54 
REVIEWS. 
Mycetophilince , with some of which it closely agrees in the venation. The 
latter family, again, should be rid of Corynocera —a genus whose affinity to 
his Chironomii has not entirely escaped Zetterstedt's observation, and to us 
appears unquestionable. In the section Brcichycera , again, the conjunction 
of Lonchoptera with Phytomyza in one family (Phytomyzides) seems un¬ 
accountable, except on the ground of Fallen's preponderating authority, all 
other modern systematists having removed the former genus entirely from 
the Muscidce. This great family has been carved by Zetterstedt, follow¬ 
ing Fallen, into a number of groups, which, though here denominated fa¬ 
milies, cannot, in respect of character’s, be accounted co-ordinate with the 
other families of this order, however the multitude of species to be 
grouped may recommend such a plan in a system professedly artificial. 
But, indeed, the subdivisions of this family have been so variously treated, 
that we do not venture to criticise closely the order or limits of Zetterstedt’s 
corresponding groups. Only the Hcematomyzides may be specified as a 
merely artificial assemblage of members taken from three different natural 
groups; Siphona being closely related to Tachina 1 Prosena to Dexia , and 
Stomoxys to Musca. We are compelled to regard it as a retrograde step, 
that Zetterstedt has fused again so many modern genera into one vast one— 
as in the cases of Tachina ,, Anthomyia , Aricia , the last two being distin¬ 
guished from each other merely by the colour of the legs. The carefully- 
constructed analytical tables of the species, given with each at least of the 
more extensive genera, do, however, remedy, in a great degree, the incon¬ 
veniences of such a fusion; nor can we attribute the rejection of so many 
genera to any indolence, since in the notes he has been at the pains of re¬ 
ferring every species he has described of these to its appropriate place in 
some one of the genera adopted by Meigen in his supplementary volume. 
The descriptions of the species in the Diptera Scandinavia: we have 
found in general as clear as they are full; and we must commend, in par¬ 
ticular, the simple phrases by which he has, in many instances, delineated 
the varying venation of the wings without the help of figures. Having ex¬ 
pressed dissatisfaction with the families he has given, we shall rather fol¬ 
low the arrangement proposed in the first volume of the Insecta Britannica, 
and refer the new genera we have to notice to their places in the families 
according to it. Mycetophilida— Pachyneura , venation not very unlike 
Platyura , antennae filiform (18-jointed?), palpi 4-jointed, lateral spines of 
tibiae very slight; one species P. fasciata , 9-11 lines long; Lapland and 
N. Sweden about rotten trunks of trees. Boletina Stg., for the species of 
Leja Mg., in which the forks of the two brachial veins are equally distant 
from the base of the wing. Giiironomida— Corynocera , wings adiaplianous, 
