TACHINIDAE OF ORIENTAL REGION 99 



latter element in the fauna includes L. comta (Fallen), L. picta (Meigen) and L. 

 soror Zimin whose presence in the northern Oriental area has been confirmed during 

 the present revisionary work from specimens (<$ genitalia examined) in the BMNH 

 collection. Some of the truly Oriental species also have very close links with 

 Palaearctic species, an example being L. atriventris (Malloch), a species hitherto 

 in Palpina, which occurs in Malaya and Indonesia and is almost indistinguishable 

 from the northern Asiatic species L. montshadskyi Zimin (the complex £ genitalia 

 in the two being almost identical) . Because of the very close affinities of the Palaearc- 

 tic and Oriental Linnaemya faunas the keys of Zimin (1963) and Mesnil (19716) 

 to Palaearctic species, and of Zimin (1954) and Chao (1962a) to Russian and Chinese 

 species, are specially relevant to the Oriental area. 



Townsend (1936a; 19390) placed the genera Palpina and Xanthoerigone in his 

 tribe Linnaemyini, but Mesnil (1957 : 60) associated these genera with Parerigone 

 Brauer (a genus now considered to belong to the tribe Parerigonini and possibly 

 having phasiine affinities), and Crosskey (1967c : 107) listed them as parerigonines. 

 In order to place the Palpina-Xanthoerigone complex (the two names have already 

 been synonymized with each other: Crosskey, 1967c) reliably in the present work 

 it has been necessary to consider the characters in detail, and especially to try and 

 determine whether the affinities are with Linnaemyini or with Parerigonini. Only 

 adult flies are available, but even so it appears certain that Palpina, despite some 

 superficial resemblance to Parerigone, is a linnaemyine and indeed no significant 

 distinction at all has been found between Palpina-Xanthoerigone and Linnaemya 

 itself. In consequence both Palpina and Xanthoerigone are treated as synonyms 

 of Linnaemya as this genus is currently understood. Here it is relevant to note 

 that Mesnil's Linnaemya longipalpis ($ holotype) is unquestionably the female 

 of Townsend's Xanthoerigone oralis (the type-species of Xanthoerigone) so that 

 Mesnil has in effect but unknowingly associated Xanthoerigone with Linnaemya; 

 while Palpina atriventris Malloch - as noted above - is hardly distinguishable 

 from, and perhaps even the same as, Linnaemya montshadskyi. The type-species 

 of Palpina, viz. scutellaris Malloch, runs perfectly in Mesnil's (19716) key to Linnaemya 

 lateralis (Townsend) and is exceedingly similar to that species if not actually synony- 

 mous with it. 



Xanthoerigone oralis (syn. Linnaemya longipalpis) differs from typical Linnaemya 

 in the form of the male genitalia, particularly in the shape of the cerci and surstyli, 

 and at first glance it appears inappropriate to associate oralis in Linnaemya. But every 

 other character shown by oralis fits with, or has its counterpart in, other Linnaemya 

 species and it is therefore considered unjustified to maintain Xanthoerigone as a 

 genus distinct from Linnaemya. In oralis there are two ad setae on the mid tibia 

 instead of the usual three or more, but two such setae occur in several undoubted 

 Linnaemya species; in oralis there is no definite pv apical seta on the hind tibia, 

 but such seta is also lacking in certain Linnaemya species (e.g. melancholica Mesnil); 

 and in oralis there is no definite submedian v seta on the mid tibia (but weakness or 

 even total absence of this seta occurs in the males of several Linnaemya species). 

 In short, there is no character or group of characters that will serve to separate 

 either Palpina or Xanthoerigone from Linnaemya. 



