356 Miss G. Ivicardo on the Tabaninre 



There is an imperfect male specimen from Galagedara, 

 Ceylon, June 1897 {E. E. Green), 1903. 150, which appa- 

 rently belongs to this genus, but will form another species, 

 having a yellow abdomen ; the antennae are placed on a 

 similar tubercle and seem of an identical shape, but the third 

 joint is wanting. 



The specimen named by Walker Chrysops parallelus, and 

 referred by me doubtfully to Diachlorus [see Ann. & Mag. 

 Nat. Hist. (7) ix. p. 372 (1902)], from Batjan Island 

 (Batchian) (Wallace Coll.), may possibly belong to this 

 genus ; but the antennae are wanting, the formation of the 

 forehead, of the antennal tubercle and face, besides the shape 

 of the abdomen and legs, agrees with that of the species 

 described above. 



Diachlorus, Osteu Sacken. 



Diachlorus, Osteu Sacken, Mem. Boston Soc. ii. p. 475 (1876). 



Diahnsis, Macq., Hist. Nat. Dipt. i. p. 207 (18.34) ; id. Dipt. Exot. i. 

 p. 150(18a8); Loew, Dipt. Sudatiik. p. 31 (1860). {'' Diabasis'' 

 being already occupied in Coleoptera, the name was changed by 

 Osteu Sacken.) 



This genus was formed by Macquart for the exotic Tabani, 

 bicinctus, glaber, globicornis, Wiedem., and curvipes, Fabr., 

 presenting as he thought an intermediate conformation 

 between Tabanus and Clirysops. The described species are 

 all from S. America, with the exception of D. ferrugatus 

 from N. America, D. scvtellata from Central America, and 

 D. flavipennis from the Philippines. Loew distinguishes 

 it from Lepidoselaga and Selasoma by the absence of 

 metallic colouring or scales and from Tabanus by the curved 

 fore tibise. Osteu Sacken considers it is only distingviished 

 from Tabanus by the shortness of the face, the rather low 

 insertion of the auteunse, and the rather broad fore tibiae, 

 the coloration of the eyes also differing from that of Tabanus, 

 at least in D. ferrugatus. The greater length of the first 

 joiut of the antennae, the general appearance, more slender 

 build, and the markings of the wings seem to sufficiently 

 distinguish it from Taba^ms, in addition to the curved dilated 

 fore tibiae, as also the absence of any tooth or real ^xo- 

 jection on the third joint of the antennae. Iti this respect 

 the species of this genus may be confused with the smaller 

 Tabani, in some of which the projection or angle of the third 

 joint is very slight, so that there is very little difference in 

 the shape of the third joint. Bigot thus confused specimens 

 of a North-American Tabanus and called it D. lueniatupotides. 



The five species placed in this genus by Bigot all belong to 



