200 MUSCA AUSTRALIS MACQ., M. VETUSTISSIMA WALKER. 
The mature larva is greyish-white with a lemon-yellow 
dorsum, while the puparium is of a dirty grey colour with 
a yellowish tinge. The female genitalia, however, are 
slightly different from those of M. australis, there being 
only one pair of accessory glands which are stated to be 
larger than those found in oviparous forms. M. corvina 
var. vivipara closely resembles M. bezzii but its puparium. 
is dark brown. It is common in Europe and parts of 
Northern Africa. 
M. corvina Fabr. var. ovipara Portschinski, on the other 
hand, is evidently close to M. vetustissima Walk. The 
size and markings are similar. According to Portschinski 
the former lays 24 eggs on cow dung, each egg being 1.5 mm. 
long and possessing a delicate dark spine 2/3 of its length. 
The puparium is white. It seems likely, as Patton and 
Cragg remark, that Portschinski confused two closely 
allied muscids, one larviparous and the other oviparous. 
There are a number of references to M. corvina Fabr. 
in Australian literature. Froggatt in his work on Austra-— 
lian Insects (1907), mentions this species and states that 
it is the common bush fly swarming from the eastern coast 
to the interior, also having a wide range over Europe, 
North America, Ceylon and Malay Archipelago. Jt is a 
darker tinted species than the house fly and s hows only 
two parallel bands on the thorax. A figure of the fly is 
given on Plate 29, fig. 5. 
Froggatt (1915, pp. 27-28), again mentions M. corvina 
as the common bush fly. He gives a short description 
of both sexes and states that it was found breeding in 
decaying vegetable matter, in the decaying mass in the 
paunch of most of the dead animals (sheep) that were 
examined, and also in horse dung from the Yarrawin horse 
yards, New South Wales. On 27th February, 1914, 200 
specimens were caught in the tent, examination shewing 
that 198 were females, these containing eggs ranging in. 
number from 22 to 35. Froggatt’s description would 
apply equally well to M. vetustissima and there is little 
doubt but that this is really the species under discussion. 
Graham-Smith (1914, p. 22) describes M. corvina, 
the size and markings being similar to those of M. vetus- 
