Studies on Tipulidae. . 165 



cillate. This is the nearest approacli I know of, to an absolute 

 clistinctive character. The genus Stygeropis Lw. (Prionocera olim) 

 f orms an exception ; but L o e w himself consiclered it as intermediate 

 between Tipida and Ctenophora (comp. Stett. Ent. Z. 1844, p. 170). 

 Some anomalous forms of Tipuli na from Australia and Soutli-America 

 also have the antennae not verticillate. 



2. Pselliophora 



gen. nov. 



That the subdivision of Ctenophora proposed by Brülle (Ann. 

 S. E. Fr. 1832, p. 205 and 1833, p. 398) is well founded, has been 

 already acknoAvledged by Schiner (Fauna Austr. II, 500, footnote 

 and Wiener Ent. Monatschr. 1863, p. 220.). Xipliura and Cte- 

 nophora sensu stricto diifer in both sexes in the structure of the 

 antennae and of the genital organs. Larvae and pupae also afford 

 very striking distinctive characters. The differences between Dicte- 

 nidia Brülle and Ctenophora s. s. are of less moment; they are 

 confined to the antennae in both sexes, and to the genitals in the 

 male; larvae and pupae of both genera belong to the same type 

 of structure. 



This subdivision of Ctenophora being granted it becomes necessary 

 to form a fourth group of equal value for a number of Ctenophorae, 

 from South-Eastern Asia. 



Pselliophora (which means bracelet-bearer) gen. nov. comes 

 nearest to Ctenophora s. s. , represented by the european species 

 pectinicornis , ßaveolata, elegans etc. It is easily distinguished, 

 however, by the foUowing characters: 1. The four branches, is- 

 suing from the same antennal Joint (in the male), are of the same 

 length (in Ctenophora s. s., the inner pair is distinctly shorter); 

 2. The branches of the § antennae are clothed with rather long, 

 soft, not very dense hairs ; 3. The 12th Joint has two pairs of branches 

 (only one in Ctenophora s. s.); 4. The forceps of the male has a 

 different structure; the long protruding adminiculum, so conspicuous 

 in Ctenophora s, s. is wanting here; 5. The females are more difficult 

 to distinguish from those of Ctenophora s. s.; the most trustworthy 

 character, as far as I can see, lies in the structure of the 3d Joint 

 of the antennae (first Joint of the flagellum), which here becomes 

 broader from base to tip, without having the expansion on the under- 

 side, such as exists in the females of Ctenophora s. s.; the other 

 joints are more rounded, and thus the flagellum appears less serrate 

 ou the underside; the latter half of the abdomen is much less ex- 



