24 R. W. CROSSKEY 



the conclusion that they must be wholly ignored for purposes of generic diagnosis 

 and treated with caution at the specific level. The same applies to certain other 

 characters that have been used within the tribe for generic separation, such as 

 the disposition of abdominal setae and the strength of the vibrissae in the Cylindro- 

 myia (non-palpate) complex, neither of which is of real value for generic characteriza- 

 tion because of the existence of intermediates. Indeed, in the Cylindromyia-complex 

 almost every combination of number of sternopleural setae, presence or absence 

 of basal scutellars, strong or weak vibrissae above or level with the epistome, bare 

 or haired propleuron, presence or absence of apical scutellar setae, presence or 

 absence of abdominal discal setae, one or two ad setae on mid tibia, or presence 

 or absence of pv setae on the hind tibia, etc., can be found if enough material is 

 studied on a world basis. 



Because of the plethora of generic names that have been proposed for Oriental 

 cylindromyiines, and because of the instability of many of the characters that 

 have been supposed to characterize the entities for which the names stand, it has 

 been necessary to make a thorough examination of the group and to re-assess 

 the generic limits. As a result I here recognize only seven genera in the Oriental 

 fauna, and two of these are only doubtfully justified (Gerocyptera Townsend could 

 be merged with Cylindromyia and Formicophania could be merged with Hermya 

 but each has a different body facies from its obvious near-relative and is maintained 

 as valid for the time being). Twenty-one generic names of Townsend and several 

 generic names of other authors are treated as synonyms, most of the synonymy 

 being newly established. The principal outcome of the generic review presented 

 here is a greatly expanded concept of the genus Lophosia Meigen, the sinking of 

 many generic names into synonymy with Lophosia, and the assignment of many 

 nominal species to this genus. It is necessary to discuss this in more detail and 

 to provide a redefinition of Lophosia. 



Eighteen so-called genera having much the facies of the European Lophosia have 

 been described from the Oriental Region, sometimes by workers who paid scant 

 regard to genera proposed by their predecessors; in some cases the nominal type- 

 species are synonymous. If this complex of supposed genera is examined, without 

 any preconceived idea of whether such characters as open or petiolate cell K 5 , 

 absence of basal scutellar setae, one or two post ia setae, presence or absence of 

 proclinate orbital setae, or number of sternopleural setae, is of 'generic' value, 

 it is obvious at once that not only do the members of the complex have a very 

 similar body facies but they are united by having a curiously modified fifth sternite 

 in the male (lateral lobes produced into long narrow shining processes, Text-figs 

 124-128) and by having the same kind of male hypopygium and female postabdomen 

 (Text-figs 129-135). The body facies, the male fifth sternite and the female 

 postabdomen are of exactly similar kind to those of the European Lophosia fasciata 

 Meigen (type-species of Lophosia), the resemblance being so close that the exceedingly 

 slender downcurved fifth sternite processes of some Oriental species would be 

 mistaken for those of fasciata if the terminalia were considered in isolation. From 

 these facts it seems plain to me that the appropriate taxonomic treatment is to 

 unify all the Oriental members of the complex into one genus with the European 



