312 CR. Osten Sachen:' 



has the ocelli indistiiict, their places beiug occupied „by sunken not 

 shining spots". 



As to the venation, I said in niy description: „The small cross 

 vein near the posterior margin is absent, although a rudiment of it 

 in the shape of a minute stump of a vein, is perceptible in the usual 

 place". This seenis to have been an accidental aberration in the 

 specimen which I had, because Coquillett says: „the marginal cross 

 vein is present in all of my examples." 



The male forceps of both species is largely developed, one-fourth 

 as long as the abdomen in episcopus and as much as two-fifth in 

 Acton. The habits of JRhapMomidas are peculiar. „R. episcopus 

 occurs sparingly in Los Angeles county in mid-summer, hovering 

 over flowers like a humming-bird". 



In my article of 1883 (p. 293) I said that „it would seem that 

 Rhaphiomidas in an Asilid of a peculiar type having, like Apiocera, 

 a Midaid-like venation, but antennae of a different structure and a 

 much longer proboscis". Since then, during a flying visit in the 

 U. S. (1885) I had the opportunity to corroborate this opinion by 

 examining the type of my description again (in the Mus. Comp. Zool. 

 Cambridge Mass.); and Coquillett's discovery of the male proves 

 that it has a forceps, which, although not described in detail, 

 is said to be largely developed. even more than in Apiocera. 



All the characters which I have eiuimerated in my previous 

 paper (p. 292) as distinguishing Ap>iocera from the Midaidae, are 

 also found m Rhap)hiomidas: the presence of ocelli, of macrochaetae 



Two other corrections to ray paper of 1883 may find Iheir place 

 here. 



On p. 293, lines 19 and 20 from the bottom an obvious slip of 

 the pen has occurred: read Asilid ae for Midaidae and vice-versä. 



On p. 289 I founded my account of the chaetotaxy of Apiocera 

 principally on Australian specimens: my anierican material, from Cali- 

 fornia, was scanty and of chilian specimen I had none. Having 

 examined such specimens since 1 found that the arraiigeraent of 

 their macrochaetae is still nearer to the Asilina than that ot the 

 australian species. For instance,. the humeral bristles of the australian 

 Apiocerae which I described as ,,hardly deserving the uame of macro- 

 chaetae" (1. e. p. 289), are much more distinct in the chiüan specimens; 

 their praesutural bristles are as large as in some Asilidae, In A. 

 brevicornis Phil. I count four scutellar bristles, — It may therefore 

 be stated in general that the relationship of the american Apiocerae 

 to tbe section Asilina is even more evident than that of the australian 

 species. 



