REVISIONARY CLASSIFICATION OF RUTILIINI 77 
Donovanius are of very little or no use for identification it is considered justified to 
describe this new species from a female holotype. 
Subgenus RUTILIA Robineau-Desvoidy 
Rutilia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830 : 319. Type-species: Tachina vivipara Fabricius, 1805, by 
subsequent designation of Crosskey (1967 : 26). 
| Psaroniella Enderlein, 1936: 417. Type-species: Rutilia castanipes Bigot sensu Enderlein 
[misidentification] [= Rutilia setosa Macquart, 1847], by original designation. Syn. n. 
Stivaulax Enderlein, 1936 : 428. Type-species: Tachina vivipara Fabricius, 1805, by original 
designation. [Isogenotypic name with Rutilia Robineau-Desvoidy, junior objective synonymy 
first noted by Crosskey (1967 : 26)]. 
_ Dracnosis. Parafrontals pollinose, not metallic. Epistome and genae non-metallic. Facial 
carina with anterior surface of upper part convex or with slight median ridge and only lower 
part flattened on anterior surface, sides slightly pinched-in ventrally, separated from lunula 
| by distinct depression well visible in profile. Parafacials bare or haired. 2 with proclinate 
| orbital setae (normally one pair well developed, rarely two each side, very rarely absent). 
| Arista micropubescent. Humeral callus with 3-4 setae. Posthumeral setae distinct in both 
sexes, variably from 1-3 each side. One or two post ia setae. Scutum without supernumerary 
prescutellar setae (rarely the last post acy seta doubled). Postalar callus with three strong setae. 
Suprasquamal ridge haired or bare. Scutellum with slight dorsal flattening or hollowing just 
before tip; with 5-7 pairs of marginal setae (these rather stiff and straight) ; with a well developed 
transverse row of small preapical setae preceding the marginals. Pteropleuron not haired in 
_ front of level of posterior sternopleural seta. Two or three sternopleural setae (1 + I or 2 + 1). 
_ Prosternum and prosternal membrane bare. Hind tibia without definite anterodorsal fringe 
or with short inconspicuous fringe, normally from 1—3 ad setae well developed, 2—4 well developed 
_ pd setae or occasionally one pd only ing. Last abdominal tergite (T5) with median depression 
(rather small and shallow in confusa). T3 with transverse row of several (usually 6-12, but 
_ often only 2-4 in confusa) strong erect often spiniform median marginal setae, the row slightly 
| arcuate forwards so that middle setae of the transverse row are more distant from hind margin 
_ of the tergite than the others; T3 also with lateral marginal setae. T5 with median transverse 
| row of strong erect setae. Surstyli of J genitalia of rather varied form (Text-figs 54-57). [Dull 
| reddish brown, tawny or blackish brown forms, with little or no metallic colouring, at most 
| with very slight reddish violet or greenish tinge dorsally on thorax and intermediate abdominal 
tergites]. 
DIsTRIBUTION. Occurring only in Australia from Tasmania to Queensland. 

Discussion. Before considering the characteristics and interrelationships of 
_ Rutilia in the strict sense it is necessary briefly to discuss the type-species of the 
_ genus and its fixation, for there has been some confusion in past taxonomic bibliog- 
raphy; although, fortunately, this has not affected the generic concept of Rutilia. 
_ The genus when originally described by Robineau-Desvoidy contained four nominal 
' species, one of which was Rutilia vivipara (Fabricius), which Fabricius (1805) had 
' described in the genus Tachina Meigen. Robineau-Desvoidy’s (1830) identification of 
| vivipara related to a specimen that stood in the collection of Count Dejean, and may 
or may not have been correct, but there has never been any means of confirming the 
rightness of Robineau-Desvoidy’s identification because both the specimen from 
| 
| Dejean’s collection and Fabricius’ type of vivipara are lost. But there are a few 
discrepancies between the brief descriptions of Fabricius and Robineau-Desvoidy 
(the latter for instance mentioning a bluish tinge on the mesonotum) and on the basis 
