
APPENDIX 209 
Two pertinent items of nomenclatural information became known while this 
paper was at the page-proof stage. These concern the generic name Spoggosia and 
the nominal species Masicera viridiventris. 
(1) Spoggosia Rondani. In the present paper this name has been used as valid 
for a genus of Exoristini in accordance with the work of Mesnil (1947, 1956, 1960), 
but Herting (1972)* has now discovered that the name Chetogena Rondani, 1856, 
applies to this genus and should be used as its valid name, since it has priority over 
Spoggosia Rondani, 1859. The genus Chetogena Rondani is widespread in Eurasia 
and Africa, and has one described and at least one undescribed species in Australia. 
The combination Chetogena micropalpis (Malloch, 1930) comb. n. is here established 
for the described Australian species. It should be noted that Herting (1972 : 8) 
spelt the name as Chaetogena but that the original spelling Chetogena is correct under 
the Code. 
(2) Masicera viridiventris. Macquart (1847: 84 & 1851: 163) described two 
nominal species under this name, the later (1851) use of the name being a junior 
primary homonym of the earlier (1847) use. The earlier nominal species was described 
from Tasmania and the later one from Egypt. Townsend (1916c) cited the two 
viridiventris names as synonyms and stated that the cited provenance ‘Egypte’ 
for the later use was in error. During earlier work on Macquart’s types (Crosskey, 
1971 : 276) I was unable to find the type of viridiventris (2), purportedly from 
Egypt, and rejected Townsend’s synonymy of the two viridiventris as unproven, 
but it can now be confirmed that Townsend was right. Ona visit to Oxford Univer- 
sity Museum in April, 1973, the female holotype of M. viridiventris Macquart, 1851, 
was found amongst the Palaearctic Tachinidae from Bigot’s collection, and exam- 
ination showed at once that the specimen is undoubtedly conspecific with, and the 
female of, M. viridiventris Macquart, 1847 (described from the male); the two types 
have been directly compared. The cited provenance of Egypt for vividiventris (2) 
is unquestionably in error, and the second use of viridiventris should appear as 
follows in the synonymy of Tasmaniomyia viridiventris (Macquart, 1847) on page 
152 of this work: 
vividiventvis Macquart, 1851: 163 (190) (Masicera). Holotype 9, AUSTRALIA, prob. 
TasMaNIA [publ. ‘Egypte’ in error] (UM, Oxford) [examined]. (Name a junior primary 
homonym of M. viridiventris Macquart, 1847, no replacement name required.) 
The holotype of viridiventris (1851) is in fair condition, but has lost the right mid 
leg and the apices of some tarsi, the thoracic dorsum is rather crushed and the 
ptilinum partially extruded. It bears Macquart’s original label reading ‘Masicera 
viridiventris 9. Macq. n. sp.’ and Bigot’s collection label reading ‘M Viridiventris. 
6g. Egypt. Macq.’ (the sex sign being erroneous). At the time of writing the holotype 
is still in the collection of the University Museum, Oxford, but it is hoped that 
consent will be obtained for it to be transferred to the British Museum (Natural 
* HerTING, B. 1972. Die Typenexemplare der von Meigen (1824-1838) beschreibenen Raupenfliegen 
(Dipt. Tachinidae). Stuttg. Beitr. Naturk., No. 243, 15 pp. 
oO 
