74 
A Parasitic Phorid Fly 
5. COMPARISON WITH LARVAE OF OTHER PHORIDAE. 
The larva of Hyjpocera incrassata differs considerably from the larvae of 
Phora Bergenstammi Mik., P. rufijpes Mg., and P. ruftcornis Mg., as described 
by Keilin(2). 
The buccopharyngeal armature is very different as may be seen by com¬ 
parison with Keilin’s figures. The numerous sensory structures on the cuticle 
of the latter larvae are not present in the case of Hyjpocera incrassata. 
The absence of sensory structures may be an adaptation to a more com¬ 
pletely parasitic existence, as may also be the simpler buccopharyngeal 
armature, with the fusion of the usual two mandibular sclerites into an 
unpaired organ. 
The study of this larva lends support to the opinions of Brues, de Meijere 
and Keilin that the position of the Phoridae in the classification of the Diptera 
should be among the Cyclorrhapha. 
REFERENCES. 
(1) Brues, C. T. (1913). A New Species of Phoridae reared from dried Coleoptera. Ann. 
Mus. Nation. Hung. xi. 
(2) Keilin, D. (1911). Recherches sur la morphologic larvaire des Dipteres du genre Pliora. 
Bull. Sci. France el Belg. 7 me serie, T. xliv, i. 
(3) Keilin, D. (1917). Recherches sur les Anthomyides a larves carnivores. Parasitology , 
ix, 3. 
(4) Wood, J. H. (1906). On the British Species of Phora (Part I). Ent. Mon. Mag. xvn. 
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE III. 
Larval and Pupal Stages of Hypocera incrassata Mg. 
Fig. 1. Fully grown larva. Dorsal view, as., anterior spiracle; ps., posterior spiracle, x 20. 
Fig. 2. Puparium. Lateral view. Is., jirotruding spiracular horn of pupa, x 20. 
Fig. 3. Pupa removed from puparium. Lateral view, s., prothoracic spiracular horn, x 20. 
Fig. 4. Buccopharyngeal armature of larva. Lateral view. i., intermediate sclerite ; m., mandibular 
sclerite; o., “baguette orale”; p., pharyngeal sclerite. x 126. 
Fig. 5. Buccopharyngeal armature of larva. Ventral view. Lettering as in previous figure, x 126. 
Fig. 6. “Baguette orale” of larva x 730. 
