TACHINIDAE OF AUSTRALIA 157 



Unplaced species of Tachinidae 



armiceps Malloch, 19306 : 336 (Voriella). Holotype §, Western Australia: Eradu (ANIC, 

 Canberra) [examined]. - W.A. 



calliphon Walker, 1849 : 777 (Tachina). Holotype $ [with puparium], 'Picton' (BMNH, 

 London) [examined]. 



Austen (1907 : 339) noted that the type bears a label 'Picton' and that it is presumably 

 therefore from 'either New South Wales or Canada'. The type also bears (as Austen 

 did not note) a BMNH accession label reading '47 109' (i.e. the 109th collection of insects 

 registered as received by BMNH in the year 1847). Examination of the register shows 

 that this collection consisted of many miscellaneous insects from 'W. Australia', and 

 suggests that calliphon must have an Australian provenance; pending other evidence 

 (from later-collected material of the same species which will help to pinpoint the locality) 

 the provenance of the holotype is accepted as Picton, Western Australia (though Picton, 

 New South Wales is an alternative possibility). Up to now the holotype has remained 

 unique; no specimens have been found that associate with it. 



despicienda Walker, 1861c : 306 (Tachina). Holotype $ [bad condition], New South Wales 

 [?] (BMNH, London) [examined]. 



This species was published as from New South Wales and the holotype bears an old ink 

 label 'NSW. No Australian specimens have been seen that associate with the holotype, 

 which may not have had an Australian provenance. From the surviving characters of 

 the holotype it appears to belong near the genus Mauritiodoria Townsend from Mauritius 

 and might be the female of Mauritiodoria spinicosta (Thomson). 



diversa Walker, 1852 : 262 (Ocyptera ?). Holotype $, 'Tasmania' (lost). 



This name remains a nomen dubiiim. The holotype is lost, and evidence that it originated 

 from Tasmania is inconclusive (there are doubts about several of the provenances cited 

 by Walker in the 1852 work). 



hyalipennis Macquart, 1855 : 122 (102) (Phorocera). Type(s) <$, South Australia: Adelaide 

 (lost). - S.A. (Nomen dubium). 



As the type-material is lost this name remains completely enigmatic; it is a junior 

 primary homonym of Phorocera hyalipennis Macquart, 1851, from Java. 



inconspicua Malloch, 19306 : 336 (Voriella). Holotype $, New South Wales: Sydney 

 (SPHTM, Sydney) [examined]. - N.S.W. 



lateralis Macquart, 1851 : 176 (203) (Degeeria). Holotype <$, Tasmania [publ. as 'Oceania'] 

 (MNHN, Paris) [examined]. - Tasm. (Nomen dubium). 



The holotype of this species is in appalling condition, being wholly coated with a brittle 

 deposit and completely concealed in mould. The name therefore remains enigmatic; 

 it is a junior primary homonym of Degeeria lateralis Macquart, 1848, from North America. 



melas Bigot, 1889 : 256 (Exorista). Holotype $, Tasmania (lost). (Nomen dubium). 



The holotype of this species was not in Bigot's collection when that collection came 

 to the BMNH and has not been seen since the time of description. Bigot added the word 

 'Detrita' after his Latin description, and the holotype was presumably therefore in very 

 bad condition when described. The name remains enigmatic. 



tnucrocornis Macquart, 1851 : 174 (201) (Phorocera). Holotype $, 'Tasmania' (MNHN, 

 Paris) [examined]. — Tasm. (?). (? Blondeliini or Exoristini). 



The holotype of this nominal species is in such bad condition that few features can be 

 made out. It appears, however, to be fairly certainly either a blondeliine or an exoristine). 



SUMMARY OF NOMENCLATURAL CHANGES ESTABLISHED 

 IN THE CATALOGUE 



The nomenclatural changes established in the foregoing catalogue are summarized 

 below in their appropriate categories. The order is alphabetical and in the tables 

 of synonyms the invalid junior names are cited first. 



