Geno'lc Position of certain Muscidjo. 333 



referred by \\'all<('r liinisclf {Inc. cit.) to tlie genus Bltphuri- 

 pezu, is, as .stuled Ijy Aldrieli (o/>. cit. p. 172), a synonym of 

 B. leucuphnjs, VVicd. 



Tachina contermina {ibid. p. 285. — S. America) is a 

 Bc/vosia, and \)cr\\ap^ = Belvo.fia [Tachina) atrata, Walk. 



I'acliina divisa {ibid. p. 270. — Pard) = Archytas ana/is, 

 Fahr. 



Tachina apicalis {ibid. p. 24'5. — California: — not " Cohim- 

 bia/^ as stated by W aWicv) = Peleteria ruhusta, Wied. 



Trixu'^ sejuncta (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond. iv. (1858) p. 200. — 

 Cape of Good Hope) belongs to the genus Deziosoma, Rond. 

 Microphthalma capemis, Schin. (Reise No vara. — Diptera, 

 p. 322), is a synonym of this species. 



Echinomi/ia a/biceps (Trans. Ent. Soc. Loud. n. ser. v. 

 (18G0) p. 295. — Brazil) is an Archytas, near A. (Tachina) 

 basifulva, Walk. 



Echinomyia ludens {ibid. — Brazil) is devoid of palpi. The 

 species would be a Saundersia but for the fact of the presence 

 of a strong bristle on the face on each side, just above the 

 level of the bottom of the eye. The same character is 

 exhibited by Saundersia truncaticornis, v. d. Wulp, from 

 Panama, and a new genus in the near vicinity of Saundersia 

 will probably be needed for these two species. In Walker's 

 species the front tarsi are not expanded in the female, 

 although they are in iS. ti-uncaticornis. 



Tachina siniilis (Ins. Saund, — Dipt. pt. iv. (1852) p. 266. — 

 New South Wales) apparently belongs to the genus Chai- 

 ophthalmus, Br. & von Berg. (Ueukschr. math.-naturw. CI. k. 

 Akad. Wiss., Bd. Iviii. (1891) p. 383).— '' Section '' Micro- 

 palpus, Br. & von Berg. So far as can be seen from the type, 

 which is in very poor condition, the palpi are entirely 

 wanting. 



Tachina basalis {ibid. p. 281. — Locality unknown) is an 

 Aporia, Macq., near A. {Macquartia) venusta, v. d. Wulp. 



Tachina vulyata {ibid. p. 300. — S. America). The licad 

 of the type is wanting, and since this species, like the 

 majority of those described by Walker, is based upon a 

 single specimen, it is impossible to be certain as to the 

 genus. From "Walker's description of the head, however, 

 tlic species M'ould appear to belong to the genus Phorocera, 

 Rob.-Desv. 



Masicera longiuscvia (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond. iv. (1858) 

 p. 198.— S. America). — "Section'" Phorocera, Br. & von 

 iierg. : genus uncertain. 



