1938 ] 
Fossil Insects 
111 
North America by Scudder and Cockerell, the majority from 
the Florissant shales. Scudder (1894) proposed four sup- 
posedly new generic groups centering about Tipula that 
must be analyzed and evaluated in relation to the great 
increase in our knowledge of the Tipulidae in the past thirty 
years. 
Manapsis Scudder (l.c., pp. 222, 223) with cell Ml lacking 
or imperfectly developed. Affinities with other Tipulinae 
uncertain, due to the difference in venation in the two wings 
of the type. Several Recent Tipuline groups are now known 
in which cell Ml is lacking (as Idiotipuld Alexander, 
Xenotipula Alexander, and others). 
Rhadinobrochus Scudder (l.c., pp. 223, 224) based on the 
character of an unusually narrow cell 1st M2, which, in one 
wing of the unique type, shows an extra vein issuing there- 
from, lying between veins Ml-\-2 and M3 of the normal 
Tipuline venation. The value of this character is question- 
able, especially in the present instance where the venation 
appears to be abnormal (see Alexander, 1919). 
Tipulidea Scudder (l.c., pp. 238, 239) was separated from 
Tipula s.s. only on the basis of small physical size (wing, 
9.5-13.5 mm.) and the relative shortness of Rs which is 
approximately equal to m-cu. Both of these characters are 
duplicated in the recent subgenus Schummelia Edwards of 
the genus Tipula. The status of Tipulidea must remain in 
question until more evidence becomes available but it seems 
possible that the group may be maintained as a valid sub- 
genus of Tipula. 
Micrapsis Scudder (l.c., pp. 242-243) is based on a single 
imperfect specimen. The characters upon which the group 
is founded are very weak, consisting of the shortness of 
Rs and of an unusually small 1st M2, with vein M U forking 
at base of this cell, with m-cu placed some distance beyond 
the origin of MU. The latter combination of characters is 
much as in N ephrotoma and some Tipula and the status of 
the group is very much in question. 
In my opinion, none of the four Tipuline groups discussed 
above is well founded and all should wait upon the discovery 
of further material to substantiate or disprove their claims. 
It appears to me that all except Tipulidea may well be found 
to be based on teratological specimens, while all are based 
