166 ©. R. Osten Sacken: 
The absence of spurs at the end of the tibiae becomes misleading 
in some genera which have the appearence of Limnophilina, but 
which being deprived of spurs, are artificially placed among the 
Eriopterina (Oladura, Lecteria, Conosia, Sigmatomera, perhaps 
also Polymoria Phil.); the true location of these genera is therefore 
still problematic. A remarkable vindication of the tibial spurs, as 
a valuable systematic character, is afforded by Dolichopeza. All 
the Tipulidae longipalpi are provided with spurs; Dolicho- 
peza alone formed an apparent exception; but an examination under 
the microscope proved to me that they are present, althoush rudi- 
mentary. 
The number of joints of the antennae, thirteen in the longi- 
palpi, fourteen in the Limnobina, sixteen in the Limnophilina, 
Eriopterina, Anomala, and in most of the Amalopina, holds 
good with rare exceptions. 
The characters borrowed from the structure of the forceps of 
the male have been observed by me, as far as possible, on living 
specimens. Their study can of course be pushed much further, as 
Mr. Westhoff has done it for the longipalpi. The method of dis- 
section applied by Dr. Dziedzicki to the Mycetophilidae, might 
in many cases be useful here; but this is as yet a desideratum. 
In looking over the Introduction to my Monograph of the Tipu- 
lidae (Monographs of N. Am. Diptera, Vol. IV, p. 1—43, 1869) I 
find very little to change; not that there is nothing to correct and 
to improve, but because, as I must humbly acknowledge, in the 
matter of generalities I have gained very little in knowledge since. 
In $ 1 Characters of the family Tipulidae, some changes 
are required; they will be found in a new edition of this paragraph, 
placed at the end of this Introduction. 
In $ 2 On the larvae of Tipulidae, p. 7, line 16 from top, 
the words „I do not know the use of these singular organs,” must 
be replaced by: „They are branchial appendages.“ The additions 
made to our knowledge of the larvae since 1868 will be found in 
the present paper under the head of the different genera. Mr. A. 
Hammond published an excellent paper: „The Anatomy of the larva 
of the Crane-fly" in Hardwicke’s Science- Gossip, January, August 
and September 1875. 
In $ 3 Historical account of the classification of the 
Tipulidae I did not make any mention of Mr. Bigot’s systematic 
arrangement. A detailed notice of his as well as of Rondani’s 
