40 Re Wi. GROSSTIREY 
status for these entities is no longer recognized, and certainly cannot be justified in 
view of the overall homogeneity shown by eutherine species; even Townsend seems 
to have thought that his penchant for splitting had been carried rather far, as he 
commented (Townsend, 1938 : 212) that it ‘comes near conforming to the proverbial 
genus for every species’. 
In Australia the Euthera fauna contains two described species, but it is likely 
that others exist, as Paramonov (1953) surmises. Paramonov (op. cit.) has noted 
how newly discovered species cut across the character differences that were previously 
supposed to define subgenera (or genera) within the Euthera complex, and has 
emphasized the need to refrain from any further description of subdivisions within 
Euthera. This is a particularly appropriate plea, as it is obvious from a study of 
undescribed species in museum collections that there is a more or less complete 
intergradation of characters between the species of different regions and that it is 
therefore impossible to maintain any valid subgenera or genera within the complex. 
Van Emden (1960) took a similar view when he discussed Euthera in the Ethiopian 
Region and formally established the synonymy of Preuthera with Euthera. 
The principal characteristics of Euthera and Eutherini are as follows. Head dichoptic, 
eyes well separated in both sexes but frons a little contracted above in ¢; 9 usually with 
proclinate orbital setae, these sometimes weakly differentiated or absent; 9 with or without 
a pair of small outwardly directed prevertical setae; face with a large vertical median keel 
or with a large bulbous swelling, the carination formed into a definite sharp edge medially 
(Text-fig. 24); ocellar setae usually weak, proclinate or divaricate; antennae extremely long, 
reaching to epistomal margin or beyond, inserted high on head; palpi present; two main 
humeral setae, sometimes weak third, or third and fourth; acy setae varied, from 2 + I to 
3 + 4; dc setae varied, usually at least 3 + 3, sometimes 4 prst dc or 4 or 5 post dc; pra seta 
present, small; normally three post za setae, if only two then standing near to each other and 
remote from transverse suture; two sa setae (hind one sometimes very weak or undifferentiated) ; 
two stpl setae (I + 1); infrasquamal hairs absent; scutellum usually with three pairs of 
marginal setae, but apical pair often very weak (crossed, divergent or parallel), apicals 
sometimes entirely absent, discal scutellars normally present (at least one pair); wings boldly 
patterned with black-brown colour (this extending along fore border and in two preapical 
cross-bands which are evanescent posteriorly and of which the proximal one is much broader 
than the distal one), alula unusually long and mainly black-brown; second costal sector bare 
below; basal node of R,, ; bare (except in an undescribed Melanesian species in which three 
or four minute hairs present); bend of M very abrupt, usually forming a right-angle or even 
an acute angle, rarely with short M, appendix; cell R, long-petiolate; lower calypter rounded 
posteriorly; last section of Cu, from half to two-thirds as long as m-—cu; legs with strong 
setae and without scale fringes; hind tibia with two or three dorsal preapical setae, with or 
without pu apical seta; hind coxa and abdominal base approximated, posteroventral declivity 
of the thorax membranous medially; abdomen elongate-subovate, strongly convex dorsally, 
apex not recurved; Tr + 2 with excavation reaching to its hind margin; abdomen with 
strong setae; sternites concealed; no specialized ovipositor. 
The most useful spot characters for the genus are provided by the combination 
of variegated black-brown and hyaline wing pattern, strong median facial keel, 
exceedingly long narrow antennae, and very long-petiolate wing cell R; (Text-figs 
24 and 77). 
It may be noted that Herting (1966 : 8) implies that the curious European 
genus Redtenbacheria Schiner should be placed in the Eutherini. Such a placement 

