CJiaracteristik der Gattungen der Notacantlien. 367 



lies beyond that middle, the genus must be referred to the Tanystoma. 

 (1. c. p. 3, lines 6 — 8 from bottom). 



I have sbown above that my views on the limitätion and position 

 of the Xylophagidae are different from these; and for this reason, I 

 cannot attach to the alleged new chai-acter the same value as Dr. B. 

 does. If he places Arthropeas and Glutops among the Notacantha, in 

 virtue of that character, and in spite of their Organization, why does 

 he not bring in some Leptidae also: Symphoromyia crassicornis has 

 the same venation as Arthropeas; and in Spania the posterior branch 

 of the fork ends in the apex of the wing, as it does in Subula. Why 

 is Spania left by him among the Tanystoma, and not Glutops? What 

 becomes of his division of the Cyclocera in Notacantha and Tanystoma 

 (see his p. 43), if the only character upon which this division is based 

 is so insufficient? 



In passing oow to a detailed esamination of Dr. B.'s paper, I will 

 begin with the few addenda, that I intended to give. 



Rosapha and Tinda. (page 8). I possess specimens of 

 Rosapha bicolor Bigot from the Philippine Islands. The antennae are 

 inserted below the middle of the profile, and the genus may be inserted 

 in the dichotomic table as follows : 



b) Endgriffel schmal, streifenförmig, micro^copisch behaart, aber 

 nicht seitlich gefiedert; Schildchen mit vier kleinen Dörnchen von beinahe 

 gleicher Grösse; kleine Querader fehlend. Tinda, 



c) EndgrifiFel lang, federartig, d. h. dicht zweizeilig gefiedert; 

 Schildchen mit vier grossen, länglieh-conischen Dornen, das mittlere 

 Paar grösser; kleine Querader voi-handen. Rosapha. 



In describing Tinda, in my Enumeration of the Diptera of the 

 Malay Archipelago etc. (Annali del Museo Civico etc. Genova Vol. XVI, 

 p. 393 — 492). I speak of a „much less distinct fringe on one side only". 

 This refers to the microscopic pubescence on the surface of the lamel, 

 and the term fringe is not äppropriate, Both Tinda and Rosapha 

 have contiguous eyes in the male sex; the former is described and 

 beautifully figured in Walker's Ins. Saunders. Diptera, Tab. III, f. 3, 

 under the (preoccupied) name of Biastes. 



Toxocera (p. 38). I have seen in Mr. Bigot's coilection the 

 original type of T. limbinervis Macq. D. E. Suppl. IV, 45. It is the 

 same as Eudmeta marginata (F.) Wied. Mr. Bigot pointed out this 

 identity to me. In Suppl. III, p. 16 Macquart had described the same 



