Synonymic List of the European Trichopterygide. 447 
unknown to me. From types received from Herr Reitter 
T. edipus is identical with a species which I formerly 
described under the name of Pétlium obcecatum. I would at 
that time have willingly separated this species from Pédliuwm, 
but could find no distinct generic difference, and did not con- 
sider the rudimentary condition of its eyes to be of itself 
sufficient. The next subgenus, Ptiliolum, commences with 
P. oblongum, a name long ago superseded by Spence?, Allib., 
and to this are added as synonyms Moerstert and fuscipenne ; 
the latter of these is the type (received from Prof. Foerster) 
from which I described P. Foerster?. Dr. Flach then makes 
P. angustatum, Erichs., into a distinct species, although he 
had just before quoted that name as a synonym of P. oblon- 
gum, and finishes Pécliolum with two new species. ‘The last 
subgenus of this group is Huptilium, containing croaticum, 
caledonicum, and one new species. Then having inserted 
the genus Actéd/wm in the most unintelligible manner among ° 
the normal Ptlia, Dr. Flach appropriates Motschulsky’s 
name Oligella for the purpose of forming a genus to receive 
P. foveolatum alone. ‘lo this succeeds the absurd introduction‘ 
of Motschulsky’s Mieridium vittatum among some of the most 
normal species of Pétlium. The shape and length of the 
posterior legs is alone sufficient to separate Micridium by a 
long interval from Ptcliwm, without entering at all into the 
numerous anatomical differences which exist between those 
two genera. But this is not all; -Dr. Flach has incorporated 
with Micridium vittatum two almost normal species of Péelium, 
P. Halidait and P. angulicolle, which resemble Miertdium in 
the transparency of their elytra and in that alone. ‘Then, 
after the intercalation of Millidium, Dr. Flach proceeds to 
enumerate the remaining Pét/ia as species of his subgenus 
Ptilium. 
I have now examined in detail the whole arrangement of 
the Ptiliina ; to proceed in the same way through the Tricho- 
pterygina would but entail the constant repetition of similar 
remarks and prove wearisome to the reader. ‘The same con- 
fusion of synonymy pervades the whole list ; it is very con- 
spicuous in Ptinella (Neuglenes), but seems to reach its 
climax in T'richopteryx. 
I fully believe that Dr. Flach’s new species are true and 
genuine, the characteristic portraits of those which he has 
figured speak for themselves; but, if I can judge by types of 
some others received from Herr Reitter, the differences on 
which ihey have been separated are far less distinguishing 
than those which exist between many species unceremoniously 
erouped together by Dr. Flach as mere synonyms ; and in 
