116 
sented, contradicts at once Mons. Bigot’s assertion; this is not the 
venation of Leskia. Moreover, the figures of the imago show a very 
stout form of the body, so that it can not possibly be united with Leskia.* 
This is all that is known to me from the literature regarding the at- 
tempts to fix the systematic position of Ugimyia. Having subsequently 
seen the imago I was enabled to properly interpret this parasite of the 
sukworm (cf. Verh. Zoél. Bot. Ges., Wien, 1889, Sitz. Ber., p. 51) and ar- 
rived at the following conclusion: 
Ugimyia sericarie has all the essential characters of the genus 
Sturmia Rob. Desv.7 and could very well be referred to this genus. It 
differs, however, from Sturmia by the pubescence of the abdomen, 
Sturmia having on the dorsum of the first and second abdominal seg- 
ments marginal macrochetze which are entirely wanting in Ugimyia 
sericarie. At the present state of the classification of Tachinide, this 
difference may be sufficient to consider Ugimuia sericarie as the type of © 
ahew genus for which I propose the name Crossocosmia mihi. The 
characters of this genus are as follows: 
Crossocosmia i. g.—First and second abdominal segments on the dor- 
sum without marginal and discal macrochete, the first two joints of the 
antennal seta very short and almost absent. Everything else as in the 
genus Sturmia R. Desy. 
The synonymy of the species is as follows: 
Sturmia (Crossocosmia) sericarie Corn. 
Ugimyia sericarie Cornalia, 1870 (Ugimyia serricarie Rond. 1870). 
Tachina oudji Guérin, 1870. (?) Tachina castellanii Guér. (i. litt?). 
In order to distinguish Crossocosmia from other allied genera it suf- 
fices to point out the following characters which, at the same time, 
plainly show the close relationship with Sturmia. Front in the ¢ wide, 
still wider in the 2; in the former the frontal orbits are hairy and 
furnished with erect bristles which, arranged in a row, descend to the 
base of the third antennal joint, where they are more approached to 
the internal margin of the eyes than to the frontal stripe. Besides 
these there are in the female two anteriorly curved and stronger ex- 
ternal bristles (orbital bristles). The antennz are inserted above the 
middle of the eyes, joint 3 being at least twice as long as jomt 2. The 
eyes are naked,i the palpi well developed, facial ridges nearly parallel, 
“Leskia aurea in the caterpillars of Sesiids (cf. Wachtl., Wien. Ent. Zeit., 1882, p. 
278; and Brischke, Schrift. d. Naturf. Ges., Danzig, 1884, Sep., p. 2). 
tThe name Sturmia R. Desv. was changed by Rondani to Blepharipa (Prodrom., 
1856, I, p. 71); by Kowarz to Cienocnemis (Verh. Zodl. Bot. Ges., 1875, p. 460); and by 
Brauer to Blepharipoda (Denkschr. Akad. Wiss., Wien, 1889, p.96). All these changes 
are superfluous) cf. Wien. Ent. Zeit., 1890, p. 155). In his Fauna, Schiner united the 
genus Sturmia with Masicera, but this is no longer admissible in the light of our 
recent knowledge of the family Tachinide. 
t Under strong magnifying power the eyes in Crossocosmia appear to be beset with 
extremely scattered, short, rod-like, but fine, yellowish hairs, but even under a good 
lens they appear to be naked, so that the genus can well be placed among those with 
naked eyes. 
— 
