64 Mr. R. E. Turner's Notes on the Thynnidse, 



mandibles are tridentate, or, in one or two Peruvian species 

 which I have placed provisionally in that genus, very 

 irregular and broad, with three or more teeth. In the 

 present state of our knowledge any attempt at classifica- 

 tion must be of a very provisional nature, and I do not 

 think it advisable to form new genera at present. I apply 

 the name Scotmna, Klug, to the species in which the males 

 have the mandibles bidentate, not elbowed, the clypeus 

 narrowly and more or less deeply emarginate, and the 

 hypopygium usually blunt. Omepetes, Guer., and Spilo- 

 thynnus, Ashm., do not seem to ditfer very much, and I do 

 not see that Spilothynnus can be retained as a distinct 

 genus ; Orne2Jetes seems to be very near Scotmna, but may 

 be retained as a sub-genus at least. The typical species of 

 Scotssna have the abdominal segments constricted at the 

 base, which is not the case in Omepetes. Telephoromyia, 

 Guer., may be distinguished by the mandibles, which have 

 three or more teeth, the clypeus usually with a small 

 depression at the apex, giving an appearance of emargina- 

 tion, the hypopygium is always unarmed. The females 

 which I class with this genus have the pronotum much 

 longer than broad and not excavated, the prosternum pro- 

 duced anteriorly and forming a neck, the first abdominal 

 segment narrow at the base, the second transversely cari- 

 nated, and the pygidium truncate. With this genus I would 

 include the two species described by Weyenbergh (Berlin 

 Ent. Zeit., xxvii, 281, 1883) as Tachypterus argentinus and 

 cordoviensis. The males seem to differ from Telepilioroviyia 

 only in the point of junction of the second recurrent 

 nervure; the female is not available to me, and the descrip- 

 tion is too poor to be of much use, but shows that it can- 

 not belong to Diamma. Pseudelap)hrop)tera, Ashm., and 

 Anodontyra, Westw., seem to me to be rather closely related 

 to each other, but should certainly be kept as distinct 

 genera until more material is available. In some of the 

 females of the former genus the anterior ocellus is present, 

 though very small. I follow Andre in considering that 

 Pycnothynnus, Ashm., should be sunk in Elaphroptera, 

 though that genus may have to be subdivided. Klugiamis, 

 Ashm., will probably stand as a good genus, but the female 

 is still unknown. The genus AinUysoma, Westw., appears 

 to be quite distinct, but I have not seen specimens. 

 jElurus, Klug, forms another group with very distinct 

 females. 



