S. Mahunka szerk.: Folia Entomologica Hungarica 63. (Budapest, 2002)

1996. V. 18-19; 2 males: Verőcemaros, Keskenybükki-p. v., 1990. VI. 16; 1 female: Kőszegi TK: Kőszeg, Hármas-p. fölött és mellett, 2001. 06. 27. - Based on its original description and the key given by Disney & Beuk (1997) it is rather easy to identify the female sex. Male hypandrial lobes (Figs 3-4) although seem different from those of Ph. berolinensis (Figs 1-2) and of Ph. delageae (Figs 5-6), it is necessary to position them correctly in order to see the existing differences. Phalacrotophora delagae Disney, 1979 - 1 male: Abaújlak: Szanticska, tölgyes, erdei út, [20]00. 05. 15-18; 1 male: Csévharaszt, 1983. V. 12, leg. Rónaszékiné. - New to Hungary. Phalacrotophora fasciata (Fallén, 1823) - 1 male, 1 female: Budapest, Pestszentlőrinc, Péterhalmi-erdő, nyár- és juharfa sebéről, 2001. máj. 20; 1 female: Zempléni TK: Regéc, Ördög-v., Malaise-csapda patak mellett, 2001. június 14, leg. Papp L. and Szappanos A. Other 8 males and 27 females from ANP: Jósvafő, Szalonna (Bódva), Duna-Ipoly NP: Szendehely (Aranyos-kút), HNP: Püspökladány (Ágota-puszta); Újszentmargita, Mocsa, Tarany, Tihany, from June 9 to August 29. It was reported as new for Hungary by Schmitz (1953: 206, as Phalacroptophora, A56) from Pomáz but it was not listed in the Palaearctic Catalogue (Disney 1991) as for Hungary. Phalacrotophora spectabilis Schmitz, 1925 - This species was described based on two females from "Nagysalló, Com. Bars (Ungarn), 13. V. 1922, Dudich leg." from the HNHM material. Later citations published by Schmitz (1928: 146, 1941a: 35, both as "U", 1953: 206, "Ungarn") are not more than repetitions of the original specimens, which also perished in 1956. Although Disney (1991) and we (Ádám & Papp 1996, 2001) listed it as a member of the Hungarian fauna, we cannot exclude that there has not been any specimen captured within the present borders of Hungary. Phora Latreille, 1796 Although only a minor part of our specimens selected as Phora spp. in the HNHM was actually identified during this project, I found six of the nine species, which Pater Schmitz reported from Hungary. Those three species are with data of the first records from our country: Ph. dubia (Zetterstedt, 1848) (Schmitz 1928: 146, as Ph. schineri (Becker, 1901)), Ph. horrida Schmitz, 1920 and Ph. stictica Meigen, 1830 (both Schmitz 1928: 146). As we listed in our Checklist (Ádám & Papp 2001), several other species are expected to occur in our country, namely Ph. adducta Schmitz, 1955, Ph. artifrons Schmitz, 1920, Ph. bullata Schmitz, 1927, Ph. convallium Schmitz, 1928, Ph. couver gens Schmitz, 1920, Ph. hyperborea Schmitz, 1927, Ph. indivisa Schmitz, 1948, Ph. obscura (Zetterstedt, 1848), Ph. penicillata Schmitz, 1920, Ph. pubipes Schmitz, 1920. Phora atra (Meigen, 1804) - 3 males: Budapest, Pestszentlőrinc, Halmi-erdő, tölgyes, avarszint, 2000.04. 29-30; 1 male: Kőszegi TK: Kőszeg, Hármas-patak fölött és mellett, 2000. július 24; 3 males: Szokolya, Les-völgyi patak fölött és mellett, 2000. április 24; 1 maie: Gagyvendégi, akácos széle, 2000. 05. 16; 2 males: Abaújlak, Szanticska, tölgyes, erdei út, 00. 05. 15-18. - Thalhammer'

s (1900: 36) record as Trineura aterrima (Fabricius, 1794) is highly questionable; the first reliable data are from Schmitz (1924: 81, as Ph. aterrima (Fabricius, 1794). Phora ed enta ta Schmitz, 1920 - 2 males: Budapest, Pestszentlőrinc, Halmi-erdő, tölgyes, avarszint/virágokról, 2000. május 7./07. 12-13; 1 male: Kőszegi TK: Kőszeg, Hármas-patak fölött és