386 Onaremarkable Dipterous Insect from Kashmir. 
middle. It is obvious from the arrangement of the folds 
that the wing is capable of first folding up fanwise, and then 
doubling up so as to occupy the smallest possible space. In 
order to demonstrate this completely I made a paper model 
of the wing, and obtained the expected result by folding it 
carefully along the lines of the ‘‘ secondary venation,’ com- 
mencing from the anal angle. Since there is no hard costal 
margin (as in the earwig) on which the wing can fold back, 
it is unlikely that the folding actually takes place after 
emergence; it is much more probable that, as in the 
Blepharoceride, the ‘‘ secondary venation” merely marks 
the manner in which the wing was folded in the pupa. This 
folding of the imaginal wing within the pupal envelope occurs, 
so far as I am aware, only in the families Blepharoceride 
and Simulide, and almost certainly indicates a relationship 
between the new genus and one or both of these families. 
The very regular arrangement of the folds in the new 
genus is quite unlike the irregular network found in the 
Blepharoceride, in which family, moreover, the folds 
generally become very faint when the wing is fully expanded 
and hardened. The basal sclerites of the wing are very 
peculiar, the attachment being unlike that found in either 
of the families mentioned. 
Halteres with rather slender curved stem and almost 
globular knob, surface covered with a microscopic pubescence. 
Measurements.—The following are taken from the formalin 
specimen, the mounted one is rather smaller :—Antenna, 
13mm. Thorax and abdomen, combined length, 3°7 mm. 
Width of thorax, 1mm. Length ofwing,5‘G6mm. Greatest 
breadth of wing, 2°9 mm. 
The following are taken from the mounted specimen :— 
Femur. Tibia. Tarsus. 
rontilog cine nat 0-75 mm. 11 mm. 10 mm, 
Midler "Ss .5.i 3. 0:66" 5, OST: O82 
Find Togs, 2 ates 2 O81 ,, 105105; 066" 5; 
Hab. Kasumir: Srinagar, 11,000-12,000 ft., July or early 
August (Ff. J. Mitchell). Cotypes, two males in the British 
Museum, presented by Mr. M. E. Mosely, Oct. 1921—one 
dissected and mounted in balsam, the other in formalin, one 
wing removed and mounted dry. Mr. Mitchell unfortunately 
kept no notes as to the habits of the flies, but wrote on 
25.xi1.1921 that “ the area in which the collection was made 
is now probably under 6 ft. of snow, increasing possibly to 
20 ft. or 80 ft. in the spring.” 
ee 
