252 C. R. Osten Sacken: 



sexes of his affinis before him, and would never have left unnoticed 

 the extraordinary forceps of stigmatica (compare my figtire of it in 

 the Stett. Ent. Z. 1854, Tab. I, f. 7). All he has about it is „Hinter- 

 leib rostgelb .... Endglied weisslich". — Stigmatica Schin. and 

 affinis Schnm. not being Synonyms, it remains to decide whethcr the 

 former is the same as stigmatica Meig. ? The descriptions being 

 insufficient the type-specimens of Schiner in Vienna must be 

 examined. 



Stäger (1840) had a Single female specinien from Denmark which 

 he identified with Meigen's stigmatica. Zetter stedt (X, 3905) 

 had no specinien whatever, but composed his description from the 

 data of Stäger and Meigen (a very bad method, by the way); the 

 description of the male forceps is entirely borrowed from Meigen: 

 „anus d" crassus, clavatns". I had abundant specimens of both sexes 

 from the environs of St. Petersburg, and compared Stäger's and 

 Meigen's descriptions, and for this reason my determination is pro- 

 bably correct. Meigen had received his specimens from v. Winthem 

 in Hamburg, which is not very far from Denmark. 



Professor Mik, whom I consulted on his experience with regard 

 to stigmatica, very kindly sent nie drawings of the male forceps'* 

 of a specinien which he has taken in Tirol, at an altitude of 6000', 

 which has very nearly the same forceps as my stigmatica. The slight 

 divergences may be due to my unskilful draughtsmanship. The alti- 

 tude would also favor the opinion that it is a northern species. In 

 my List of the Diptera of the environs of S. Petersburg (Otcherk etc. 

 S. Petersburgh 1858, p. 142) I find that stigmatica was more common 

 there than autumnalis. It will remain for austrian dipterologists to 

 decide the question in determining what stigmatica Schin. is. About 

 autumnalis these is no doubt whatever, the specimens of Mik and 

 Verrall have the characteristic forceps tigured by me and described 

 by Stäger. 



There is a passage in Bergroth, Verb. Z. B. Ges. 1888, p. 645, 

 in which he expresses the same opinion as I about the erroneous 

 synonymy of modesta and autumnalis in Schin er, and points out 

 the difference betvveen them correctly. It is to be regretted however 

 that he does not say anything about the male forceps of the latter, 

 without which one cannot be sure whether bis autumnalis is really 

 the same as Stäger's. — In the same paper Bergroth accepts 

 Seh in er 's synonymy of stigmatica with affinis Schum., which, as I 

 have shown, must be erroneous. He also asserts the synonymy of 

 Dicranomyia Osten Sackenii Westhoff with both stigmatica ' and 



