1915] Bergroth — Some Tipulid Synonymy 57 



of the propygium, as Alexander seems to think, is not of much im- 

 portance as a generic character, we cannot separate Ptilostena 

 from Gonomyia. In wing-venation and other characters Sacan- 

 daga Al. seems to differ very little from Erioptera (in Alexander's 

 sense), although the author assures that the resemblance is prob- 

 ably merely accidental" (whatever that may mean) and that 

 they are different "'in general appearance." We would then have 

 together there the whole series — Erioptera-Ilisia-Mesocyphona- 

 Chilotrichia-Empeda-Sacandaga-Gonomyia-Ptilostena-Lipophleps — 

 happily united in the same genus. But would this really clear up 

 the study of the Eriopterinse? In my opinion it would decidedly 

 be a step backward. It seems much better to follow Needham, 

 Edwards, and many other dipterists in regarding Osten-Sacken's 

 so-called subgenera of Erioptera as distinct genera. They are much 

 more sharply separated from each other than the subgenera (or 

 rather groups) of Limnophila are, and there is scarcely any species 

 of Erioptera (in its broad sense) that could not easily be deter- 

 mined as to its place in any of these genera. Of course certain 

 species can in one or other respect approach towards some related 

 genus, but this occurs in numerous genera in the whole animal 

 kingdom without involving the necessity of giving up these genera. 

 Lumping of genera is certainly in some cases better than the ex- 

 cessive and often absurd splitting so characteristic of Theobald's 

 and Enderlein's writings, but it should not be done without ade- 

 quate grounds. It must be admitted, however, that the Eriop- 

 terinse leave a more open field to personal opinions than most other 

 groups of Tipulidse. 



6. Acyphona O. S. must take the older name Ilisia Rond. 

 (1856) . Rondani after the description expressly states that Eriop- 

 tera maculata Meig. is the type, and this was the only species he 

 referred to the genus. That he many years later placed also two 

 other species in it cannot, of course, invalidate its claim to recog- 

 nition in its original comprehension. In describing two Japanese 

 species of this genus Alexander says (Canad. Ent., 1913, p. 287) 

 that maculata Meig. is the only described palearctic species of the 

 genus, but the north-european obscuripes Zett. and areolata Siebke 

 belong there, as shown by Wahlgren and Lundstrom. 



7. Brunetti's book on the Indian Nematocera, which on a cur- 

 sory examination makes such a good impression by the detailed 



