Articoli di riviste sul tema "1835-1910"

A new subspecies of Phragmatobia amurensis Seitz, 1910, Phragmatobia amurensis edita ssp. n. is described from the Shaanxi Province of China. Adults and genitalia of both sexes of all subspecies of P. amurensis as well as the similar P. fuliginosa (Linnaeus, 1758) and P. placida (Frivaldszky, 1835) are illustrated.

In the literature there is much confusion about the identity and taxonomic position of two common oribatid mite species in the family Ceratozetidae: Oribates setosus C.L. Koch, 1839, and Murcia trimaculata C.L. Koch, 1835. Related to these problems, there are contrary opinions about the validity of two ceratozetid genera, Murcia Koch, 1835 and Trichoribates Berlese, 1910, and the identity of their type species. Important conclusions on these issues have been proposed in the past (Jacot 1929; Pérez-Iñigo 1993) but these were not followed in an important recent catalog (Subías 2004). In the following, we summarize and comment on the history of these problems, and argue in the context of the current ICZN rules to preserve nomenclatural stability.

AbstractThe Windsor amateur astronomer, John Tebbutt, had a ceased observing in 1907. However, in 1909, at the age of 75, he came out of retirement to observe Halley’s comet and his astrometric positions were published in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. These data were used, together with most published observations from the 1835 and 1910 apparitions, for the computation of Halley’s orbit for ESA’s Halley intercept spacecraft, Giotto. A detailed analysis of the observations have shown minor imperfections that, when corrected, gave rms errors of 3''.5 arc in right ascension and 2''.8 in declination. His systematic errors are negligible at the 0''.2 level.

The theory of the motion of Halley comet has been built using ground optical positional observations of 1682, 1759, 1835, 1910 and 1982–84. The orbital elements of the comet and two coefficients characterizing non-gravitational perturbations were determined precisely as a result of the statistical treatment of the observations. The estimations of the accuracy of the theory and the data describing its agreement with the observations are presented. The theory has been applied to ballistic-navigational calculations for the Soviet Vega project.

Eupholus sulisi Bollino and Anderson sp. nov. is here described from the Indonesian portion of New Guinea, and separated from the most similar species E. prasinus Heller 1910 and E. humeralis Heller 1908. The structure of the everted endophallus examined in 38 of 71 species of Eupholus Boisduval 1835 supports the recognition of three groups within the genus, the Eupholus loriae-group, Eupholus schoenherri-group, Eupholus alternans-group, and Eupholus antonkozlovi Porion and Audibert, which does not fall into the three aforementioned groups.

The present paper deals with five species of oribatid mites of the genus Trichoribates Berlese, 1910 and two species of the genus Jugatala Ewing, 1913 from high mountains of the Central and Southern Alps. A new species, Trichoribates scilierensis sp. nov., collected from South Tyrol (Italy) is described in detail on the basis of adults. In addition, supplementary descriptions and illustrations of six known species, Trichoribates monticola (Trägårdh, 1902), T. novus (Sellnick, 1928), T. punctatus Shaldybina, 1971, T. trimaculatus (C. L. Koch, 1835), Jugatala angulata (C. L. Koch, 1839) and J. cribelliger (Berlese, 1904) are presented. Trichoribates punctatus is recorded for the first time in Central Europe. The status of old generic names as well as the validity of some species are discussed. The synonymy of T. oxypterus (Berlese, 1910) is rejected and its validity retained. The possible synonymy of Jugatala rotunda Willmann, 1953 with J. angulata is discussed. The distribution of all studied species is discussed.

Estudo do Cancioneiro popular gauchesco, através das coletâneas: Cancioneiro Guasca (1910), de Simões Lopes Neto, Cancioneiro gaúcho (1952), de Augusto Meyer e Cancioneiro da Revolução de 1835 (1935), de Apolinário Porto Alegre, recortando a configuração do homem e da mulher, suas relações de amor, seu papel no universo campeiro, sua possibilidade de fala e imposição de vontade e valores. Ao enfocar esses aspectos pretendemos demonstrar que, por sua ênfase, esses temas ocupam o espaço do tema das contendas guerreiras, impopulares, uma vez que pouco poetizadas. Além disso, fica patente o quanto o regionalismo gauchesco já estava presente nas origens de nossa literatura.

O viajante francês Jean-Baptiste Douville, ao cruzar terras da Província da Bahia, doa, em 1835, peças de história natural para formar gabinete oficializado pela administração do governo na cidade do Salvador. A partir da noticia publicada em 1910 na revista do Instituto Geográfico e Histórico da Bahia, problematiza-se a situação para o aceite da doação, rastreando o cruzamento de providências indicativas da criação, continuidade e descontinuidade, as intenções e impactos na cultura do lugar. Conclui-se que, apesar da instabilidade que rondou o “Gabinete Douville”, a criação inicial franqueou a entrada das ciências naturais na Bahia Oitocentista no Liceu Provincial que passou a funcionar em 1837.

AbstractThe six species assigned to the Holarctic nigellus complex of Hydroporus Clairville are revised, and a key is given to the separation of males. Species limits were studied biometrically, chiefly using body length, penis length and male protarsal width. Principal components analysis was used to combine size variables taken from samples throughout species ranges. The two Holarctic species H. geniculatus Thomson, 1854, and H. nigellus Mannerheim, 1853, are separated on tarsal width, with H. nigellus being circumboreal and H. geniculatus confined to NW Europe and NW North America. Of the four other species H. semenowi Jakowlew, 1897, is Palearctic, and H. despectus Sharp, 1882, H. tartaricus LeConte, 1850, and H. tenebrosus LeConte, 1850, are Nearctic. Lectotypes are designated for the following nominal species: Hydrocoptus obscuripes Motschulsky, 1860, Hydroporus caminarius Motschulsky, 1860, Hydroporus despectus Sharp, 1882, Hydroporus eugeniae Zaitzev, 1909, Hydroporus lugubris Motschulsky, 1845, Hydroporus melancholicus Motschulsky, 1860, Hydroporus opacus Wehncke, 1871, Hydroporus pyrenaeus Wehncke, 1871, Hydroporus rusticus Sharp, 1882, Hydroporus semenowi Jakowlew, 1897, and Hydroporus tartaricus LeConte, 1850. The following new synonymies are established: Hydroporus longitarsis J. Sahlberg, 1910, and Hydroporus afflatus Scholz, 1917 = Hydroporus semenowi Jakowlew, 1897; Hydrocoptus obscuripes Motschulsky, 1860, Hydroporus pyrenaeus Wehncke, 1871, Hydroporus bungei Zaitzev, 1910, and Hydroporus tungus Zaitzev, 1910 = Hydroporus nigellus Mannerheim, 1853; Hydroporus eugeniae Zaitzev, 1909 = Hydroporus elongatulus Sturm, 1835.

In their close ties to a folkloric past, and in a conscientious effort to dialogue with a far-reaching literary inheritance, the Brazilian Ariano Suassuna (1927-2014) and the U.S.’s Mark Twain (1835-1910) present regional protagonists who negotiate roles as heroes of artifice. As they feed off models of the Trickster and pícaro, an analysis based on cognitive and psychosocial theory reveals a João Grilo and Huck Finn that model valued skills as socioeconomically marginalized figures on the outskirts of civilization. In Auto da Compadecida (1955) and Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (1884), both Suassuna and Twain manage to highlight these skills by creating character duos that mimic the cognitive counterpointing between Miguel de Cervantes’ Don Quijote and Sancho Panza.

AbstractHomeopathy was introduced into the USA by Hans Burch Gram in 1825. It developed largely through immigration of German homeopaths. The first homeopathic medical college was established in Allentown, PA in 1835. The American institute of Homeopathy (AIH) was founded in 1844. The American Medical Association was founded in 1847 and pursued policies hostile to homeopathy from the outset. Eclectic medicine was widespread in nineteenth century medicine, one of the greatest homeopaths, JT Kent had originally been an eclectic. The International Hahnemannian Association split from the AIH in 1880. The Flexner Report of 1910 resulted in many homeopathic medical colleges being closed down. Homeopathy in the USA was in steep decline from the 1920s to the 1960s but has had a strong recovery since the 1970s.

During the latter half of the nineteenth century, the countries of Central America incorporated European musicians into their state-generated projects. Administrations from Guatemala to Costa Rica appointed composers from Italy, Germany, Belgium, and Spain to help stimulate national musical culture and education, giving them leadership roles in state institutions. Belgian composer and conductor Alejandro Cousin arrived in the late 1850s and spent the rest of his life in El Salvador and Nicaragua where he established the national military band. This article, in the form of an obituary, sheds light on his noteworthy artistic legacy in Central America.

A collection of flies and mosquitoes were made at four different locations at different altitudes along the trail from the base to the summit of Gunung Santubong in Santubong National Park, Sarawak in November 2013. A total of 2,494 specimens of nine species of flies were collected comprising of families Calliphoridae and Muscidae. The species composition were Chrysomya megacephala (Fabricius, 1794) 53.3%; Chrysomya chani Kurahashi, 1979, 11.9%; Chrysomya defixa (Walker, 1856) 8.4%; Ophyra spinigera Stein, 1910, 6.8%; Chrysomya rufifacies (Macquart, 1843) 5.7%; Ceylonomyia nigripes (Aubertin, 1932) 5.5%; Chrysomya villeneuvi (Patton, 1922) 4.8%; Ophyra chalcogaster (Weidemann, 1824) 3.2%; and, Hypopygiopsis violacea (Macquart, 1835) 0.4%. of the flies, C. megacephala (Fabricius,1794) is the most abundant species collected at different altitudes. Few mosquitoes of the family Culicidae were collected from tree holes along the trail. They consisted of four species namely Aedes albolineatus, Anopheles sp., Uranotenia sp. and Tripteroides sp.

En este artículo abordamos una de las cuestiones que evidencian más a las claras la provechosa relación que puede existir entre el drama romántico y el teatro lírico, cuando el texto dramático es la fuente que inspira la composición del libreto y de la partitura de una ópera homónima. Tal es el caso del drama del Duque de Rivas, Don Álvaro o la fuerza del sino (1835) y la ópera de Conrado del Campo El final de Don Álvaro (1910).Conrado del Campo, uno de los compositores españoles de ópera más relevantes de comienzos del siglo XX, supo descubrir en los elementos musicales existentes en el texto dramático de D. Ángel Saavedra el germen de su primera ópera. Así, mediante la inteligente combinación de los postulados musicales wagnerianos con los ingredientes pasionales propios del drama tardorromántico alumbró su propio modelo de ópera nacional, siempre vinculado a los elementos singulares del folklore hispano.

In this paper the present state of knowledge of the family Sicariidae in the Afrotropical region is discussed. The Sicariidaein the Afrotropical region, as it stands at present, consists of two genera, viz. Sicarius Walckenaer, 1847 (subfamilySicariinae) with six species: S. albospinosus Purcell, 1908, S. damarensis Lawrence, 1928, S. dolichocephalus Lawrence,1928, S. hahni (Karsch, 1878), S. spatulatus Pocock, 1900, and S. testaceus Purcell, 1908 and Loxosceles Heineken &Lowe, 1835 (subfamily Loxoscelinae) with 13 species: L. fontainei Millot, 1941, L. foutadjalloni Millot, 1941, L. lacroixiMillot, 1941, L. meruensis Tullgren, 1910, L. neuvillei Simon, 1909, L. pallidecolorata (Strand, 1906), L. parramiNewlands, 1981, L. rufecens (Dufour, 1820), L. smithi Simon, 1897, L. speluncarum Simon, 1893, L. spinulosa Purcell,1904, L. valida Lawrence, 1964 and L. vonwredei Newlands, 1980. Loxosceles parrami Newlands, 1981 is here renamedto L. parramae (Newlands, 1981), as it was named for a Miss Parram. Loxosceles valida Lawrence, 1964 is heretransferred to the genus Drymusa Simon, 1893 (Drymusidae) and three species of Loxosceles is revalidated (L. bergeri Strand, 1906, L. pilosa Purcell, 1908 and L. simillima Lawrence, 1927).

Today we are accustomed to seeing the objects of the universe in magnificent digital pictures vividly before our eyes. But before the invention of photography, the art of painting and drawing played an important role in scientific research. Those who were powerful astronomers of this art had the advantage. This article substantiates this thesis by means of selected examples. The drawings and the related discoveries of Galileo Galilei (1564–1642), Johannes Hevelius (1611–1687), Tobias Mayer (1723–1762), Johann Heinrich Mädler (1794–1874), Julius Schmidt (1825–1884), Giovanni Schiaparelli (1835–1910), Eugenios Antoniadi (1870–1944), William Parsons alias Lord Rosse (1800–1867), Ernst Wilhelm Leberecht Tempel (1821–1889), Etienne Trouvelot (1827–1895) and Walter Löbering (1895–1969) and showed their most important drawn observation documents. It can be seen that thanks to their art and the associated highly developed ability to perceive it, astronomers' drawings have made astounding discoveries that others have been denied. Finally, some thoughts on the role of drawn or painted astronomical motifs in the present are developed.

Forest water bodies, e.g., pools, constitute ‘environmental islands’ within forests, with specific flora and fauna thus contributing considerably to the landscape biodiversity. The mite communities of Oribatida and Mesostigmata in two distinctive microhabitats, water-soaked Sphagnum mosses at the edge of a pool and other mosses growing on the medium-wet forest floor nearby, were compared in a limestone forest in Southern Norway. In total, 16,189 specimens of Oribatida representing 98 species, and 499 specimens of Mesostigmata, from 23 species, were found. The abundance and species number of Oribatida were significantly lower at the pool, while the abundance and species richness of Mesostigmata did not differ. Both the communities of Oribatida and of Mesostigmata differed among the microhabitats studied and analysis showed significant differences between the community structures in the two microhabitats. The most abundant oribatid species in Sphagnum mosses was Parachipteria fanzagoi (Jacot, 1929), which made up over 30% of all Oribatida, followed by Atropacarus striculus (C.L. Koch, 1835) and Tyrphonothrus maior (Berlese, 1910) (14% and 12% of Oribatida, respectively). Among Mesostigmata Paragamasus parrunciger (Bhattacharyya, 1963) dominated (44% of Mesostigmata), followed by P. lapponicus (Trägårdh, 1910) (14% of Mesostigmata). Most of these species, except P. lapponicus, were either absent or very uncommon in the other microhabitat studied. The specific acarofauna of the forest pool shows the importance of such microhabitats in increasing forest diversity. In addition, a quarter of the mite species found had not been reported from Norwegian broadleaf forests before, including five new species records for Norway and four new to Fennoscandia, all found in the medium-wet microhabitat. Most of these species are rarely collected and have their northernmost occurrence in the studied forest.

For quite a while, scientific biography was relegated to a subordinate status in the history of science. In the last two decades, however, it has seen a revival, which can be explained both by its popularity among general audiences as it conveys a closer image of scientists and scientific practice, and science historians' reappraisal of biography as a literary genre and as a source for their research. When writing scientific biographies or using them as a source, however, historians have to contend with complex questions, such as the extent to which a particular biography is representative of larger patterns, and they face a variety of problems associated with the use of sources such as oral testimonies and obituaries. In this paper, the scientific lives of Joaquim Filipe Nery da Encarnação Delgado (1835-1908) and Francisco Luís Pereira de Sousa (1870-1931), both engineers working at the Portuguese Geological Survey, and Carlos Teixeira (1910-1982), a leading geologist working in the academia, will be analysed. Through this comparison, the authors aim to characterize the development of Portuguese geology in different contexts in the period spanning from the mid-nineteenth to the twentieth century.

A review of genus-group names for darkling beetles in the family Tenebrionidae (Insecta: Coleoptera) is presented. A catalogue of 4122 nomenclaturally available genus-group names, representing 2307 valid genera (33 of which are extinct) and 761 valid subgenera, is given. For each name the author, date, page number, gender, type species, type fixation, current status, and first synonymy (when the name is a synonym) are provided. Genus-group names in this family are also recorded in a classification framework, along with data on the distribution of valid genera and subgenera within major biogeographical realms. A list of 535 unavailable genus-group names (e.g., incorrect subsequent spellings) is included. Notes on the date of publication of references cited herein are given, when known. The following genera and subgenera are made available for the first time: Anemiadena Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Cheirodes Gené, 1839), Armigena Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Nesogena Mäklin, 1863), Debeauxiella Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Hyperops Eschscholtz, 1831), Hyperopsis Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Hyperops Eschscholtz, 1831), Linio Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Nilio Latreille, 1802), Matthewsotys Bouchard & Bousquet, gen. nov., Neosolenopistoma Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Eurynotus W. Kirby, 1819), Paragena Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Nesogena Mäklin, 1863), Paulianaria Bouchard & Bousquet, gen. nov., Phyllechus Bouchard & Bousquet, gen. nov., Prorhytinota Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Rhytinota Eschscholtz, 1831), Pseudorozonia Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Rozonia Fairmaire, 1888), Pseudothinobatis Bouchard & Bousquet, gen. nov., Rhytinopsis Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Thalpophilodes Strand, 1942), Rhytistena Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Rhytinota Eschscholtz, 1831), Spinosdara Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Osdara Walker, 1858), Spongesmia Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Adesmia Fischer, 1822), and Zambesmia Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Adesmia Fischer, 1822). The names Adeps Gistel, 1857 and Adepsion Strand, 1917 syn. nov. [= Tetraphyllus Laporte & Brullé, 1831], Asyrmatus Canzoneri, 1959 syn. nov. [= Pystelops Gozis, 1910], Euzadenos Koch, 1956 syn. nov. [= Selenepistoma Dejean, 1834], Gondwanodilamus Kaszab, 1969 syn. nov. [= Conibius J.L. LeConte, 1851], Gyrinodes Fauvel, 1897 syn. nov. [= Nesotes Allard, 1876], Helopondrus Reitter, 1922 syn. nov. [= Horistelops Gozis, 1910], Hybonotus Dejean, 1834 syn. nov. [= Damatris Laporte, 1840], Iphthimera Reitter, 1916 syn. nov. [= Metriopus Solier, 1835], Lagriomima Pic, 1950 syn. nov. [= Neogria Borchmann, 1911], Orphelops Gozis, 1910 syn. nov. [= Nalassus Mulsant, 1854], Phymatium Billberg, 1820 syn. nov. [= Cryptochile Latreille, 1828], Prosoblapsia Skopin & Kaszab, 1978 syn. nov. [= Genoblaps Bauer, 1921], and Pseudopimelia Gebler, 1859 syn. nov. [= Lasiostola Dejean, 1834] are established as new synonyms (valid names in square brackets). Anachayus Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. is proposed as a replacement name for Chatanayus Ardoin, 1957, Genateropa Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. as a replacement name for Apterogena Ardoin, 1962, Hemipristula Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. as a replacement name for Hemipristis Kolbe, 1903, Kochotella Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. as a replacement name for Millotella Koch, 1962, Medvedevoblaps Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. as a replacement name for Protoblaps G.S. Medvedev, 1998, and Subpterocoma Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. is proposed as a replacement name for Pseudopimelia Motschulsky, 1860. Neoeutrapela Bousquet & Bouchard, 2013 is downgraded to a subgenus (stat. nov.) of Impressosora Pic, 1952. Anchomma J.L. LeConte, 1858 is placed in Stenosini: Dichillina (previously in Pimeliinae: Anepsiini); Entypodera Gerstaecker, 1871, Impressosora Pic, 1952 and Xanthalia Fairmaire, 1894 are placed in Lagriinae: Lagriini: Statirina (previously in Lagriinae: Lagriini: Lagriina); Loxostethus Triplehorn, 1962 is placed in Diaperinae: Diaperini: Diaperina (previously in Diaperinae: Diaperini: Adelinina); Periphanodes Gebien, 1943 is placed in Stenochiinae: Cnodalonini (previously in Tenebrioninae: Helopini); Zadenos Laporte, 1840 is downgraded to a subgenus (stat. nov.) of the older name Selenepistoma Dejean, 1834. The type species [placed in square brackets] of the following available genus-group names are designated for the first time: Allostrongylium Kolbe, 1896 [Allostrongylium silvestre Kolbe, 1896], Auristira Borchmann, 1916 [Auristira octocostata Borchmann, 1916], Blapidocampsia Pic, 1919 [Campsia pallidipes Pic, 1918], Cerostena Solier, 1836 [Cerostena deplanata Solier, 1836], Coracostira Fairmaire, 1899 [Coracostira armipes Fairmaire, 1899], Dischidus Kolbe, 1886 [Helops sinuatus Fabricius, 1801], Eccoptostoma Gebien, 1913 [Taraxides ruficrus Fairmaire, 1894], Ellaemus Pascoe, 1866 [Emcephalus submaculatus Brême, 1842], Epeurycaulus Kolbe, 1902 [Epeurycaulus aldabricus Kolbe, 1902], Euschatia Solier, 1851 [Euschatia proxima Solier, 1851], Heliocaes Bedel, 1906 [Blaps emarginata Fabricius, 1792], Hemipristis Kolbe, 1903 [Hemipristis ukamia Kolbe, 1903], Iphthimera Reitter, 1916 [Stenocara ruficornis Solier, 1835], Isopedus Stein, 1877 [Helops tenebrioides Germar, 1813], Malacova Fairmaire, 1898 [Malacova bicolor Fairmaire, 1898], Modicodisema Pic, 1917 [Disema subopaca Pic, 1912], Peltadesmia Kuntzen, 1916 [Metriopus platynotus Gerstaecker, 1854], Phymatium Billberg, 1820 [Pimelia maculata Fabricius, 1781], Podoces Péringuey, 1886 [Podoces granosula Péringuey, 1886], Pseuduroplatopsis Pic, 1913 [Borchmannia javana Pic, 1913], Pteraulus Solier, 1848 [Pteraulus sulcatipennis Solier, 1848], Sciaca Solier, 1835 [Hylithus disctinctus Solier, 1835], Sterces Champion, 1891 [Sterces violaceipennis Champion, 1891] and Teremenes Carter, 1914 [Tenebrio longipennis Hope, 1843]. Evidence suggests that some type species were misidentified. In these instances, information on the misidentification is provided and, in the following cases, the taxonomic species actually involved is fixed as the type species [placed in square brackets] following requirements in Article 70.3 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature: Accanthopus Dejean, 1821 [Tenebrio velikensis Piller & Mitterpacher, 1783], Becvaramarygmus Masumoto, 1999 [Dietysus nodicornis Gravely, 1915], Heterophaga Dejean, 1834 [Opatrum laevigatum Fabricius, 1781], Laena Dejean, 1821, [Scaurus viennensis Sturm, 1807], Margus Dejean, 1834 [Colydium castaneum Herbst, 1797], Pachycera Eschscholtz, 1831 [Tenebrio buprestoides Fabricius, 1781], Saragus Erichson, 1842 [Celibe costata Solier, 1848], Stene Stephens, 1829 [Colydium castaneum Herbst, 1797], Stenosis Herbst, 1799 [Tagenia intermedia Solier, 1838] and Tentyriopsis Gebien, 1928 [Tentyriopsis pertyi Gebien, 1940]. The following First Reviser actions are proposed to fix the precedence of names or nomenclatural acts (rejected name or act in square brackets): Stenosis ciliaris Gebien, 1920 as the type species for Afronosis G.S. Medvedev, 1995 [Stenosis leontjevi G.S. Medvedev, 1995], Alienoplonyx Bremer, 2019 [Alienolonyx], Amblypteraca Mas-Peinado, Buckley, Ruiz & García-París, 2018 [Amplypteraca], Caenocrypticoides Kaszab, 1969 [Caenocripticoides], Deriles Motschulsky, 1872 [Derilis], Eccoptostira Borchmann, 1936 [Ecoptostira], †Eodromus Haupt, 1950 [†Edromus], Eutelus Solier, 1843 [Lutelus], Euthriptera Reitter, 1893 [Enthriptera], Meglyphus Motschulsky, 1872 [Megliphus], Microtelopsis Koch, 1940 [Extetranosis Koch, 1940, Hypermicrotelopsis Koch, 1940], Neandrosus Pic, 1921 [Neoandrosus], Nodosogylium Pic, 1951 [Nodosogilium], Notiolesthus Motschulsky, 1872 [Notiolosthus], Pseudeucyrtus Pic, 1916 [Pseudocyrtus], Pseudotrichoplatyscelis Kaszab, 1960 [Pseudotrichoplatynoscelis and Pseudotrichoplatycelis], Rhydimorpha Koch, 1943 [Rhytimorpha], Rhophobas Motschulsky, 1872 [Rophobas], Rhyssochiton Gray, 1831 [Ryssocheton and Ryssochiton], Sphaerotidius Kaszab, 1941 [Spaerotidius], Stira Agassiz, 1846 (Mollusca) [Stira Agassiz, 1846 (Coleoptera)], Sulpiusoma Ferrer, 2006 [Sulpiosoma] and Taenobates Motschulsky, 1872 [Taeniobates]. Supporting evidence is provided for the conservation of usage of Cyphaleus Westwood, 1841 nomen protectum over Chrysobalus Boisduval, 1835 nomen oblitum.

The article analyzes the border conflicts between Mexico and the United States at the turn of the XIXth and XXth centuries. American-Mexican relations were an important factor in the development of the regional subsystem of international relations in the Western Hemisphere. Historically, Mexico and the United States have had a complicated relationship. Mexico in the late XIXth – early XXth centuries was a secondary peripheral state, which was mainly agrarian in nature. There were both phases of acute confrontation (almost the entire XIXth century and the beginning of the XXth century), as well as periods of good neighborliness, relatively good, friendly, stable relationships and constructive cooperation. In relations with the United States at that time, it remained rather not a subject, but an object of influence. The extreme American expansionists proposed in the middle of the XIXth century to capture all of Mexico. In response to the aggressive aspirations of America, the Mexican radicals put forward their territorial claims to the neighboring country. They hoped to regain the vast northern region, that was lost during the wars of 1835-1848, which included Upper California, New Mexico, Utah, Arizona and Texas (which was called the "New Philippines" during the era of Spanish colonization). There are two stages of confrontation between the two countries: the 1870s – 1890s and the 1910s – 1920s. The most serious exacerbations on the border occurred in 1876, 1877, 1891-1893, 1896, 1906 and 1910-1919. Both government troops and irregular (militias, partisans, rebels) formations took part in the regional armed conflict. As a result, the situation stabilized for almost a century.

Benjamin Anderson (1835-1910), Liberia's great explorer of the nineteenth century, was at the forefront of encouraging the government to establish a viable economic and political presence in the deep interior. Anderson migrated from Baltimore, Maryland, when he was sixteen years old, and became a three-time Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of the Interior, mathematics professor, official surveyor, diplomat, military officer, and accomplished cartographer. He is most noted for having traveled to the fabled town of Musadu in today's Guinea. Musadu seemed to hold much promise to enrich the young colony because of its supposed natural resources such as gold, a strong political base, and connections to the interior trade routes that extended to the Niger River and beyond.Primary source information about Anderson's life comes from his own writings, scattered publications, and archival materials. The most complete contemporary account—published here—is an obituary that an unknown author wrote shortly after Anderson died. The obituary was located in the Frederick Starr Papers (Box 9, Folder 9) in the Department of Special Collections at the University of Chicago's Regenstein Library in 2000. It is typed on 8 ½″ × 14″ paper with “Republic of Liberia, Montserrado County, Superintendents Office” pre-printed on the back of each sheet. This paper's title is the same as the original title of the obituary. The document gives several interesting bits of information about Anderson's life that are not found in any other sources, and contains considerable data that can be independently confirmed.

Este artigo soma-se aos trabalhos disponíveis sobre Processamento de Língua Natural ao fornecer uma demonstração de como linguagens de programação como o R (R CORE TEAM, 2020) podem ser úteis na detecção de autoria e na identificação do estilo do autor em obras literárias. Foram selecionados dois autores e duas obras de cada, a saber: The Adventures of Tom Sawyer (1876) e Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (1884), do autor Mark Twain (1835-1910), e Typee: A Peep at Polynesian Life (1846) e Omoo: A Narrative of Adventures in the South Seas (1847), do autor Herman Melville (1819-1891). Posteriormente, os dados foram analisados seguindo a mesma metodologia de Eder et al. (2016), a fim de testar a eficácia do pacote stylo e aplicar os métodos de Análise de Componentes Principais, Análise de Cluster e Árvore de Consenso. Os resultados apontaram que cada um dos métodos testados conseguiu distinguir as obras dos autores, evidenciando-se, assim, a eficácia do pacote utilizado. Além disso, realiza-se uma análise estilométrica baseada nos métodos de Zeta de Craig e Rolling Delta. Para este último, utilizaram-se obras de dois autores de língua alemã, Frank Kafka e Heinrich von Kleist. Os resultados apontaram uma semelhança estilística de von Kleist, sobretudo, na primeira obra de Kafka. Adicionalmente, o método Rolling Delta foi usado para explorar uma análise feita por Juola (2013ª, 2013b) a respeito de uma obra de J. K. Rowling escrita sob o pseudônimo de Robert Galbraith.

In the years around the turn of the present century, relying on the contacts and expertise of Theophilus Goldridge Pinches, Lord William Amhurst Tyssen-Amherst, 1st Baron Amherst of Hackney (1835–1909), put together what came to be one of the most wide-ranging and important collections of cuneiform tablets to have been assembled in private hands in this country. Since the publication of Volume 1 of The Amherst Tablets in 1908 by Pinches, followed much later by E. Sollberger's The Pinches Manuscript, the Amherst Collection has been familiar enough among Assyriologists, but perhaps less has been known of the collector, and of his other collections. The Museum at the family estate of Didlington Hall, Northwold, Norfolk, contained in its heyday a much broader range of material than cuneiform inscriptions. From the Near Eastern world there were very extensive collections of Egyptian papyri and antiquities, but the Hall also housed remarkable accumulations of incunabula and printed books, porcelain, tapestries, sculpture and other works of art. It is evident that the specific pursuit of cuneiform sources was inspired by a profound interest in the origin and development of writing and printing.The survival of a group of private letters covering the years 1896–1910, from Lord Amherst to Pinches, with some draft reply letters from Pinches and other relevant documents, has entailed the preservation of unusual information about the process of acquisition and the sources of the tablets themselves. The present paper offers a summary of this information, in the hope of conveying something of the circumstances and motives at play at such a period.

In the mid-1860s, with the nation immured in a devastating Civil War, two artists emerged as the premier representatives of America's Far West. Albert Bierstadt (1830–1902) and Mark Twain (1835–1910) captured the nation's imagination with images that challenged ideas about the West as well as about art itself. In little more than a decade, however, Bierstadt's paintings were being ignored while Twain's name began to acquire something of its present canonical status. Unremarkable as this divergence in reputations may seem today (when “fifteen minutes of fame” has been promised to every one of us), a century ago Warhol's prediction would have been inconceivable. That in itself makes the receptions first accorded Bierstadt and Twain as interesting as the dramatic divergence later taken in their careers. What was it, one might well ask, that so appealed to contemporaries, and why should Bierstadt's success so quickly have palled while Twain's only continued to grow?The question encourages us to transgress the boundaries that separate painting from writing, to shift attention from a given medium onto the larger process by which popularity is won. One of the questions that then emerges is whether artists acclaimed in different media make similar demands upon their audience. Do a certain set of common standards, that is, shape an artist's reception, much as they more self-consciously dictate assessments that scholars will make later on? Or is it simply a matter of being in the right artistic place at the right cultural time? Certainly, the receptions accorded Bierstadt and Twain suggest that the former is true -indeed, that in their case a forceful aesthetic logic was at work.

In an interview published in the October 21, 1908, issue of the Boston Transcript, Debussy had been asked to comment on American musical life. He remarked, “The distinction of a country like [the United States] is that it imbibes from all sources... it is less German bound than are the countries who hear little or no other music through chauvinism or antipathies.” This paper examines the roles of Camille Saint-Saëns (1835-1921) and Claude Debussy (1862-1918) in driving such a modernist evolution. Saint- Saëns performed with and conducted the New York Symphony in 1906, including his symphonic poem Le rouet d’Omphale and playing solo piano in his Africa, Fantaisie pour piano et orchestre. He thereafter appeared in both Chicago and San Francisco, and critics could already hear the modernist aesthetic in formation. When conductor Frederick Stock, a stalwart champion of French music, led Prélude à “L’après- midi-d’un faune” in Chicago in December 1908, the symbolist dimensions of the new music were grasped by both critics and audiences, and Paul Rosenfeld wrote: “We should look to France for the latest gospel [of the new musical advancement] […] Claude Debussy has broken through the limitation of the old, and shall we say he has found new musical dimensions?” Contemporaneously, the premiere of Pelléas et Mélisande in New York dramatically impressed the new hearing on American audiences. To be sure, anti-German feelings after 1910, brought with the Great War, promoted such a shift from the aesthetics of the Gilded Age, but the new French music had itself led the way since just after 1900. By 1923, Carl Van Vechten, in Music after the Great War, wrote, “It is not from the German countries that the musical invention of the past two decades has come. It is from France.”

The identification, origin, introduction, establishment, spread and pest status of extralimital (introduced, those that naturally occur within and outside Australia, and possibly introduced but of uncertain origin) dynastines in Australia and its territories are reviewed. We examine likely introduction pathways and the species’ life histories and attempt to draw out factors that predispose some species to establish, naturalise and then become invasive. Six categories of extralimital dynastines are identified: established and have spread widely (invasive)—Cyclocephala signaticollis Burmeister, 1847, Heteronychus arator (Fabricius, 1775); established but have not spread widely (sleepers)—Oryctes rhinoceros (Linnaeus, 1758), Oryctoderus latitarsus Boisduval, 1835 (possibly), Papuana woodlarkiana (Montrouzier, 1855) (possibly), Temnorhynchus retusus (Fabricius, 1781); known from one or only a few specimens that have arrived but not established—H. parumpunctatus Burmeister, 1847, Or. centaurus Sternberg, 1910, Pa. angusta Arrow, 1914, Pentodon algerinus algerinus (Fuessly, 1778); with distributions that extend from New Guinea into northeastern Australia—Pa. woodlarkiana (possibly), Od. latitarsus (possibly), Xylotrupes carinulus Rowland, 2011; whose records within Australia are doubtful—Dipelicus integriceps (Fairmaire, 1877), D. montrouzieri (Reiche, 1860), Or. nasicornis (Linnaeus, 1758), Pa. tibialis Arrow, 1941, Phyllognathus degener Fairmaire, 1891; species whose identity is unclear—Carne’s (1981) enigmatic species. Characters that make a species an ideal tramp species are: adults feed and are active for an extended period after emergence; larval development is relatively quick; adults and larvae are associated with potted plants and lawn grasses; the native distribution is in the Southern Hemisphere so that life cycles are synchronised between original and introduced localities. Shipping ballast and potted plants were the probable major pathways of introduction, but now rapid air and land transport provide the means for movement into and within Australia of hitchhiker species. Key words: Dynastinae, introductions, exotic species, pest species, quarantine, biosecurity

A complete taxonomic catalogue of the Stick and Leaf-insects (Phasmatodea) recorded or described from the mainland China (excluding Taiwan) is presented. 241 valid species are listed, which are currently attributed to 50 genera, 5 families and 7 subfamilies. Genera and species are listed alphabetically. All available type-data is provided based mainly on literary sources for species described by Chinese workers from 1986 to 2006, including documented depository of typespecimens. The catalogue therefore also provides complete lists of the type-material of Phasmatodea housed in the following Chinese institutions: Administration of Baishuijiang Natural Reserve (ABNR), Beijing Forestry University, Beijing (BFU), China Agricultural University, Beijing (CAU), Geological Museum of China, Beijing (GMC), Inca Science Ltd., Chongqing (INCA), Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing (IZCAS), Department of Biology, Nankai University, Tianjin (NKU), Northwest Sci-Tech University of Agriculture and Forestry, Shaanxi (NWAU), Institute of Zoology, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an (SNU), Institute of Entomology, Sun Yat-sen University (ICRI), Shanghai Institute of Entomology, Academia Sinica, Shanghai (SIES), Tianjin Natural History Museum, Tianjin (TMNH), Zhejiang Museum of Natural History, Hangzhou (ZMNH). The known distribution of each species, inmeans of provinces is provided as well. 14 species are shown to have been recorded from China in error, several of these based on misidentifications. The “Phasmatodea-like” fossil taxa described from the Late Jurassic Yixian Formation of North Hebei and West Liaoning are listed in a separate section. Two new generic synonyms are recognized: Arthminotus Bi, 1995 synonymised with Lopaphus Westwood, 1859 (n. syn.) and Dianphasma Chen & He, 1997 synonymised with Parasosibia Redtenbacher, 1908 (n. syn.). The genus Linocerus Gray, 1835 (Type-species: Linocerus gracilis Gray, 1835) was erroneously synonymised with the mediterranean Bacillus St. Fargeau & Audinet-Serville, 1825 and is here re-established in Phasmatidae: Pachymorphinae: Gratidiini (rev. stat.). Relationship to Clonaria Stål, 1875 (= Gratidia Stål, 1875, = Paraclonaria Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1893), Sceptrophasma Brock & Seow-Choen, 2000 and Macellina Uvarov, 1940 is obvious. 21 species are transferred to other genera (new combinations): Asceles dilatatus Chen & He, 2004 and Asceles quadriguttatus Chen & He, 1996 to Pachyscia Redtenbacher, 1908, Arthminotus sinensis Bi, 1995 to Lopaphus Westwood, 1859, Baculum dolichocercatum Bi & Wang, 1998 and Baculum politum Chen & He, 1997 to Medauroidea Zompro, 1999, Dixippus hainanensis Chen & He, 2002, Dixippus huapingensis Bi & Li, 1991, Dixippus nigroantennatus Chen & He, 2002, Dixippus parvus Chen & He, 2002 and Entoria bobaiensis Chen, 1986 to Lonchodes Gray, 1835, Sipyloidea obvius Chen & He, 1995 to Sinophasma Günther, 1940, Paramyronides biconiferus Bi, 1993, Paramyronides leishanensis Bi, 1992, Lonchodes chinensis Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907, Lonchodes confucius Westwood, 1859 and Phasgania glabra Günther, 1940 to Phraortes Stål, 1875, Gratidia bituberculata Redtenbacher, 1889 and Leptynia xinganensis Chen & He, 1993 to Sceptrophasma Brock & Seow-Choen, 2002, Prosentoria bannaensis Chen & He, 1997 to Paraentoria Chen & He, 1997, and Mantis squeleton Olivier, 1792 to Phanocloidea Zompro, 2002. Acrophylla sichuanensis Chen & He, 2001 remains of unknown generic assignment, but is shown to be not a member of the Australian genus Acrophylla Gray, 1835. Furthermore, as Baculum Saussure, 1861 is a neotropical genus and most Old World species previously attributed to this genus are now listed in Ramulus Saussure, 1861, all Chinese species described in Baculum Saussure are consequently transferred to Ramulus Saussure. Other changes of specific placements are based on published literature and concern to the following three synonymies not recognized by Chinese workers: Abrosoma Redtenbacher, 1906 (= Prosceles Uvarov, 1940), Necroscia Audinet-Serville, 1838 (= Aruanoidea Redtenbacher, 1908), Lopaphus Westwood, 1859 (= Paramyronides Redtenbacher, 1908). Megalophasma Bi, 1995 is transferred from Necrosciinae to Lonchodinae. Four lectotypes are designated and three new specific synonyms revealed. A lectotype is designated for Rhamphophasma modestus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1893, the type-species of Rhamphophasma Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1893, in order to fix this genus and species. The male paralectotype is shown to be a male of Parapachymorpha nigra Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1893, the type-species of Parapachymorpha Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1893. Clitumnus porrectus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907 is synonymised with Bacillus ? artemis Westwood, 1859 and a lectotype designated for the former (n. syn.). A lectotype is designated for Oxyartes lamellatus Kirby, 1904 in order to fix this taxon and confirm the synonymy established by Dohrn, 1910 (= Oxyartes honestus Redtenbacher, 1908, = Oxyartes spinosissimus Carl, 1913). Paracentema stephanus Redtenbacher, 1908 is shown to have been erroneously synonymised with Neohirasea japonica (de Haan, 1842) and here synonymised with Neohirasea maerens (Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907) (n. syn.). In order to fix this new synonymy a lectotype is designated for Paracentema stephanus Redtenbacher, 1908. Finally, a biogeographic analysis of the Chinese phasmid fauna is presented. This includes brief background information on the topography and biogeography of China along with maps showing the seven zoogeographical subregions currently recognized as well as the 4 municipalities, 23 provinces, 5 autonomous regions and 2 special administrative regions of China. A summary of the taxonomic compilation of the fauna is provided and its relationships with neighbouring regions, of both the Palaearctic and Oriental realms, are discussed. A study is presented on the distribution of the taxa and species densities of each province / autonomous region. Recent ecological studies are summarized and list of the host plants of 42 different species attached. The pest status of certain species which have become of serious importance for agriculture in China is briefly summarized based on literary sources.

Enicospilus Stephens, 1835 is the largest genus of subfamily Ophioninae (Ichneumonidae) with more than 700 extant species worldwide that are mostly nocturnal and parasitoids of larvae of Lepidoptera. In this paper, the Vietnamese species of Enicospilus are reviewed for the first time. Of the total 82 recorded species, 10 species are described as new: E. aequiscleritalis sp. nov., E. bulbipennis sp. nov., E. centraliscleritiger sp. nov., E. circuliscleritalis sp. nov., E. gialaiensis sp. nov., E. hiepi sp. nov., E. melanothoracicus sp. nov., E. nigristernalis sp. nov., E. trui sp. nov., and E. tuani sp. nov. Fifty-two species are recorded for the first time from the country: E. abdominalis (Szépligeti, 1906), E. acutus Shimizu, 2020, E. argus Gauld & Mitchell, 1981, E. atoponeus Cushman, 1947, E. bacillaris Wang, 1997, E. bakerielli Gauld & Mitchell, 1981, E. bifasciatus (Uchida, 1928), E. biharensis Townes, Townes & Gupta, 1961, E. concentralis Cushman, 1937, E. corculus (Tosquinet, 1903), E. dasychirae Cameron, 1905, E. eastopi Gauld & Mitchell, 1981, E. enicospilus Nikam, 1972, E. exaggeratus Chiu, 1954, E. fittoni Nikam, 1980, E. flavocephalus (Kirby, 1900), E. formosensis (Uchida, 1928), E. fusiformis Chiu, 1954, E. gasteralis Nikam, 1980; E. grandis (Cameron, 1905), E. hamatus Gauld & Mitchell, 1981, E. hedilis Gauld & Mitchell, 1981, E. iapetus Gauld & Mitchell, 1981, E. insinuator (Smith, 1860), E. ixion Gauld & Mitchell, 1981, E. javanus (Szépligeti, 1910), E. laqueatus (Enderlein, 1921), E. longitarsis Tang, 1990, E. mythrus Gauld & Mitchell, 1981, E. nathani Gauld & Mitchell, 1981, E. nigribasalis (Uchida, 1928), E. nigristigma Cushman, 1937, E. nigriventris Nikam, 1975, E. nigronotatus Cameron, 1903, E. nigropectus Cameron, 1905, E. pallidistigma Cushman, 1937, E. pantanae Tang, 1990, E. pinguivena (Enderlein, 1921), E. pseudoconspersae (Sonan, 1927), E. purifenestratus (Enderlein, 1921), E. rhetus Gauld & Mitchell, 1981, E. riukiuensis (Matsumura & Uchida, 1926), E. sauteri (Enderlein, 1921), E. selmatos Chiu, 1954, E. strigilatus Tang, 1990, E. teleus Gauld & Mitchell, 1981, E. transversus Chiu, 1954, E. tripartitus Chiu, 1954, E. urus Gauld & Mitchell, 1981, E. verticinus (Roman, 1913), E. yonezawanus (Uchida, 1928), and E. zebrus Gauld & Mitchell, 1981. A key to all Vietnamese species of Enicospilus is provided.

The genus Lamprima Latreille, 1804 (Coleoptera: Lucanidae: Lampriminae: Lamprimini), is revised. Five species are recognised: one in New Guinea (L. adolphinae (Gestro, 1875)), two on isolated western Pacific islands (L. aenea Fabricius, 1792: Norfolk Island; L. insularis W.J. Macleay, 1885: Lord Howe Island), one in northeastern New South Wales (L. imberbis Carter, 1926) and a common widespread species in eastern and southern Australia, L. aurata Latreille, 1817. Lamprima aurata varies considerably morphologically and many of the different forms encompassed by this variation have been described as species. Our study of morphology does not support this classification. Therefore, Lamprima aurata is designated a senior synonym of the following 24 names: L. cuprea Latreille, 1817; L. latreillii W.S. MacLeay, 1819 (new synonym); L. pygmaea W.S. MacLeay, 1819 (new synonym); L. fulgida Boisduval, 1835; L. micardi Reiche, 1841 (new synonym); L. rutilans Erichson, 1842; L. splendens Erichson, 1842; L. viridis Erichson, 1842; L. nigricollis Hope in Westwood, 1845 (new synonym); L. purpurascens Hope in Westwood, 1845 (new synonym); L. sumptuosa Hope in Westwood, 1845 (new synonym); L. tasmaniae Hope in Westwood, 1845 (new synonym); L. varians Burmeister, 1847 (new synonym); L. cultridens Burmeister, 1847 (new synonym); L. amplicollis Thomson, 1862 (new synonym); L. krefftii W.J. MacLeay, 1871 (new synonym); L. violacea W.J. Macleay, 1885 (new synonym); L. mandibularis W.J. Macleay, 1885 (new synonym); L. sericea W..J Macleay, 1885 (new synonym); L.nigripennis W.J. Macleay, 1885 (new synonym); L. minima W.J. Macleay, 1885 (new synonym); L. mariae Lea, 1910; L. coerulea Boileau, 1913 (new synonym); L. insularis Boileau, 1913 (new synonym). Lamprima adolphinae is a senior synonym of L. bohni (Darge & Séguy, 1953) (new synonym). Lamprima schreibersi Hope in Westwood, 1845, is an unnecessary nomen novum for L. aenea redescribed by Schreibers in 1802 from the same material as Fabricius, and therefore an objective synonym of L. aenea. Lamprima puncticollis Dejean, 1833, L. coerulea Hope in Westwood, 1845, and L. insularis Hope in Westwood, 1845, are nomina nuda, the last two names first made available by Boileau in 1913. The five Lamprima species are redescribed and recommendations made for their conservation. Type specimens of the species of Lamprima described by William Sharpe MacLeay and William John Macleay are illustrated for the first time. Lectotypes are designated for Lamprima insularis, L. latreillii, L. latreillii sericea, and L. mandibularis.

The South African Nemestrinidae are reviewed. Regional family characteristics, biology and the importance of long-proboscid species in pollination biology are discussed. Long-proboscid species (proboscis 15 mm or longer) are important pollinators in most provinces, but particularly in the Western Cape; all have specialised pollination interactions with long-tubed flower species. Five pollination guilds centered on long-proboscid species are briefly discussed. A detailed, annotated key to the six genera is presented; in it particular attention is given to the problematic distinction between Prosoeca Schiner and Stenobasipteron Lichtwardt. A checklist of all described species considered to have a South African provenance is provided. A total of 43 described species is recorded in the following genera: Moegistorhynchus Macquart (4 species); Prosoeca (35 species); Stenobasipteron (1 species); Atriadops Wandolleck (1 species); Nycterimyia Lichtwardt (1 species); Trichopsidea Westwood (1 species). Moegistorhynchus is restricted to the west coast (Western Cape, Northern Cape). Three of its species have a remarkably elongate proboscis, the best known and most widespread being M. longirostris (Wiedemann, 1819). Its proboscis reaches 90 to 100 mm in length in some specimens, this being the longest proboscis of all known Diptera. Two new species have been identified in the fauna. Prosoeca dominates the fauna, and is the only genus likely to be represented in all nine provinces. It appears to occur in all habitats except closed-canopy forest. Prosoeca major Bezzi, 1924 is newly synonymised with P. robusta Bezzi, 1924. The likely South African provenance of P. nigripes (Macquart, 1840) is confirmed. Nemestrina obscura Westwood, 1835, previously referred to Prosoeca, is considered not to be an Afrotropical species. Prosoeca rhodesiensis Bequaert, 1925a, is recorded from South Africa for the first time. Although Stenobasipteron is restricted to only one named South African species, namely S. wiedemanni Lichtwardt, 1910 from the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal, several undescribed species occur in Mpumalanga and Limpopo. Stenobasipteron wiedemanni occurs in closed-canopy forest, but species from Mpumalanga may occur in other habitats such as grassland and savanna. There are at least two species of Atriadops, one almost certainly being A. vespertilio (Loew, 1858). The genus is recorded from the Western Cape, Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, Gauteng and Mpumalanga. A taxonomic revision is recommended. Nycterimyia is represented by one species only, namely N. capensis Bezzi, 1924 from KwaZulu-Natal and Limpopo. Trichopsidea is represented by one species, T. costata (Loew, 1858), recorded from North West, Gauteng and Limpopo.

A fully annotated catalog of genus- and species-group names of Neotropical Lauxaniidae (Diptera: Lauxanioidea) is presented, providing details of references to these names in literature, and providing additional details such as distributions, generic combinations, synonymies, misspellings and emendations, information on types, notes on unusual situations, etc. As this catalog is meant to supplement the older Catalog of the Diptera of America North of Mexico, to complete the cataloging of the New World Lauxaniidae, “Neotropical” is herein inclusive of everything south of the United States, and the Nearctic parts of Mexico are not separately distinguished. The catalog is organized alphabetically within each of the three lauxaniid subfamilies, Eurychoromyiinae, Homoneurinae and Lauxaniinae, treating 91 available genus-group names, of which 77 represent valid genera. In the species-group, the catalog treats 441 available species-group names, of which 391 represent valid Neotropical lauxaniid species, 39 are invalid, three are valid but extralimital lauxaniids, five are valid but removed from Lauxaniidae, and two are new replacement names for two homonyms outside Lauxaniidae. The following nine new genera are described, based on previously described species: Elipolambda Gaimari & Silva (type species, Sapromyza lopesi Shewell, 1989), Griphoneuromima Silva & Gaimari (type species, Sapromyza frontalis Macquart, 1844b), Meraina Silva & Gaimari (type species, Lauxania ferdinandi Frey, 1919), Myzaprosa Gaimari & Silva (type species, Myzaprosa mallochi Gaimari & Silva), Paradeceia Silva & Gaimari (type species, Sapromyza sororia Williston, 1896b), Pseudodeceia Silva & Gaimari (type species, Lauxania leptoptera Frey, 1919), Sericominettia Gaimari & Silva (type species, Minettia argentiventris Malloch, 1928), Zamyprosa Gaimari & Silva (type species, Sapromyza semiatra Malloch, 1933), and Zargopsinettia Gaimari & Silva (type species, Minettia verticalis Malloch, 1928). The following four new replacement names in the species-group replace junior homonyms: Myzaprosa mallochi Gaimari & Silva (for Sapromyza spinigera Malloch, 1933, nec Malloch, 1925), Pseudogriphoneura mallochi Silva & Gaimari (for Minettia infuscata Malloch, 1928, nec Sciomyza infuscata Wulp, 1897), Xenochaetina hendeli Silva & Gaimari (for Allogriphoneura robusta Hendel, 1936, nec Helomyza robusta Walker, 1858), Zamyprosa macquarti Gaimari & Silva (for Sciomyza nigripes Blanchard, 1854, nec Sapromyza nigripes Macquart, 1844). The following six genus-group names are new synonyms: Allogriphoneura Hendel, 1925 (= Xenochaetina Malloch, 1923), Bacilloflagellomera Papp & Silva, 1995 (= Stenolauxania Malloch, 1926), Haakonia Curran, 1942 (= Xenochaetina Malloch, 1923), Homoeominettia Broadhead, 1989 (= Allominettia Hendel, 1925), Paraphysoclypeus Papp & Silva, 1995 (= Physoclypeus Hendel, 1907), Tibiominettia Hendel, 1936 (= Allominettia Hendel, 1925). The following 12 species-group names are new synonyms: Chaetocoelia banksi Curran, 1942 (= Chaetocoelia excepta (Walker, 1853)), Chaetocoelia tripunctata Malloch, 1926 (= Chaetocoelia excepta (Walker, 1853)), Minettia semifulva Malloch, 1933 (= Zamyprosa nigriventris (Blanchard, 1854)), Pseudogriphoneura scutellata Curran, 1934a (= Xenochaetina porcaria (Fabricius, 1805)), Sapromyza apta Walker, 1861 (= Chaetominettia mactans (Fabricius, 1787)), Sapromyza brasiliensis Walker, 1853 (= Chaetominettia corollae (Fabricius, 1805)), Sapromyza semiatra subsp. remissa Malloch, 1933 (= Zamyprosa semiatra (Malloch, 1933)), Sapromyza sordida Williston, 1896b (= Neogriphoneura sordida (Wiedemann, 1830)), Setulina geminata subsp. quadripunctata Malloch, 1941, subsp. tripunctata Malloch, 1941 & subsp. verticalis Malloch, 1941 (= Setulina geminata (Fabricius, 1805)), Tibiominettia setitibia Hendel, 1932 (= Allominettia assimilis (Malloch, 1926)). The following 96 lauxaniid species-group names are in new combinations: Allominettia approximata (Malloch, 1928; Deutominettia Hendel, 1925), Allominettia assimilis (Malloch, 1926; Minettia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830), Allominettia rubescens (Macquart, 1844b; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Allominettia woldae (Broadhead, 1989; Homoeominettia Broadhead, 1989), Camptoprosopella sigma (Hendel, 1910; Procrita Hendel, 1908), Camptoprosopella verena (Becker, 1919; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Dryosapromyza pirioni (Malloch, 1933; Minettia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830), Elipolambda duodecimvittata (Frey, 1919; Lauxania Latreille, 1804), Elipolambda lopesi (Shewell, 1989; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Elipolambda picrula (Williston, 1897; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Griphoneuromima frontalis (Macquart, 1844b; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Homoneura maculipennis (Loew, 1847; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Lauxanostegana albispina (Albuquerque, 1959; Steganopsis Meijere 1910), Marmarodeceia claripennis (Curran, 1934a; Pseudogriphoneura Hendel, 1907), Melanomyza nigerrima (Becker, 1919; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Meraina ferdinandi (Frey, 1919; Lauxania Latreille, 1804), Minettia altera (Curran, 1942; Pseudogriphoneura Hendel, 1907), Minettia duplicata (Lynch Arribálzaga, 1893; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Minettia lateritia (Rondani, 1863; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Minettia lupulinoides (Williston, 1897; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Minettia pallens (Blanchard, 1854; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Minettia remota (Thomson, 1869; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Minettia setosa (Thomson, 1869; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Myzaprosa chiloensis (Malloch, 1933; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Myzaprosa emmesa (Malloch, 1933; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Myzaprosa triloba (Malloch, 1933; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Neodecia albovittata (Loew, 1862; Lauxania Latreille, 1804), Neodecia bivittata (Curran, 1928b; Pseudogriphoneura Hendel, 1907), Neodecia flavipennis (Curran, 1928b; Pseudogriphoneura Hendel, 1907), Neodecia vittifacies (Curran, 1931; Pseudogriphoneura Hendel, 1907), Neominettia eronis (Curran, 1934a; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Neominettia lebasii (Macquart, 1844b; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Neominettia melanaspis (Wiedemann, 1830; Sciomyza Fallén, 1820d), Neoxangelina congruens (Hendel, 1910; Physegenua Macquart, 1848a/b), Neoxangelina facialis (Wiedemann, 1830; Sciomyza Fallén, 1820d), Neoxangelina flavipes (Hendel, 1926; Physegenua Macquart, 1848a/b), Paracestrotus albipes (Fabricius, 1805; Scatophaga Fabricius, 1805), Paradeceia incidens (Curran, 1934a; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Paradeceia shannoni (Malloch, 1933; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Paradeceia sororia (Williston, 1896b; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Physegenua annulata (Macquart, 1844b; Ephydra Fallén, 1810), Physoclypeus nigropleura (Papp & Silva, 1995; Paraphysoclypeus Papp & Silva, 1995), Poecilohetaerus suavis (Loew, 1847; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Poecilolycia blanchardi (Malloch, 1933; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Poecilolycia lineatocollis (Blanchard, 1854; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Poecilominettia aibonito (Curran, 1926; Minettia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830), Poecilominettia bipunctata (Say, 1829; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Poecilominettia evittata (Malloch, 1926; Minettia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830), Poecilominettia mona (Curran, 1926; Minettia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830), Poecilominettia nigropunctata (Malloch, 1928; Minettia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830), Poecilominettia plantaris (Thomson, 1869; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Poecilominettia quichuana (Brèthes, 1922; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Poecilominettia schwarzi (Malloch, 1928; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Poecilominettia sonax (Giglio-Tos, 1893; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Poecilominettia thomsonii (Lynch-Arribálzaga, 1893; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Poecilominettia triseriata (Coquillett, 1904a; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Pseudocalliope albomarginata (Malloch, 1933; Minettia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830), Pseudodeceia leptoptera (Frey, 1919; Lauxania Latreille, 1804), Pseudogriphoneura albipes (Wiedemann, 1830; Lauxania Latreille, 1804), Pseudominettia argyrostoma (Wiedemann, 1830; Lauxania Latreille, 1804), Ritaemyia unifasciata (Macquart, 1835; Tephritis Latreille, 1804), Sciosapromyza fuscinervis (Malloch, 1926; Minettia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830), Sciosapromyza limbinerva (Rondani, 1848; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Sciosapromyza scropharia (Fabricius, 1805; Scatophaga Fabricius, 1805), Scutominettia guyanensis (Macquart, 1844b; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Sericominettia argentiventris (Malloch, 1928; Minettia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830), Sericominettia aries (Curran, 1942; Pseudogriphoneura Hendel, 1907), Sericominettia holosericea (Fabricius, 1805; Scatophaga Fabricius, 1805), Sericominettia nigra (Curran, 1934a; Pseudogriphoneura Hendel, 1907), Sericominettia velutina (Walker, 1853; Helomyza Fallén, 1820a), Stenolauxania flava (Silva, 1999a; Bacilloflagellomera Papp & Silva, 1995), Stenolauxania fusca (Silva, 1999a; Bacilloflagellomera Papp & Silva, 1995), Stenolauxania longicornus (Silva, 1999a; Bacilloflagellomera Papp & Silva, 1995), Stenolauxania nigrifemuris (Silva, 1999a; Bacilloflagellomera Papp & Silva, 1995), Stenolauxania pectinicornis (Papp & Silva, 1995; Bacilloflagellomera Papp & Silva, 1995), Trivialia nigrifrontata (Becker, 1919; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Trivialia scutellaris (Williston, 1896b; Phortica Schiner, 1862), Trivialia venusta (Williston, 1896b; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Xenochaetina annuliventris (Hendel, 1926; Allogriphoneura Hendel, 1925), Xenochaetina glabella (Becker, 1895; Lauxania Latreille, 1804), Xenochaetina nigra (Williston, 1896b; Physegenua Macquart, 1848a/b), Xenochaetina phacosoma (Hendel, 1926; Allogriphoneura Hendel, 1925), Xenochaetina porcaria (Fabricius, 1805; Scatophaga Fabricius, 1805), Xenochaetina robusta (Walker, 1858; Helomyza Fallén, 1820a), Zamyprosa dichroa (Malloch, 1933; Minettia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830), Zamyprosa edwardsi (Malloch, 1933; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Zamyprosa ferruginea (Macquart, 1844b; Opomyza Fallén, 1820b), Zamyprosa fulvescens (Blanchard, 1854; Sciomyza Fallén, 1820d), Zamyprosa fulvicornis (Malloch, 1933; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Zamyprosa micropyga (Malloch, 1933; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Zamyprosa nigripes (Macquart, 1844b; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Zamyprosa nigriventris (Blanchard, 1854; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Zamyprosa parvula (Blanchard, 1854; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Zamyprosa semiatra (Malloch, 1933; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Zamyprosa seminigra (Malloch, 1933; Minettia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830), Zargopsinettia verticalis (Malloch, 1928; Minettia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830). The following 42 species have lectotype designations herein: Allogriphoneura nigromaculata Hendel, 1925 (synonym of Xenochaetina porcaria (Fabricius, 1805)), Allogriphoneura robusta Hendel, 1936 (= Xenochaetina hendeli Silva & Gaimari), Allominettia maculifrons Hendel, 1925 (synonym of Allominettia xanthiceps (Williston, 1897)), Blepharolauxania trichocera Hendel, 1925, Chaetocoelia palans Giglio-Tos, 1893, Euminettia zuercheri Hendel, 1933b (Minettia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830), Griphoneura triangulata Hendel, 1926, Lauxania albovittata Loew, 1862 (Neodecia Malloch, in Malloch & McAtee, 1924), Lauxania imbuta Wiedemann, 1830 (Griphoneura Schiner, 1868), Lauxania lutea Wiedemann, 1830 (Neominettia Hendel, 1925), Lauxania ruficornis Macquart, 1851a (synonym of Xenochaetina flavipennis (Fabricius, 1805)), Neominettia fumosa Hendel, 1926 (synonym of Neominettia costalis (Fabricius, 1805)), Physegenua ferruginea Schiner, 1868, Physegenua vittata Macquart, 1848a/b, Pseudogriphoneura cormoptera Hendel, 1907, Sapromyza angustipennis Williston, 1896b (Chaetocoelia Giglio-Tos, 1893), Sapromyza distinctissima Schiner, 1868 (Chaetocoelia Giglio-Tos, 1893), Sapromyza exul Williston, 1896b (Neodecia Malloch, in Malloch & McAtee, 1924), Sapromyza gigas Schiner, 1868 (Dryosapromyza Hendel, 1933a), Sapromyza ingrata Williston, 1896b (Poecilominettia Hendel, 1932), Sapromyza latelimbata Macquart, 1855a (synonym of Chaetominettia corollae (Fabricius, 1805)), Sapromyza lineatocollis Blanchard, 1854 (Poecilolycia Shewell, 1986), Sapromyza longipennis Blanchard, 1854 (= Minettia duplicata (Lynch Arribálzaga, 1893)), Sapromyza nigerrima Becker, 1919 (Melanomyza Malloch, 1923), Sapromyza nigriventris Blanchard, 1854 (Zamyprosa Gaimari & Silva), Sapromyza octovittata Williston, 1896b (Poecilominettia Hendel, 1932), Sapromyza ornata Schiner, 1868 (Neoxangelina Hendel, 1933a), Sapromyza pallens Blanchard, 1854 (Minettia Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830), Sapromyza parvula Blanchard, 1854 (Zamyprosa Gaimari & Silva), Sapromyza picrula Williston, 1897 (Elipolambda), Sapromyza puella Williston, 1896b (Trivialia Malloch, 1923), Sapromyza sororia Williston, 1896b (Paradeceia Silva & Gaimari), Sapromyza venusta Williston, 1896b (Trivialia Malloch, 1923), Sapromyza xanthiceps Williston, 1897 (Allominettia Hendel, 1925), Scatophaga scropharia Fabricius, 1805 (Sciosapromyza Hendel, 1933a), Sciomyza fulvescens Blanchard, 1854 (Zamyprosa Gaimari & Silva), Sciomyza melanaspis Wiedemann, 1830 (Neominettia Hendel, 1925), Sciomyza nigripes Blanchard, 1854 (= Zamyprosa macquarti Gaimari & Silva), Sciomyza obscuripennis Bigot, 1857 (Physegenua Macquart, 1848a/b), Scutolauxania piloscutellaris Hendel, 1925, Trigonometopus albifrons Knab, 1914, Trigonometopus rotundicornis Williston, 1896b. The following three species are removed from being recognized as part of the Neotropical fauna: Homoneura americana (Wiedemann, 1830; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Homoneura maculipennis (Loew, 1847; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810), Poecilohetaerus suavis (Loew, 1847; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810). The following four species are removed from the family, three of which are put into the following new combinations: Senopterina cyanea (Fabricius, 1805; Lauxania Latreille, 1804) (Platystomatidae), Dihoplopyga delicatula (Blanchard, 1854; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810) (Heleomyzidae), Pherbellia geniculata (Macquart, 1844b; Sapromyza Fallén, 1810) (Sciomyzidae). The remaining species, Sapromyza fuscipes Macquart, 1844b, is of uncertain family placement within the Muscoidea. The following new replacement names for species of Platystomatidae were necessary due to homonymy: Senopterina gigliotosi Gaimari & Silva (for Bricinniella cyanea Giglio-Tos, 1893, nec Lauxania cyanea Fabricius, 1805), and Rivellia macquarti Gaimari & Silva (for Tephritis unifasciata Macquart, 1843: 381, nec Macquart, 1835: 465).

The family Phasmatidae Gray, 1835 is reviewed and the subfamily Phasmatinae shown to be polyphyletic. Based on features of the exosceleton of the insects, egg-morphology and copulation habits a new arrangement of Phasmatidae is proposed. The monophyly of Lanceocercata Bradler, 2001 is confirmed but this name shown to be a synonym of Phasmatidae, hence Lanceocercata is here referred to as Phasmatidae sensu stricto. Six subfamilies belong in Phasmatidae sensu stricto all of which share several common and supposedly apomorphic characters: Phasmatinae, Tropidoderinae, Extatosomatinae (stat. nov.), Xeroderinae, Pachymorphinae and “Platycraninae”. The other two subfamilies contained in Phasmatidae sensu Bradley & Galil, 1977 (Eurycanthinae and Cladomorphinae) are not cosely related and here regarded as subfamilies of Phasmatidae sensu lato. The subfamily Phasmatinae sensu Bradley & Galil, 1977 is shown to be polyphyletic. The two tribes Pharnaciini and Clitumnini (= Baculini Günther, 1953) are removed from Phasmatinae and shown to be closely related to each other. They are transferred to the here established subfamily Clitumninae, a subordinate clade of Phasmatidae sensu lato. The subfamily Lonchodinae is closely related to Clitumninae, hence removed from Diapheromeridae and transferred to Phasmatidae sensu lato. The tribes Achriopterini and Stephanacridini (formerly in Phasmatinae) are shown to be not closely related to either Phasmatinae sensu stricto, Clitumninae or Lonchodinae, and provisionally must be treated as tribes of Phasmatidae sensu lato (incerte sedis). A re-arrangement of Phasmatidae sensu stricto is proposed along with determinating keys to all subfamilies and their tribes. The subfamilies Phasmatinae, Tropidoderinae and Extatosomatinae stat. nov. are re-described and discussed in detail. Full lists of genera are provided for each tribe. Only three of seven tribes formerly in Phasmatinae remain in the subfamily, this is Phasmatini, Acanthomimini and Acanthoxylini. The subfamily Tropidoderinae contains three tribes: Tropidoderini, Monandropterini and Gigantophasmatini trib. nov. The tribe Extatosomatini Clark-Sellick, 1997 is removed from Tropidoderinae and raised to subfamily level (Extatosomatinae stat. nov.). Several genera are transferred to other tribes or subfamilies. Didymuria Kirby, 1904 is removed from Tropidoderini, since it differs by having a closed internal micropylar plate in the eggs (open in all Tropidoderini). It here remains as a genus incerte sedis of Tropidoderinae and its systematic position clearly deserves further clarification. Gigantophasma Sharp, 1898 from the Loyalty Islands is removed from Pharnaciini, and becomes the type genus of the tribe Gigantophasmatini trib. nov.. Anophelepis Westwood, 1859 is removed from “Platycraninae” and shown to belong in Phasmatinae: Acanthomimini. The two Australian genera Arphax Stål, 1875, and Vasilissa Kirby, 1896 are removed from Acanthoxylini and provisionally transferred to Acanthomimini, but their position remains as yet debatable. Echetlus Stål, 1875 is misplaced in “Platycraninae” and shown to be a likely member of Phasmatinae. The two Brazilian species Echetlus evoneobertii Zompro & Adis, 2001 and Echetlus fulgens Zompro, 2004b are obviously misplaced and belong in the New World Diapheromeridae: Diapheromerinae: Diapheromerini. The subfamily Pachymorphinae is briefly discussed and considered polyphyletic. Two genera of Pachymorphinae: Gratidiini Bragg, 1995 (Parapachymorpha Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1893 and Cnipsomorpha Hennemann et al., 2008) are transferred to Clitumninae: Medaurini trib. nov. The genus Gongylopus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907 is transferred from Pachymorphinae: Gratidiini to Clitumninae: Clitumnini. The subfamily Xeroderinae is briefly discussed and shown likely to be polyphyletic, due to it contains two fundamentally different types of genitalia in the males. Only the genera Xeroderus Gray, 1835 and perhaps Epicharmus Stål, 1875 clearly belong in Phasmatidae sensu stricto. Both, the Pachymorphinae and Xeroderinae certainly deserve more detailed investigation to clarify their systematic positions with confirmation. Two generic groups are recognized within Clitumnini (subfamily Clitumninae). Due to differing by genital features and egg-morphology Medaura Stål, 1875 and Medauroidea Zompro, 2000 are removed from Clitumnini and transferred to the newly described Medaurini trib. nov.. The new tribe furthermore contains two genera formerly included in Pachymorphinae: Gratidiini and transferred here, Cnipsomorpha Hennemann et al., 2008 and Parapachymorpha Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1893. Phryganistria Stål, 1875 is removed from Clitumnini and transferred to Pharnaciini. Nesiophasma Günther, 1934 is shown to belong in the tribe Stephanacridini. The Australasian subfamily Lonchodinae Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1893 has formerly been included in Diapheromeridae Zompro, 2001 (= Heteronemiidae by Bradley & Galil, 1977). However, numerous features of the genitalia and egg morphology show close relation to the Oriental subfamily Clitumninae instead. Thus, Lonchodinae is here transferred to the family Phasmatidae (sensu lato). Within Lonchodinae the new tribe Neohiraseini trib. nov. is recognized and contains the five genera formerly placed in the “Neohirasea-complex” of that subfamily, namely Andropromachus Carl, 1913, Neohirasea Rehn, 1904, Pseudocentema Chen, He & Li, 2002, Qiongphasma Chen, He & Li, 2002 and Spinohirasea Zompro, 2001. It differs from all other Lonchodinae (= tribe Lonchodini) by the well developed vomer of males and the lack of a capitulum in the eggs. The genus Cladomimus Carl, 1915 was previously misplaced in Clitumninae: Pharnaciini and is here transferred to Lonchodinae: Lonchodini. It appears to be close to the Australian Hyrtacus Stål, 1875. Leprocaulinus Uvarov, 1940 and Phenacocephalus Werner, 1930 are removed from the subfamily Necrosciinae and transferred to Lonchodinae: Lonchodini. Extensive research on the genera which belong to the tribe Pharnaciini Günther, 1953 and taking features of the genital exosceleton and egg-morphology into account, has shown this tribe to be polyphyletic. Based on such features two generic groups are easily recognized within Pharnaciini sensu Günther, 1953. Males of the first group have a longitudinally split anal segment, which consists of two separate, more or less elongate semi-tergites and forms a clasping apparatus, the vomer is strongly reduced or lacking, the profemora have a prominent, lamellate medioventral carina which is strongly displaced towards the anteroventral carina and the eggs have an open internal micropylar plate with a clear median line. Only the genera falling into this group remain in Pharnaciini. Males of the second group in contrast have an anal segment which is not split, but possess a clearly visible, well sclerotised, triangular or hook-like external vomer, an indistinct medioventral carina on the profemora and eggs with a closed internal micropylar plate. Most of the genera which fall into the second group are here transferred to the tribe Stephanacridini Günther, 1953, this is Diagoras Stål, 1877b, Eucarcharus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907, Phasmotaenia Návas, 1907 and Sadyattes Stål, 1875. A detailed discussion of the differences between Pharnaciini and Stephanacridini is provided along with distinguishing keys, illustrations and maps showing the distinct geographic distributions. The five genera that belong in Pharnaciini are: Baculonistria gen. nov., Pharnacia Stål, 1877a, Phobaeticus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907 (= Baculolonga Hennemann & Conle, 1997a, = Lobophasma Günther, 1934b syn. nov. , = Nearchus Redtenbacher, 1908 syn. nov. ), Tirachoidea Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1893 stat. rev. and Phryganistria Stål, 1875. Pharnacia annulata Redtenbacher, 1908 and Pharnacia enganensis Redtenbacher, 1908 were misplaced in Pharnacia Stål, 1877 (tribe Pharnaciini) and are transferred to the genus Sadyattes Stål, 1875 (tribe Stephanacridini, comb. nov.). Phobaeticus kuehni Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907 is removed from Phobaeticus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907 (Phasmatinae: Pharnaciini) and shown to belong in Nesiophasma Günther, 1934c (tribe Stephanacridini, comb. nov.). Phobaeticus incertus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907 (= Nearchus grubaueri Redtenbacher, 1908 syn. nov.) is unlikely to belong in Pharnaciini and here only retained in the original genus Phobaeticus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907 with doubt, it may belong in Nesiophasma Günther, 1934c (tribe Stephanacridini). Based on a total of almost 700 examined specimens, the Oriental tribe Pharnaciini Günther, 1953 is revised at the species level. The new genus Baculonistria gen. nov. (Type species Baculonistria alba (Chen & He, 1990) comb. nov.), is described to contain three species from Central and Eastern China. Tirachoidea Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1893 was erroneously synonymised with Pharnacia Stål, 1877 and is here re-established as a valid genus (stat. rev.). All five genera are re-diagnosed and differentiated, their systematic position within Pharnaciini discussed, and complete synonymic and species-listings as well as distribution maps and determination keys to the insects and eggs are provided. Detailed descriptions, diagnoses, synonymic listings, illustrations, material listings, distribution maps and measurements are provided for all 42 valid species. The type material of a further two species appears to be lost. Seven new species are described: Pharnacia borneensis spec. nov. from Borneo; Pharnacia palawanica spec. nov. from Palawan, Phobaeticus mucrospinosus spec. nov. from Sumatra, Phobaeticus palawanensis spec. nov. from Palawan, Tirachoidea herberti spec. nov. from Borneo, Tirachoidea siamensis spec. nov. from Thailand and S-Vietnam and Phobaeticus chani Bragg spec. nov. from Borneo. Phobaeticus chani Bragg spec. nov. is the world’s longest known insect with a maximum body length of 357 mm and an overall length of 567 mm in the female. Twelve new synonymies were discovered: Bactridium grande Rehn, 1920 = Phobaeticus serratipes (Gray, 1835) syn. nov.; Pharnacia rigida Redtenbacher, 1908 = Phobaeticus sumatranus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907, syn. nov.; Clitumnus irregularis Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907 = Phibalosoma tirachus Westwood, 1859, syn. nov.; Pharnacia magdiwang Lit & Eusebio, 2008 = Pharnacia ponderosa Stål, 1877 syn. nov.; Pharnacia spectabilis Redtenbacher, 1908 = Phibalosoma hypharpax Westwood, 1859, syn. nov.; Pharnacia semilunaris Redtenbacher, 1908 = Eucarcharus inversus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907, syn. nov.; Pharnacia chiniensis Seow-Choen, 1998c = Pharnacia biceps Redtenbacher, 1908, syn. nov.; Nearchus grubaueri Redtenbacher, 1908 = Phobaeticus incertus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907, syn. nov.; Phibalosoma maximum Bates, 1865 = Cladoxerus serratipes Gray, 1835, syn. nov.; Phobaeticus lambirica Seow-Choen, 1998a = Eucarcharus rex Günther, 1928, syn. nov.; Phobaeticus sichuanensis Cai & Liu, 1993 = Baculum album Chen & He, 1990, syn. nov. and Phobaeticus beccarianus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907 is shown to represent the previously unknown female of Phobaeticus sobrinus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907 (syn. nov.) Lectotypes are designated for: Nearchus redtenbacheri Dohrn, 1910, Pharnacia biceps Redtenbacher, 1908, Pharnacia ingens Redtenbacher, 1908, Pharnacia heros Redtenbacher, 1908, Phibalosoma westwoodi Wood-Mason, 1875, Phobaeticus sinetyi Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907, and Phobaeticus sumatranus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907. A neotype is designated for Nearchus maximus Redtenbacher, 1908 and Phobaeticus magnus nom. nov. introduced as a replacement name for Nearchus maximus Redtenbacher, which is a junior homonym of Phibalosoma maximum Bates, 1865.The previously unknown males of Pharnacia heros Redtenbacher, 1908, Phobaeticus ingens (Redtenbacher, 1908), Tirachoidea jianfenglingensis (Bi, 1994), Pharnacia sumatrana (Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907), Phryganistria fruhstorferi (Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907) and Tirachoidea westwoodii (Wood-Mason, 1875) as well as the females of Pharnacia ponderosa Stål, 1877a and Pharnacia tirachus (Westwood, 1859) are described and illustrated for the first time. A brief description on the basis of colour photos of the so far unknown male of Pharnacia kalag Zompro, 2005 are presented. Detailed descriptions and illustrations are provided for the eggs of 24 species. The eggs of the following 18 species are described and illustrated for the first time: Phobaeticus magnus nom. nov., Pharnacia borneensis spec. nov., Pharnacia palawanica spec. nov., Pharnacia ponderosa Stål, 1877a, Pharnacia sumatrana (Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907), Pharnacia tirachus (Westwood, 1859), Phobaeticus hypharpax (Westwood, 1859), Phobaeticus chani Bragg spec. nov., Phobaeticus incertus Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907, Phobaeticus magnus nom. nov., Phobaeticus philippinicus (Hennemann & Conle, 1997a), Phobaeticus sinetyi Brunner v. Wattenwyl, 1907, Phryganistria grandis Rehn, 1906, Phryganistria virgea (Westwood, 1848), Tirachoidea biceps (Redtenbacher, 1908), Tirachoidea herberti spec. nov., Tirachoidea jianfenglingensis (Bi, 1994) and Tirachoidea siamensis spec. nov.. Several species were originally placed in or subsequently transferred into wrong genera by various authors. Consequently, numerous taxa are here transferred or re-transferred to other genera, which results in 22 new or revised combinations or status of genera and species (comb. nov. / stat. rev. / stat. nov.). A list of the taxonomic changes made in this revision is provided in the summary ( 9.2), which in all lists 70 nomenclatural changes.

In accordo con le disposizioni del codice internazionale di Nomenclatura Zoologica, vengono proposte otto azioni allo scopo di salvaguardare la stabilità della nomenclatura attuale di alcune specie della tribù Tychiini. seguendo le indicazioni dell’Articolo 23.9.1,<em> Sibinia subelliptica</em> Desbrochers, 1873 è considerato <strong>nomen protectum</strong> e <em>Gymnetron schaumi</em> Becker, 1864 è considerato <strong>nomen</strong> <strong>oblitum</strong>; <em>Sibinia phalerata</em> Gyllenhal, 1836 è considerato <strong>nomen protectum</strong> e <em>Sibinia</em> <em>centromaculata</em> Villa &amp; Villa, 1835 è considerato <strong>nomen</strong> <strong>oblitum</strong>. Essendo presenti le condizioni richieste dall’articolo 75.3, vengono designati i neotipi dei seguenti taxa: <em>Sibinia</em> <em>centromaculata</em> Villa &amp; Villa, 1835; <em>Sybines</em> <em>pulchellus</em> Desbrochers, 1875. Sono inoltre stabiliti i lectotypi di: <em>Gymne­</em> <em>tron</em> <em>schaumi</em> Becker, 1864; <em>Sibinia attalica</em> Gyllenhal var. <em>lateralis</em> Desbrochers, 1895; <em>Sibinia cinctella</em> Desbrochers, 1898; <em>Sibinia pozuelica</em> Fuente, 1910; <em>Tychius barceloni­cus</em> Desbrochers, 1908; <em>Tychius edentatus</em> Desbrochers, 1895; <em>Tychius</em> <em>pallidicornis</em> Desbrochers, 1875; <em>Tychius parvulus</em> Stephens, 1831; <em>Tychius seductor</em> Desbrochers, 1908. Vengono proposte le seguenti nuove sinonimie: <em>Sibinia bipunctata</em> Kirsch, 1870 =<em> Sibi­nia postsignata</em> Voss, 1971<strong> n. syn</strong>.; <em>Sibinia</em> <em>exigua</em> Faust = <em>Sibinia</em> <em>cinctella</em> Desbrochers, 1898 <strong>n. syn</strong>.; <em>Sibinia femoralis</em> Germar, 1824 = <em>Sibinia attalica</em> var. <em>lateralis</em> Desbrochers, 1895<strong> n. syn</strong>. = <em>Sibinia consanguinea</em> Desbrochers, 1895 <strong>n. syn</strong>. = <em>Sibinia attalica</em> var. <em>curtula</em> Desbrochers, 1907 n. syn. = <em>Sibinia</em> <em>dilataticollis</em> Desbrochers, 1907 <strong>n. syn</strong>.= <em>Sibinia</em> <em>seducta</em> Desbrochers, 1907 <strong>n. syn.</strong> = <em>Sibinia pozuelica</em> Fuente, 1910 <strong>n. syn</strong>.; <em>Si­binia pici</em> Desbrochers = <em>Sibinia otiosa</em> Hustache, 1944 <strong>n. syn.</strong> = <em>Sibinia</em> <em>praeventa</em> Hustache, 1944 <strong>n. syn</strong>.; <em>Sibinia subelliptica</em> Desbrochers, 1873 = <em>Sibinia schaumei</em> Desbrochers, 1895 <strong>n</strong>. <strong>syn</strong>.; <em>Sibinia unicolor</em> Fåhraeus, 1843 = <em>Sybines pulchellus</em> Desbrochers, 1875 <strong>n. syn</strong>. = <em>Sibinia ochreata</em> Schilsky, 1912 <strong>n. syn.</strong> = <em>Sibinia sobrina</em> Voss, 1936 <strong>n. syn</strong>.; <em>Sibinia variata</em> Gyllenhal, 1836 = <em>Sibinia rubripes</em> Desbrochers, 1907 <strong>n. syn</strong>.; <em>Sibi­nia</em> <em>viscariae</em> (Linnaeus) = <em>Sibinia submeticollis</em> Desbrochers, 1908<strong> n. syn</strong>.; <em>Tychiusar­ gentatus</em> Chevrolat, 1859 = <em>Tychius dimidiatipennis</em> Desbrochers, 1873 <strong>n. syn.</strong> = <em>Tychius argenteosquamosus</em> Desbrochers, 1908 <strong>n. syn</strong>. = <em>Tychius seductor</em> Desbrochers, 1908<strong> n. syn</strong>.; <em>Tychius</em> <em>medicaginis</em> C. Brisout, 1862 = <em>Tychius griseus</em> Petri, 1915 (non Schaeffer, 1908) <strong>n. syn</strong>.; <em>Tychius breviusculus</em> Desbrochers, 1873 = <em>Tychius humeralis</em> Desbrochers, 1908 <strong>n.</strong> <strong>syn</strong>.; <em>Tychius cinnamomeus</em> Kiesenwetter, 1851 = <em>Tychius</em> <em>adspersus</em> Desbrochers, 1908 <strong>n. syn</strong>. = <em>Tychius barcelonicus</em> Desbrochers, 1908 <strong>n. syn</strong>.; <em>Tychius cu­prifer</em> (Panzer, 1799) = <em>Myllocerus subcostatus</em> Kolenati, 1858 <strong>n. syn</strong>.; <em>Tychius cuprinus</em> Rosenhauer, 1856 = <em>Tychius tuberculirostris</em> Hustache, 1944 <strong>n. syn.</strong>; <em>Tychius dieckmanni</em> Caldara, 1986 = <em>Lepidotychius babaevi</em> Bajtenov &amp; Soyunov, 1990<strong> n. syn</strong>.; <em>Tychius ele­gantulus</em> C. Brisout, 1862 = <em>Tychius pulcher</em> Pic, 1925 <strong>n. syn.</strong>; <em>Tychius elongatulus</em> Desbrochers, 1897 = <em>Tychius longitarsis</em> Desbrochers, 1898 <strong>n. syn</strong>.; <em>Tychius grenieri</em> C. Brisout, 1861 = <em>Tychius sparsus</em> Hustache, 1944; <em>Tychius</em> <em>immaculicollis</em> Desbrochers, 1907 = <em>Tychius</em> <em>elegans</em> Desbrochers, 1896 (non Brullé, 1832) = <em>Tychius ifranensis</em> Hustache, 1944 <strong>n. syn</strong>. = <em>Tychius kocheri</em> Hustache, 1944 <strong>n.</strong> <strong>syn</strong>. = <em>Tychius teluetensi</em>s Hustache, 1944<strong> n. syn.</strong>; <em>Tychius</em> <em>lautus</em> Gyllenhal, 1836 = <em>Tychius</em> <em>obductus</em> Hochhuth, 1851 <strong>n</strong>. <strong>syn</strong>. = <em>Tychius cilicensis</em> Pic<em>,</em> 1905<strong> n. syn</strong>.; <em>Tychius oschianus</em> Faust, 1885 = <em>Tychius pubicol­lis</em> Petri, 1915 <strong>n. syn</strong>.; <em>Tychius</em> <em>pardalis</em> Escalera, 1914 = <em>Tychius</em> <em>circulatus</em> Hustache, 1944 <strong>n.</strong> <strong>syn</strong>.; <em>Tychius picirostris</em> (Fabricius, 1787) = s<em>Tychius parvulus</em> Stephens, 1831 <strong>n. syn</strong>.; <em>Tychius polylineatus</em> (Germar, 1824) = <em>Tychius orbiculatus</em> Hustache, 1944 <strong>n. syn.</strong>; <em>Tychius stephensi</em> Schoenherr, 1836 = <em>Tychius pallidicornis</em> Desbrochers, 1875<strong> n. syn</strong>. Sono considerati nomi infrasubspecifici e pertanto non utilizzabili: <em>Sibinia attalica</em> Gyllenhal var. <em>unicolor</em> Desbrochers, 1895: 102 (non Fåhraeus, 1843); <em>Sibinia attalica</em> subsp. <em>tibiella</em> var. <em>desbordesi</em> Hoffmann, 1954;<em> Tychius pusillus</em> var. <em>inermis</em> Hoffmann, 1954. <em>Sibinia</em> <em>suturella</em> Motschulsky, 1858 (non Fårhaeus, 1843) viene trasferita al genere <em>Smicronyx</em>.

The classification of Microhoriini Bonadona, 1974 is revised. Five genera are recognized: Aulacoderus LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849, Falsophilus Kejval, 2015, Liparoderus LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849, Microhoria Chevrolat, 1877, and Neocrohoria Telnov, 2019. (i) New species: Microhoria almukalla Kejval, sp. nov. (Yemen), M. anahita Kejval, sp. nov. (Iran), M. antalya Kejval, sp. nov. (Turkey), M. bacillisternum Kejval, sp. nov. (Iran), M. cervi Kejval, sp. nov. (Oman), M. fergana Kejval, sp. nov. (Kyrgyzstan), M. garavuti Kejval, sp. nov. (Tajikistan), M. gibbipennis Kejval, sp. nov. (Turkey), M. halophila Kejval, sp. nov. (Turkey), M. hazara Kejval, sp. nov. (Afghanistan), M. heracleana Kejval, sp. nov. (Greece), M. impavida Kejval, sp. nov. (Turkey), M. kabulensis Kejval, sp. nov. (Afghanistan), M. kermanica Kejval, sp. nov. (Iran), M. pahlavi Kejval, sp. nov. (Iran), M. persica Kejval, sp. nov. (Iran), M. strejceki Kejval, sp. nov. (Tajikistan), M. sawda Kejval, sp. nov. (Saudi Arabia), and M. sulaimanica Kejval, sp. nov. (Pakistan, Uzbekistan). (ii) New synonymies: Microhoria Chevrolat, 1877 = Clavicomus Pic, 1894 syn. nov. = Tenuicomus Pic, 1894 syn. nov.; Microhoria depressa (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849) = Anthicus mollis Desbrochers des Loges, 1875 syn. nov.; Microhoria edmondi (Pic, 1893) = Anthicus spinosus Pic, 1912 syn. nov.; Microhoria globipennis (Pic, 1897) = Anthicus globipennis quercicola Sahlberg, 1913 syn. nov.; Microhoria luristanica (Pic, 1911) = Anthicus pietschmi Pic, 1938 syn. nov.; Microhoria ottomana (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849) = Anthicus merkli Pic, 1897 syn. nov.; Microhoria pinicola (Reitter, 1889) = Microhoria feroni Bonadona, 1960 syn. nov.; Microhoria posthuma (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) = Anthicus fumeoalatus Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931 syn. nov.; Microhoria truncatipennis (Pic, 1897) = Anthicus mouzafferi Pic, 1910 syn. nov. (iii) Status changes. Anthicus tauricus var. inobscura Pic, 1908 is raised to species level as Microhoria inobscura (Pic, 1908) stat. nov.; Anthicus truncatus var. decoloratus Pic, 1897 is removed from synonymy with Anthicus truncatus Pic, 1895 and raised to species level as Microhoria decolorata (Pic, 1897) stat. restit. (iv) New combinations: Microhoria disconotata (Pic, 1907) comb. nov., M. fossicollis (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849) comb. nov., M. gestroi (Pic, 1895) comb. nov., M. irregularis (Pic, 1932) comb. nov., M. lividipes (Desbrochers des Loges, 1875) comb. nov., M. marginicollis (Pic, 1951) comb. nov., M. nystii (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849) comb. nov., M. schimperi (Pic, 1898) comb. nov., M. semiviridis (Pic, 1951) comb. nov., M. strandi (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., and M. yemenita (Nardi, 2004) comb. nov., all from Anthicus Paykull, 1798. Microhoria abscondita (Telnov, 2000) comb. nov., M. adusta (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. afghana (Telnov, 2010) comb. nov., M. almorae (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. ambusta (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. angulifer (Pic, 1893) comb. nov., M. anomala (Telnov, 1998) comb. nov., M. antinorii (Pic, 1894) comb. nov., M. apicordiger (Bonadona, 1954) comb. nov., M. aquatilis (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. assamensis (Pic, 1907) comb. nov., M. assequens (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. atrata (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. austriaca (Pic, 1901) comb. nov., M. bicarinifrons (Pic, 1892) comb. nov., M. biguttata (Bonadona, 1964) comb. nov., M. brevipilis (Pic, 1893) comb. nov., M. bruckii (Kiesenwetter, 1870) comb. nov., M. brunneipes (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. caeruleicolor (Pic, 1906) comb. nov., M. callima (Baudi di Selve, 1877) comb. nov., M. comes (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. cordata (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. curticeps (Pic, 1923) comb. nov., M. dichrous (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849) comb. nov., M. doderoi (Pic, 1902) comb. nov., M. erythraea (Pic, 1899) comb. nov., M. erythrodera (Marseul, 1878) comb. nov., M. feai (Pic, 1907) comb. nov., M. fugax (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849) comb. nov., M. fugiens (Marseul, 1876) comb. nov., M. garze (Telnov, 2018) comb. nov., M. gigas (Pic, 1899) comb. nov., M. gravida (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. harmandi (Pic, 1899) comb. nov., M. hauseri (Pic, 1906) comb. nov., M. henoni (Pic, 1892) comb. nov., M. heydeni (Marseul, 1879) comb. nov., M. himalayana (Pic, 1909) comb. nov., M. hummeli (Pic, 1933) comb. nov., M. immaculipennis (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. inabsoluta (Telnov, 2003) comb. nov., M. indeprensa (Telnov, 2000) comb. nov., M. kabyliana (Pic, 1896) comb. nov., M. kejvali (Telnov, 1999) comb. nov., M. kham (Telnov, 2018) comb. nov., M. kocheri (Pic, 1951) comb. nov., M. kuluensis (Pic, 1914) comb. nov., M. lepidula (Marseul, 1876) comb. nov., M. longiceps (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849) comb. nov., M. longicornis (Uhmann, 1983) comb. nov., M. manifesta (Pic, 1907) comb. nov., M. martinezi (Pic, 1932) comb. nov., M. muguensis (Telnov, 2000) comb. nov., M. nigrocyanella (Marseul, 1877) comb. nov., M. nigrofusca (Telnov, 2000) comb. nov., M. nigroterminata (Pic, 1909) comb. nov., M. notatipennis (Pic, 1909) comb. nov., M. olivierii (Desbrochers des Loges, 1868) comb. nov., M. optabilis LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849) comb. nov., M. paganettii (Pic, 1909) comb. nov., M. phungi (Pic, 1926) comb. nov., M. picea (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849) comb. nov., M. plagiostola (Bonadona, 1958) comb. nov., M. plicatipennis (Pic, 1936) comb. nov., M. posthuma (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. postimpressa (Pic, 1938) comb. nov., M. postluteofasciata (Pic, 1938) comb. nov., M. prolatithorax (Pic, 1899) comb. nov., M. proterva (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. ragusae (Pic, 1898) comb. nov., M. semidepressa (Pic, 1893) comb. nov., M. separatithorax (Pic, 1914) comb. nov., M. shibatai (Nomura, 1962) comb. nov., M. schrammi Pic, 1913) comb. nov., M. sikkimensis (Pic, 1907) comb. nov., M. sinensis (Pic, 1907) comb. nov., M. spinipennis (Pic, 1898) comb. nov., M. sporadica (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. striaticollis (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. subpicea (Pic, 1914) comb. nov., M. tersa (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. tonkinensis (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1928) comb. nov., M. truncatella (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849) comb. nov., M. turgida (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1928) comb. nov., M. uhagoni (Pic, 1904) comb. nov., M. uniformis (Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931) comb. nov., M. variabilis (Telnov, 2003) comb. nov., M. weigeli (Telnov, 2000) comb. nov., M. versicolor (Kiesenwetter, 1866) comb. nov., M. wuyishanensis (Nardi, 2004) comb. nov., and Nitorus niger (Uhmann, 1996) comb. nov., all from Clavicomus Pic, 1894. Microhoria agriliformis (Pic, 1893) comb. nov., M. alfierii (Pic, 1923) comb. nov., M. angelinii (Degiovanni, 2012) comb. nov., M. babaulti (Pic, 1921) comb. nov., M. barnevillei (Pic, 1892) comb. nov., M. armeniaca (Pic, 1899) comb. nov., M. bonnairii (Fairmaire, 1883) comb. nov., M. cyanipennis (Grilat, 1886) comb. nov., M. depressa (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849) comb. nov., M. dolichocephala (Baudi di Selve, 1877) comb. nov., M. duplex (Nardi, 2004) comb. nov., M. edmondi (Pic, 1893) comb. nov., M. escalerai (Pic, 1904) comb. nov., M. finalis (Telnov, 2003) comb. nov., M. fuscomaculata (Pic, 1893) comb. nov., M. insignita (Pic, 1906) comb. nov., M. luristanica (Pic, 1911) comb. nov., M. meloiformis (Reitter, 1890) comb. nov., M. mesopotamica (Pic, 1912) comb. nov., M. ocreata (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1847) comb. nov., M. olivacea (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849) comb. nov., M. ottomana (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849) comb. nov., M. pallicra (Dufour, 1849) comb. nov., M. paralleliceps (Reitter, 1890) comb. nov., M. paupercula (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1847) comb. nov., M. platiai (Degiovanni, 2000) comb. nov., M. siccensis (Normand, 1950) comb. nov., M. subaerea (Reitter, 1890) comb. nov., M. subcaerulea (Pic, 1906) comb. nov., M. subsericea (Pic, 1898) comb. nov., M. tarifana (Pic, 1904) comb. nov., M. tibialis (Waltl, 1835) comb. nov., M. velox (LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849) comb. nov., M. viridipennis (Pic, 1899) comb. nov., and M. viturati (Pic, 1893) comb. nov., all from Tenuicomus Pic, 1894. Microhoria decolorata (Pic, 1897) comb. nov. and M. truncata (Pic, 1895) comb. nov. from Stricticomus Pic, 1894. Microhoria truncatipennis (Pic, 1897) comb. nov. from Anthelephila Hope, 1833. (v) Lectotype designations. Lectotypes are designated for the following species: Anthicus depressus LaFerté-Sénectère, 1849, A. edmondi Pic, 1893, A. luristanicus Pic, 1911, A. merkli Pic, 1897, A. mouzafferi Pic, 1910, A. pietschmi Pic, 1938, A. pinicola Reitter, 1889, A. posthumus Krekich-Strassoldo, 1931, and A. spinosus Pic, 1912.

A list of available taxonomic names in Curculionidae: Scolytinae and Platypodinae in familyand genus-groups is given, together with some remarks on unavailable nominal taxa. Comments are provided on their status and nomenclature, and additions and corrections to extant catalogues given, as a first step for their inclusion in the electronic catalogue ‘WTaxa’. Available names, not recognised as such in current published catalogues, are: Mecopelminae Thompson, 1992; Trypodendrina Nunberg, 1954; Archaeoscolytus Butovitsch, 1929; Camptocerus Dejean, 1821; Coccotrypes Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Coptogaster Illiger, 1804; Cosmoderes Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Cryptoxyleborus Wood & Bright, 1992; Cylindra Illiger, 1802; Dendrochilus Schedl, 1963; Dendrocranulus Schedl, 1938; Doliopygus Browne, 1962; Doliopygus Schedl, 1972; Erioschidias Wood, 1960; Ernopocerus Wood, 1954; Idophelus Rye, 1877; Lepicerus Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Lepidocerus Rye, 1880; Miocryphalus Schedl, 1963; Ozopemon Hagedorn, 1910; Phloeoditica Schedl, 1963; Pinetoscolytus Butovitsch, 1929; Pycnarthrum Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Pygmaeoscolytus Butovitsch, 1929; Scolytogenes Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Spinuloscolytus Butovitsch, 1929; Stephanopodius Schedl, 1963; Stylotentus Schedl, 1963; Thamnophthorus Blackman, 1942; Trachyostus Browne, 1962; Treptoplatypus Schedl, 1972; Triarmocerus Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Trypodendrum Agassiz, 1846; Tubuloscolytus Butovitsch, 1929; Xelyborus Schedl, 1939. Unavailable names, not recognised as such in the current published catalogues, are: Chaetophloeini Schedl, 1966; Eidophelinae Murayama, 1954; Mecopelmini Wood, 1966; Strombophorini Schedl, 1960; Tomicidae Shuckard, 1840; Trypodendrinae Trédl, 1907; Acryphalus Tsai & Li, 1963; Adryocoetes Schedl, 1952; Asetus Nunberg, 1958; Carphoborites Schedl, 1947; Charphoborites Schedl, 1947; Cryptoxyleborus Schedl, 1937; Cylindrotomicus Eggers, 1936; Damicerus Dejean, 1835; Damicerus Dejean, 1836; Dendrochilus Schedl, 1957; Dendrocranulus Schedl, 1937; Doliopygus Schedl, 1939; Erioschidias Schedl, 1938; Ernopocerus Balachowsky, 1949; Gnathotrichoides Blackman, 1931; Ipites Karpiński, 1962; Isophthorus Schedl, 1938; Jugocryphalus Tsai & Li, 1963; Landolphianus Schedl, 1950; Mesopygus Nunberg, 1966; Micraciops Schedl, 1953; Miocryphalus Schedl, 1939; Mixopygus Nunberg, 1966; Neohyorrhynchus Schedl, 1962; Neophloeotribus Eggers, 1943; Neopityophthorus Schedl, 1938; Neoxyleborus Wood, 1982; Phloeoditica Schedl, 1962; Platypinus Schedl, 1939; Platyscapulus Schedl, 1957; Platyscapus Schedl, 1939; Pygodolius Nunberg, 1966; Scutopygus Nunberg, 1966; Stephanopodius Schedl, 1941; Stylotentus Schedl, 1939; Taphrostenoxis Schedl, 1965; Tesseroplatypus Schedl, 1935; Thamnophthorus Schedl, 1938; Thylurcos Schedl, 1939; Trachyostus Schedl, 1939; Treptoplatus Schedl, 1939. The name Tesseroceri Blandford, 1896, incorrectly given as “Tesserocerini genuini” in current catalogues, is unavailable as basionym for the family-group name, since it was proposed as a genusgroup name. Resurrected names from synonymy are: Hexacolini Eichhoff, 1878 from synonymy under Ctenophorini Chapuis, 1869 (invalid name because its type genus is a homonym) and given precedence over Problechilidae Eichhoff, 1878 under Art. 24.2; Hylurgini Gistel, 1848 from virtual synonymy under Tomicini C.G. Thomson, 1859 (unavailable name); Afromicracis Schedl, 1959 from synonymy under Miocryphalus Schedl, 1939 (an unavailable name) to valid genus; Costaroplatus Nunberg, 1963 from synonymy under Platyscapulus Schedl, 1957 (an unavailable name) to valid genus; Cumatotomicus Ferrari, 1867 from synonymy under Ips DeGeer, 1775 to valid subgenus of the same; Hapalogenius Hagedorn, 1912 from synonymy under Rhopalopselion Hagedorn, 1909 to valid genus; Pseudips Cognato, 2000, from synonymy under Orthotomicus Ferrari, 1867 to valid genus. New synonyms are: Hexacolini Eichhoff, 1878 (= Erineophilides Hopkins, 1920, syn. nov.); Hypoborini Nuesslin, 1911 (= Chaetophloeini Schedl, 1966, unavailable name, syn. nov.); Scolytini Latreille, 1804 (= Minulini Reitter, 1913, syn. nov.); Afromicracis Schedl, 1959 (= Miocryphalus Schedl, 1963, syn. nov.); Aphanarthrum Wollaston, 1854 (= Coleobothrus Enderlein, 1929, syn. nov.); Coccotrypes Eichhoff, 1878 (April) (= Coccotrypes Eichhoff, 1878 (December), syn. nov.); Cosmoderes Eichhoff, 1878 (April) (= Cosmoderes Eichhoff, 1878 (December), syn. nov.); Cumatotomicus Ferrari, 1867 (=Emarips Cognato, 2001, syn. nov.); Doliopygus Browne, 1962 (=Doliopygus Schedl, 1972, syn. nov.); Eidophelus Eichhoff, 1875 (= Idophelus Rye, 1877, syn. nov.); Hapalogenius Hagedorn, 1912 (= Hylesinopsis Eggers, 1920, syn. nov.); Phloeoborus Erichson, 1836 (= Phloeotrypes Agassiz, 1846, syn. nov.); Pycnarthrum Eichhoff, 1878 (April) (= Pycnarthrum Eichhoff, 1878 (December), syn. nov.); Scolytogenes Eichhoff, 1878 (April) (= Scolytogenes Eichhoff, 1878 (December) = Lepicerus Eichhoff, 1878 (December) = Lepidocerus Rye, 1880, synn. nov.); Trypodendron Stephens, 1830 (=Xylotrophus Gistel, 1848 = Trypodendrum Gistel, 1856, synn. nov.); Xylechinus Chapuis, 1869 (= Chilodendron Schedl, 1953, syn. nov.); Cosmoderes monilicollis Eichhoff, 1878 (April) (= Cosmoderes monilicollis Eichhoff, 1878 (December), syn. nov.); Hylastes pumilus Mannerheim, 1843 (= Dolurgus pumilus Eichhoff, 1868, syn. nov.); Hypoborus hispidus Ferrari, 1867 (= Pycnarthrum gracile Eichhoff, 1878 (April) syn. nov.); Miocryphalus agnatus Schedl, 1939 (= Miocryphalus agnatus Schedl, 1942, syn. nov.); Miocryphalus congonus Schedl, 1939 (= Miocryphalus congonus Eggers, 1940, syn. nov.); Lepicerus aspericollis Eichhoff, 1878 (April) = Lepicerus aspericollis Eichhoff, 1878 (December), syn. nov.); Spathicranuloides moikui Schedl, 1972 (June) (= Spathicranuloides moikui Schedl, 1972 (December), syn. nov.); Triarmocerus cryphalo-ides Eichhoff, 1878 (April) (= Triarmocerus cryphaloides Eichhoff, 1878 (December), syn. nov.); Scolytogenes darvini Eichhoff, 1878 (April) (= Scolytogenes darwinii Eichhoff, 1878 (December), syn. nov.). New type species designations are: Bostrichus dactyliperda Fabricius, 1801 for Coccotrypes Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Triarmocerus cryphaloides Eichhoff, 1878 (April) for Triarmocerus Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Ozopemon regius Hagedorn, 1908 for Ozopemon Hagedorn, 1910 (non 1908); Dermestes typographus Linnaeus, 1758 for Bostrichus Fabricius, 1775 (non Geoffroy, 1762). New combinations are: Afromicracis agnata (Schedl, 1939), A. attenuata (Eggers, 1935), A. ciliatipennis (Schedl, 1979), A. congona (Schedl, 1939), A. dubia (Schedl, 1950), A. elongata (Schedl, 1965), A. grobleri (Schedl, 1961), A. klainedoxae (Schedl, 1957), A. longa (Nunberg, 1964), A. natalensis (Eggers, 1936), A. nigrina (Schedl, 1957), A. nitida (Schedl, 1965), A. pennata (Schedl, 1953) and A. punctipennis (Schedl, 1965) all from Miocryphalus; Costaroplatus abditulus (Wood, 1966), C. abditus (Schedl, 1936), C. carinulatus (Chapuis, 1865), C. clunalis (Wood, 1966), C. cluniculus (Wood, 1966), C. clunis (Wood, 1966), C. costellatus (Schedl, 1933), C. frontalis (Blandford, 1896), C. imitatrix (Schedl, 1972), C. manus (Schedl, 1936), C. occipitis (Wood, 1966), C. pulchellus (Chapuis, 1865), C. pulcher (Chapuis, 1865), C. pusillimus (Chapuis, 1865), C. subabditus (Schedl, 1935), C. turgifrons (Schedl, 1935) and C. umbrosus (Schedl, 1936) all from Platyscapulus; Hapalogenius africanus (Eggers, 1933), H. alluaudi (Lepesme, 1942), H. angolanus (Wood, 1988), H. angolensis (Schedl, 1959), H. arabiae (Schedl, 1975), H. atakorae (Schedl, 1951), H. ater (Nunberg, 1967), H. baphiae (Schedl, 1954), H. brincki (Schedl, 1957), H. confusus (Eggers, 1935), H. decellei (Nunberg, 1969), H. dimorphus (Schedl, 1937), H. dubius (Eggers, 1920), H. emarginatus (Nunberg, 1973), H. endroedyi (Schedl, 1967), H. fasciatus (Hagedorn, 1909), H. ficus (Schedl, 1954), H. fuscipennis (Chapuis, 1869), H. granulatus (Lepesme, 1942), H. hirsutus (Schedl, 1957), H. hispidus (Eggers, 1924), H. horridus (Eggers, 1924), H. joveri (Schedl, 1950), H. kenyae (Wood, 1986), H. oblongus (Eggers, 1935), H. orientalis (Eggers, 1943), H. pauliani (Lepesme, 1942), H. punctatus (Eggers, 1932), H. quadrituberculatus (Schedl, 1957), H. rhodesianus (Eggers, 1933), H. saudiarabiae (Schedl, 1971), H. seriatus (Eggers, 1940), H. squamosus (Eggers, 1936), H. striatus (Schedl, 1957), H. sulcatus Eggers, 1944), H. togonus (Eggers, 1919), H. ugandae (Wood, 1986) and H. variegatus (Eggers, 1936), all from Hylesinopsis. New ranks are: Diapodina Strohmeyer, 1914, downgraded from tribe of Tesserocerinae to subtribe of Tesserocerini; Tesserocerina Strohmeyer, 1914, downgraded from tribe of Tesserocerinae to subtribe of Tesserocerini. New placements are: Coptonotini Chapuis, 1869 from tribe of Coptonotinae to tribe of Scolytinae; Mecopelmini Thompson, 1992, from tribe of Coptonotinae to tribe of Platypodinae; Schedlariini Wood & Bright, 1992, from tribe of Coptonotinae to tribe of Platypodinae; Spathicranuloides Schedl, 1972, from Platypodinae s.l. to Tesserocerina; Toxophthorus Wood, 1962 from Scolytinae incertae sedis to Dryocoetini. Confirmed placements are: Onychiini Chapuis, 1869 to tribe of Cossoninae (including single genus Onychius Chapuis, 1869); Sciatrophus Sampson, 1914 in Cossoninae incertae sedis; Cryphalites Cockerell, 1917 in Zopheridae Colydiinae. Corrected spellings are: Micracidini LeConte, 1876 for Micracini; Phrixosomatini Wood, 1978 for Phrixosomini. Gender agreements are corrected for species of several genera.

Abstracttitle RIASSUNTO /title Viene pubblicata la corrispondenza tra il famoso astronomo italiano Giovanni Schiaparelli (1835-1910) e Percival Lowell (1855-1916), fondatore dell'omonimo importante osservatorio di Flagstaff in Arizona. Entrambi compirono dettagliati studi sul pianeta Marte, per cui la corrispondenza tratta in particolar modo questo argomento. Si tratta di 35 lettere inedite (34 in francese, una in inglese) scritte dal 1896 alla morte di Schiaparelli (1910). Nell'archivio dell'Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera sono custoditi gli originali di Lowell ed alcune minute di Schiaparelli; l'Osservatorio di Flagstaff ha gentilmente messo a nostra disposizione alcune lettere originali di Schiaparelli. title SUMMARY /title In this article we publish the correspondence between the famous italian astronomer Giovanni Schiaparelli (1835-1910) and Percival Lowell (1855-1916), founder of the Flagstaff Observatory in Arizona. Both studied in detail the planet Mars, therefore the correspondence focuses on this topic. In this work we present 35 unpublished letters (34 in French, one in English) written from 1896 until Schiaparelli's death (1910). The original letters from Lowell and some drafts by Schiaparelli are conserved in the archives of the Brera Astronomical Observatory; Flagstaff Observatory has kindly provided us with some of the original letters by Schiaparelli.

The article is a brief biographical presentation of the Italian astronomer Giovanni Virginio Schiaparelli (1835-1910) in the context of the so-called "Martian canals", "discovered" by the astronomer in 1877.

An update of the current knowledge of Anacharis Dalman, 1823 for the Palaearctic and Indomalayan regions is given. The previously known Palaearctic species Anacharis antennata Belizin, 1951, Anacharis eucharoides (Dalman, 1818), Anacharis immunis Walker, 1835 and Anacharis parapsidalis Belizin, 1951 are redescribed. Three new species are described: Anacharis fergussoni sp. nov. from Europe, Anacharis norvegica sp. nov. from Norway and Anacharis belizini sp. nov. from Thailand, the first recorded Indomalayan species for the genus. Anacharis gracilipes Ionescu, 1969, is synonymized with A. eucharoides, while Anacharis flavidicornis Kieffer, 1910 is transferred to the genus Aegilips Haliday, 1835, resulting in Aegilips flavidicornis (Kieffer, 1910) comb. nov. Diagnostic characters and data about the biology, distribution and affinities with other species of Anacharis are discussed. An identification key for the Palaearctic and Indomalayan species of Anacharis is given.

Ricardo Palma publicó en la revista limeña Variedades, en 1910, un artículo jocoso sobre el próximo paso del cometa Halley, desconocido hasta el día de hoy por haber salido bajo el seudónimo Savonarola. La ocurrencia cósmica le permitió recordar que el anterior paso del citado cometa se produjo en 1835, cuando él solo tenía dos años, y a sus hijos Clemente y Ricardo les dio la oportunidad de escribir artículos fantásticos que publicó la prensa limeña.

For the almost three centuries from the appointment of John Flamsteed in 1675 to the retirement of Richard Woolley in 1971, the office of Director of the Royal Observatory and the title Astronomer Royal were deemed inseparable (although just at the outset there had been slight variability in the title’s wording). Flamsteed and his successors were all among Britain’s most distinguished scientists. They included Edmond Halley, in office 1720-42, probably the greatest scientist of the generation after Newton; James Bradley 1742-62, discoverer of optical aberration giving the first direct empirical evidence for the Copernican system ; Nevil Maskelyne 1765-1811, who was the first scientist to weigh the Earth ; Sir George Airy 1835-81, who personally performed most of the functions nowadays requiring a string of research councils; and Sir Frank Dyson 1910-33, who organized the observations at the 1919 solar eclipse that led to the acceptance of the modification of Newton’s law of gravitation proposed by Einstein.

What does it mean for the Church to be in the world? In this paper, I propose that it means for the Church to be sacred, i.e., all Catholics are called to live sacredly. How is the sacred defined? To answer this question, I look to the American artist, John La Farge (1835-1910), whose works are currently being displayed at Boston College's McMullen Museum. The exhibition examines La Farge's "lifelong efforts to visualize the sacred." Given this, I offer a theological reflection on La Farge's painting of the Wise Virgin in order to elucidate what it means to live sacredly: being in tension between the transcendent and the imminent. In other words, to live sacredly means to be attentive, patient, and faithful to the ultimate coming of God's kingdom, yet also to be present, patient, and concerned with the practical worldly challenges of today. This sacredness begins to manifest God's love and kingdom on Earth even if there is still a longing for God’s full glory which is not yet present. This is how the Church is to be in the world. The Church should be attentive to the numerous challenges on Earth while remembering her ultimate end is union with God in Heaven. To forget this latter point would make the Church a mere NGO detached from God while to forget the former would make the Church an arthritic institution detached from those who suffer. Therefore, all Catholics are called to live in the tension between the transcendent and the imminent.

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. “文如其人”是中國古代文論中涉及“人———言／文”關係之一大命題，其假定了“言／文”爲“人”心之外發外現，因而兩者之間理應若合符契。進入二十世紀後，隨著西方文學觀念的東漸，“文如其人”屢被用作轉譯或比附於法國布封的名言Le style, c’est l’homme（風格即人），並與當時流行的西方自然主義理論相結合，在現代文學批評的語境下持續發揮影響力。而這一傳統文論話語在經歷中西對接的意義轉化後，又爲李長之創造性地借用，他汲取了狄爾泰的“體驗”論和洪堡特的語言觀，重新省思中國古代“文如其人”的觀念傳統，並摶成其獨具特色的“傳記批評”之理論基礎。緣此，對“文如其人”此一古今中西對接演繹過程之勾勒梳理，允爲考察古代文論在西學東漸潮流下的傳承和轉化之絕佳案例。 The belief that “writing reflects the author’s personality” (wen ru qiren 文如其人) was a major theory in traditional Chinese literary criticism concerning the relationship between Man and Word/Text. It presumed that Word/Text is a manifestation of the author’s thought; therefore, the two should perfectly correspond with each other. Since the beginning of the 20th century, with the introduction of Western literary theories into China, wen ru qiren has frequently become a rendering or counterpart of the famous saying “le style, c’est l’homme” by Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon (1709-1788). It was also combined with the then-popular Western Naturalism theory and exerted continuous influence within the context of modern literary criticism. This traditional literary discourse underwent conversions of meaning as a result of its interactions with Western theories before Li Changzhi (1910-1978) borrowed it for his own creative use. Li drew upon Wilhelm Dilthey’s (1833-1911) philosophical theory on “Erlebnis” and Wilhelm von Humboldt’s (1767-1835) philosophy of language, reevaluated the traditional Chinese concept of wen ru qiren, and thereby molded these Western and Chinese theories into the theoretical basis of his unique “critique of biographies.” For this reason, the investigation of the process through which wen ru qiren evolved by connecting a traditional Chinese concept with modern Western theories makes a perfect case study for examining the inherence and conversion of traditional literary theory during the era when Western knowledge was introduced to China.