80 R. W. CROSSKEY 
in other subgenera median marginal setae are normally absent on T3 or represented 
by only a single fine pair. 
Rutilia s.str. is most easily distinguished from Chrysorutilia, Donovanius and 
Ameniamima, by the possession of only three instead of four or more setae on the 
postalar callus, and from Chrysorutilia and Ameniamima by the absence of ptero- 
pleural hairing in front of the posterior sternopleural seta. It differs also from 
Chrysorutilia and Donovanius by lacking a long hind tibial fringe (though a short one 
is present in confusa), and usually by having two distinct pd setae on the hind tibia. 
The depression in the last abdominal tergite, and the presence of two or three strong 
sternopleural setae, also, separate Rutilia s.str. from Chrysorutilia. 
In species of Rutilza s.str. the suprasquamal ridge may be bare or haired (though 
presence or absence of such hairing seems to be constant within each species). In 
vivipara the ridge is haired, but the hairing is rather short and sparse (as in the 
species of Grapholostylum) instead of very long, dense and crinkly (as in the species 
of Donovanius, Chrysorutilia, and Neorutilia), a fact which perhaps suggests that the 
affinities of Rutilia s.str. lie more closely with Grapholostylum than with any other 
subgenus, a supposition which is supported by the several other character that 
Rutilia and Grapholostylum share in common (among them the three postalars, lack 
of hind tibial fringe, unusually strong development of the chaetotaxy of the thoracic 
dorsum, pteropleuron bare in front of the posterior st¢p/ seta, and rather similar form 
of facial carina). 
If all the species of Rutilia s.str. and Grapholostylum are considered it is found that 
there are one or two species which are rather intermediate and tend to form an 
interconnecting link between the two subgenera, as discussed in more detail under 
Grapholostylum. One of these, here placed in Rutilia s.str., is the aptly named 
species confusa Malloch. This species has the suprasquamal ridge bare and on this 
account was originally described by Malloch as a Formosia, but it has none of the 
characters of true Formosia apart from the bare ridge and is certainly a Rutilia in 
all other respects (just as the species of Ameniamina subgen.n. with bare supra- 
squamal ridge are equally Rutilia in the wide sense) ; but confuwsa has only some 2-4 
(rarely more) median marginal setae on abdominal T3, has a somewhat shallow 
median depression in T5, and has a definite though short hind tibial fringe, and so 
differs in these features from vivipara; on the other hand, it has rather strong ventral 
marginal setae on the tergites, colouring very like that of vivipava, and the form of 
5th abdominal sternite of the male, which all confirm the correct placement of 
confusa in Rutilia s.str. 
The following points should be noted about the synonymies indicated in the list 
of included species. The neotype specimen herein designated for Rutilia durvillet 
Robineau-Desvoidy (see p. 124) is conspecific with the neotype of vivipara, and 
durvillei therefore goes into synonymy; apart from being justified by what little is 
known of durvillei from the original description it is desirable to dispose of this name 
as a synonym since it has never been in use for a recognized species. Enderlein 
(1936 : 430) suggested that durvillet was perhaps only a variety of desvoidyi (=vivi- 
para) ; the present fixation of the neotype eliminates the name completely as a junior 
synonym. For Rutilia inornata Guérin-Méneville an original syntype specimen 
