NOTES AND OBSERVATIONS. 135 



15. Proctotrypes pallipes, Jurine. 



Codrus pallipes, Jar., Nouv. Meth., 1907, p. 309, pi. xiii, gen. 

 46, c? ; Nees, I.e., p. 356, excl. syn. et var. Proctrotrupes pal- 

 lipes, Latr., Gen. Crust, et Ins., p. 38 ; Hal., I.e., p. 11, $ ? ; 

 Thorns., I.e., p. 418, ? ; Voll., I.e., p. 29, pi. xix, tig. 1. Serphus 

 'pallipes, Andre, I.e., p. 309. 



This species should certainly be ascribed to Jurine, and not 

 to Haliday as is done in Andr6 ; for nothing in the former's 

 account is inaccurate but the antennal coloration, which is 

 depicted as liavidous throughout. Haliday's two varietal forms 

 appear quite different to me. The centrally produced propleurae 

 are distinctive of the present species. 



Wide-spread from Hungary to Sweden ; Vollenhoven records 

 it (I.e.), as preying on the fungus-gnat, Macrocera maculata, Mg. 

 Frequent everywhere in woody places in Britain (Haliday and 

 Walker). I have found it very far from common, and pretty 

 well confined to the month of June ; it has always turned up 

 at random in the sweep-net, or flying in sunshine, and several 

 times in shady places in woods at Foxhall, Wherstead, Ipswich, 

 Barton Mills and Tuddenham in Suffolk ; Market Rasen in 

 Lines ; Helpstone Heath near Peterborough, and Matley Bog in 

 New Forest. There seems to be an entirely different mode of 

 life to the above Mycetophilid suggestion, for Kawall says 

 {' Stett. Bntom. Zeit.,' 1855, p. 260) : " Many years ago, I found 

 under a stone a shrunken beetle larva, which undoubtedly 

 belonged to the Staphylince, dead. In it were several parasites 

 in naked pupal state; these proved to be Codrus pallipes, Juiv' ; 

 and there is no reason to suppose that he mistook P. viator for 

 the present species, as I myself did (' Trans. Entom. Soc.,' 1911, 

 p. 453), in ascribing Mr. Step's breeding to it. 



(To be continued.) 



NOTES AND OBSERVATIONS. 



The Dipterous Family BlephaeiceridvE. — Macquart (1843) 

 wrote Blepharicera, but this was amended to Blepharocera, and the 

 family has been called Blepharoceridae. It seems evident that the 

 •original spelling must be restored, and the family name changed to 

 Blephariceridse. Were we to permit such changes in the spelling of 

 generic names, it would be impossible to save the name of the 

 Blepharicerid genus Philorus, Kellogg, long antedated by the Lepidop- 

 terous Philoros, Walker.* I will take occasion to record that by St. 

 Vrain Creek, above Peaceful Valley, Colorado, August 23rd, I found 

 the Blepharicerid Bibiocephala elegantula, V. Eoder, preying upon the 

 subimago of a mayfly (Bphemeridae). — T. D. A. Cockekell. 



* If we consider an " emendation " equivalent to an error in spelling, and hold to 

 the "one-letter rule," the Lepidopterous Blepharocera, Chambers, stands, preoccupied 

 neither by the Dipterous genus nor by Blepharocerm, Blanchard. This seems to me 

 the proper course, following the spirit of the International rules, and the ol»\ 

 wise principle that names should not be changed without absolute necessity. 



