FURTHER NOTES ON A NEW CLASSIFICATION OF AUSTRALIAN ROBBERFLIES (DIPTERA-ASILIDAE) . By G. H. Hardy. Walter and Eliza Hall Fellow in Economic Biology, Queensland University, Brisbane. [Read 29th June, 1927.] For loan of, or access to material that aided in the formation of this outline on a proposed new classification of Australian Asilidae, I would again express my indebtedness to the Directors and Curators of Museums and to various entomologists all of whom have been enumerated in an earlier paper (Hardy, 1926, p. 306) ; for the loan of further material to Mr. Alan Dodd, chief of the staff engaged upon the biological control of prickly pear, and to his co-workers Messrs. A. R. Taylor, G. R. Bassingthwaighte and T. A. Cole, who have submitted for identification genera and species I have not seen represented in other collections. Those new species from Chinchilla, Queensland, often labelled '"Chilla" in hand-writing, are liable to lead to errors if they ever find their way into collections abroad and become described from there; the corruption is too near "Chile" unless very clearly written. My knowledge of the world's genera of Asilids and their structure is mainly based upon the few papers available to me, to Lundbeck's Dipte7'a Danica, and to Melin's excellent studies on the Swedish species. The last mentioned author anticipated many of the views I was slowly evolving and so the enlightenment afforded by him gave me greater confidence than I would otherwise have had in the classification proposed. To these works I must add an acknowledgment to the value of the exotic Asilids sent by Professor M. Bezzi, consisting for the most part of genera related to the Australian forms. I have insufficient knowledge of the genus Dasypogon itself, therefore I have made no attempt to place it in the present work; but from what I can gather it will form the typical genus of a tribe not represented in Australia. In 1921, I revised the characters of various genera of Australian Asilidae, and again in two papers of 1926 reconsidered some of these. These three papers marked a stage in a search for an adequate classification which is further advanced in the present paper wherein the family is treated as a whole. Three proposed tribes have already been diagnosed and these are maintained in the present paper, though a different conception is given to some of them and four more tribes are added, two of which have already been mentioned. An improvement will be found in the incorporation of part of the old subfamily Laphrinae with the Saropogonini, two genera being thus transposed, whilst the Cerdistus-Neoitamus complex is more adequately isolated though very little altered in effect, the genus Stilpnogaster being now excluded from that complex, v
BioStor
