


REVISIONARY CLASSIFICATION OF RUTILIINI 93 
proposed at present because the male is still unknown; the male genitalia might well 
give a better clue to the affinities than any of the female characteristics known so 
far. Ifit should prove, as seems possible, that the male of micropalpis has genitalia 
of the Donovanius type (with large heavy foliaceous surstyli) then it might be best to 
assign micropalpis to this subgenus in spite of its somewhat aberrant features such 
as the reduced palpi. 
Chrysorutilia media var. scutellata Enderlein 
This variety was described from a single female (holotype) collected at Adelaide, 
South Australia, and the description consists of the five words ‘Scutellum dunkel 
rostfarben ohne Metallglanz’. The holotype is probably in the Berlin Museum 
where it should correctly be located, but was not found there when other Enderlein 
types were borrowed for this work. In the absence of the type I cannot place the 
name scutellata, but it presumably applies to a species of Chrysorutilia (most probably 
asasynonym). It almost certainly has nothing to do with media Macquart, which 
belongs in the subgenus Microrutilia and was clearly misidentified by Enderlein 
(though specimens named as media by Enderlein have not been seen). 
Genus AMPHIBOLIA Macquart 
Amphibohha Macquart, 1843 : 278 (121). Type-species: Amphibolia valentina Macquart, 1843, 
by original designation and monotypy. 
Diacnosis. Facial carina widest above middle and distinctly convergent ventrally, rounded 
on anterior surface, upper part often rather bulbous. Epistome moderately to strongly promi- 
nent, face strongly excavate in profile between epistome and carina. Head of ¢ not holoptic, 
upper eye facets not enlarged, separated by a distance much greater than width of facial carina. 
Genal dilation well developed. Parafacials haired or bare. Buccal opening normal, very much 
wider than facial carina. Head pollinose, non-metallic. Arista pubescent. Palpi normal, 
fully developed. Mentum short and rather broad in profile with subparallel sides. Prosternum 
bare, prosternal membrane bare or haired. Scutellum with apical pair of setae inserted at 
lower level than other marginal setae (very rarely absent); total of 4-6 (7) pairs of marginals; 
disc of scutellum not flattened. Postalar callus with 3-4 setae (occasional specimen with small 
supernumeraries in addition). Postalar wall bare. Suprasquamal ridge thickly haired. Upper 
calypter normal. Tegula with normal long wiry posterior setulae. Costal base not explanate. 
Abdomen with marginal vestiture of tergite venters weak and semi-recumbent (directed back- 
wards), if slightly spiniform (as in assimilis) then not directed vertically downwards; T3 with 
median marginal setae (often numerous and in strongly developed transverse row) ; intermediate 
tergites with discal setae (absent in occasional specimens). T5 convex above and broadly trun- 
cate subconical, without depression or at most with only very slight apicomedian hollowing. 
DISTRIBUTION. Australia and Tasmania, Lord Howe Island, New Guinea. 
Occurring in Australia from Western Australia to Victoria and New South Wales; 
Tepresented, but apparently poorly, in Queensland. 
Discussion. It is by no means certain that Amphibolia ought to be considered 
generically distinct from Rutilia s.1., and it is maintained here as a separate genus 
with considerable doubts as to whether this is fully justified. In the past none of the 
earlier workers on the Rutiliini have doubted its generic distinctness, but the fact is 
