I02 KANSAS UNIVERSITY QUARTERLY. 



form of the greatest rarity, as well as of the greatest value in the 

 present discussion. 



The group, whether it be a family or subfamily, includes about 

 twelve known species, all from Australia and America. It is a group, 

 moreover, of great interest to the systematist, and additional discov- 

 eries will be looked for with eagerness. 



The first species described was by Wiedemann (31), under the name 

 Laphria brevicor^iis. His description was meagre, and may not suffice 

 for the recognition of the species. Nor can Wiedemann be credited 

 with especial acumen in referring the form to the Asilidae ; he accepted 

 both genera and families in a much wider sense than is now done. 

 Macquart was sufficiently acute to perceive from the description that 

 the species could not be a Laphria, and, as Osten Sacken has shown, 

 after the fashion that was not at all rare with him, described a new 

 genus from the data contained in the description, actually figuring the 

 species without having seen a specimen or any figure (10)! He did 

 not do very badly, a la Macquart, in the figure, except that he put on 

 an ordinary Asilid palpus. Meanwhile, however, Westwood had 

 described and accurately figured species under the generic name 

 Apiocera (29, 30). I regret that Westwood's papers are inaccessible 

 to me ; all that I know concerning them has been derived from 

 Osten Sacken (17). "As to the place of the genus, he hesitated 

 between the Midaidee and the Nemistrinidse." Later (11), Macquart 

 described from specimens the genus Pomacera, not recognizing in 

 them his own genus Tapiiiocera, and erected a new family for it, 

 located near the Therevid^. Bigot, following Macquart, accepted the 

 family, but rejected Macquart's name for Apioceridae (i). This is 

 the first place that I find the word Apioceridse, though used rather in 

 the sense of Apiocerinae, as a subdivision of his "Asilides," which 

 included the " Mydaidaj, " " Apioceridae, " " Laphridse," "Asilidse" 

 and "Dasypogonidae." " Ce genre \_Apiocera\ me parait mieux place 

 parmi mes Asilidii.''' 



In 1865, Philippi described the "hoechst ausgezeichnete Gattung" 

 Anypenus as an Asilid, not recognizing the form in any previous 

 description (24, p. 702). His genus has had a rather peculiar history, 

 misleading both Brauer and Osten Sacken, its identity with Apiocera 

 not being discovered till the type was examined. 



Gerstaecker, in 1868, in his review of the Mydaidte (7), refused the 

 genus admittance to that family. "Die systematische Stellung dieser 

 Gattung \_Apiocera'\ naeher zu fixiren, muss einer spaeteren, ihren 

 naechsten Verwandten vielleicht zu Tage fordernden Zeit vorbehalten 

 bleiben ; so wenig die sich im Augenblick einer der iibrigen Familien 

 iiberzeugend zuertheilen laesst, so wenig gehoertsie auch den Mydaiden 



