26 
Psyche 
[February 
moreover, contains several other forms with well-developed 
ocelli. Siircouf admits 43 genera, of which Baikalia (p. 39; 
monotypic for B. vaillanti Surcouf), Guyona (p. 141; monotypic 
for Pangonia mesembrinoides Surcouf, 1908),i Brodenia (p. 160; 
monotypic for B. cinerea Surcouf), and Lesneus (p. 161; mono- 
typic for L. canescens Surcouf) are proposed for the first time. 
Unfortunately two of these new generic names are preoccupied: 
Baikalia Surcouf (not Baicalia v. Martens, 1876) I propose to 
replace by Surcoufiella, new name, and Brodenia Surcouf (not 
Brodenia Gedoelst, 1913) by BroMnsiomyia, new name. The 
only species of the last-named genus, Braunsiomyia cinerea 
(Surcouf) was discovered on the sandy beach at Port Elizabeth 
(Algoa Bay), Cape Colony, by that enthusiastic South African 
entomologist Dr. H. Brauns. 
Walker’s subdivisions of Pangonius and most of Ad. Lutz’ 
generic creations among South American tabanids are not ac- 
cepted by Surcouf and many of those proposed by Ad. Lutz are 
not even enumerated. There are, however, a number of other 
generic names published previous to 1920, which have been over- 
looked by Surcouf and in some other cases the names he uses are 
obsolete or wrongly spelled. 
Hexatoma Meigen, 1820 (p. 26). This name is preoccupied 
by Hexatoma Latreille, 1809, and should be replaced by Heptatoma 
Meigen, 1803, which, moreover, has many years priority. 
Chrysozona Meigen, 1800 (p. 28). I cannot agree with those 
who claim that this name should replace Hcematopota Meigen, 
1803. I have recently examined an original copy, now at the 
Library of the American Museum of Natural History, of Meigen’s 
pamphlet ‘^Nouvelle Classification des Insectes Dipteres” (Paris, 
1800) and find that this work merely gives short generic des- 
criptions without mentioning any species, so that these so-called 
genera having no genotypes should be regarded as nomina nuda, 
and therefore without nomenclatorial standing. 
Lepidoselaga Osten Sacken, 1876 (p. 43). There is no suf- 
ficient reason why this amended form should be preferred to the 
original Lepiselaga Macquart, 1838. 
^Guyona does not appear to be generically distinct from Orgizomyia, as 
will be shown in a subsequent paper. 
