* For names and illustrations of colours, see Ridgway, , ‘A Nomenclature of Colors for Naturalists’ (Boston: Little, Brown & Company, 1886).Google Scholar

* For this Northern Nigerian species Baron J. M. R. Surcouf, of the Muséum National D'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, recently proposed to found a new genus, which he was good enough to designate Austenia (Bull. Mus. Nat. D'Hist. Nat., 1909 (not published until 1910), p. 454).Google Scholar In proposing a generic separation in the case of Haemotopota bullatifrons, M. Surcouf relied upon the shape and other characters of the frontal callus, on the presence of fringes of long hair on the femora, and on the shape of the hind tibiae in this species; in the same paper the author in question, on the basis of characters presented by the antennae, proposed a new genus named Potisa for certain Oriental species, the genotype in this case being Haemotopota pachycera, Big., which occurs in Cambodia and Siam. In the opinion of the present writer, however, no valid division of the genus Haematopota, at any rate into categories higher than groups or subgenera, is possible, since, although within the limits of the genus great differences exist in the shape of the frontal callus, antennae, front and hind tibiae, etc., it would be difficult to find two species showing identical differences from the genotype, yet all are united by the well-known, highly characteristic, and distinctive wing-markings, as well as by a general facies.

* [The Committee has also received two females taken between Daboya and Busunu, Northern Territories, Gold Coast, vii. 1912 (C. Saunders).—Ed.]

† Cf. Austen, , Illustrations of African Blood-Sucking Flies, p. 126 (1909).Google Scholar

‡ Cf. Austen, , op. cit., p. 125, and Plate xi., fig. 84.Google Scholar