70 Bulletin of the Brooklyn Entomological Society Vol. XVI 



probably the Bomhyliidae, there is a tremendous gap, and appar- 

 ently no connectant links are existent today. The short anal cell 

 and enfolding (arched) tergites of the Empididae and Dolicho- 

 podidae preclude allying these families with the Syrphidae. 



There is good evidence that the Platypezidae and Pipunculidae 

 are closely related to the Syrphidae, but they are probably inde- 

 pendent groups derived from the ancestral stock of the Syrphidae 

 and not, as is frequently considered, offshoots of the Syrphidae 

 through Baccha and Paragus; nor are they the ancestral stock as 

 has been supposed by some authors. 



Pipunculus, through its wing venation, parasitic habits, and the 

 possession of a chitinous ovipositor, leads naturally to Dalmania 

 of the Conopidae; and probably the other extreme of the Conopi- 

 dae — i.e., Conops et al.— lead on to Pyrgota ( Ortalidae) . 



The similarity in appearance between Nephrocerus and Baccha 

 is, at the best, only superficial, since Nephrocerus does not possess 

 any of several characters peculiar to Baccha and the Syrphinae 

 in general. The pile present on the humeral calli in Nephrocerus 

 is as long as elsewhere on the mesonotum ; there is no plumula ; 

 no tongue-like projection of thin chitin on the middle coxa (see 

 below), and no short vertical fold in the wing just beyond the 

 post anal section of the sixth vein ; the tergites are arched, i.e., 

 folding under. 



The asserted relationship between Syrphidae and Conopidae, 

 through Cerioides and Conops, is utterly erroneous. There is 

 nothing in common between the two genera except their great 

 superficial resemblance ! 



Without doubt the Syrphidae represent a free branch of the 

 Diptera, specializing in their own Syrphidid way, which is at an 

 angle from the central line of descent of the order, and not lead- 

 ing through any subbranch or its main branch to any of the other 

 cyclorrhaphous families. 



A number of the accepted genera of the Syrphidae are, in 

 reality, composed of merely aberrant species or represent at best 

 subgenera. Some of them are heterogeneous groups based upon 

 superficial resemblances. There have been a number of instances 

 where new genera could have been described on characters as 



