
TACHINIDAE OF AUSTRALIA 41 
is insufficiently substantiated at present and the diagnosis of Eutherini given 
above omits Redtenbacheria from consideration. 
SUBFAMILY PROSENINAE (DEXIINAE) WITH KEYS TO THE 
TRIBES AND GENERA 
The subfamily name Proseninae is here used in order to conform with the recently 
published catalogues of the Tachinidae of North and South America, although it 
is now known that it is not the oldest available name that applies to the group; 
several family-group names based on included genera pre-date the use of Prosenini 
(-ae) and one of these ought strictly to be used for the subfamily under the priority 
requirements of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. It is not yet 
clear which name should stand valid, and most specialists are in favour of returning 
to the name Dexiinae (that used to be almost universally applied to the subfamily). 
The name Dexiinae cannot, however, be validly applied to the subfamily until the 
type-species of Dexia Meigen is changed by a ruling of the International Commission 
on Zoological Nomenclature; such a ruling has not yet been applied for, although it 
is under active consideration by interested specialists. 
The subfamily is very large and cosmopolitan and its members appear exclusively 
to parasitize beetles. There are very few host records for the rich Australian fauna, 
but it is a reasonable guess on present evidence that all will be found to have 
coleopterous hosts. Several tribes have been delimited within the subfamily by 
various authors, notably Townsend, but taken as a whole the multiplicity of forms 
tends to merge together with few if any breaks in the characters that permit 
satisfactory tribal definitions. Even between the Rutiliini and the rest of the 
Proseninae (which are conventionally treated as tribally distinct) there are few 
concrete characters that absolutely serve for reliable tribal discrimination (Crosskey, 
1973) of all the forms into one tribe or the other; the genus Chetogaster Macquart 
could, for example, be equally well placed in either the Prosenini or the Rutiliini 
(in the present work it is retained therefore in its traditional position in the latter 
tribe). 
As with other tachinid subfamilies it is difficult to formulate a fully satisfactory subfamiliar 
definition but the main characteristics of most members of the group are as follows. Head 
often with a very strong facial carina separating the antennae or with a sharp median ridge 
(though carina lacking in very many forms); rows of frontal setae descending to the level of 
the lunula or the first antennal segment; ¢ without reclinate orbital setae; J head often with 
eyes very strongly approximated but not holoptic (except in a few Formosia species) ; uppermost 
eye facets normally not enlarged (only enlarged in some Formosia); eyes bare [this is true 
of almost the entire vast complex of world forms included in the Proseninae, but there are 
a very few exceptions that have haired eyes: examples, Callotvoxis Aldrich and Tyreomma 
Brauer and Bergenstamm from South America]; inner vertical setae when present often 
convergent or crossing; prosternum bare (except in a few Rutiliuni); prosternal membrane 
bare (except in some Rutiliini); humeral callus with at least two setae distinguishable (though 
these may be very weak in Rutiliini); post ia setae varied, from none to four; dorsocentral 
setae varied, often very reduced in Rutiliin:, pre-alar seta weak or absent; two or more 
differentiated sa setae in almost all forms; postalar callus with 2-7 setae; usually two or 
three sternopleural setae (one or none in some Rutiliini); infrasquamal hairs nearly always 
