Identification, Images, & Information
For Insects, Spiders & Their Kin
For the United States & Canada
Taxonomy and biology of the Nearctic species of Homoneura (Diptera: Lauxaniidae) I. Subgenera Mallochomyza and Tarsohomoneura
By Miller R.M.
Iowa State Journal of Research 52(1): 147-176, 1977
Cite: 1026175 with citation markup [cite:1026175]

the PhD thesis
these papers are based on is available here

Freely available from Iowa State University Digital Repository
Miller's paper cited above appears on pp. 147-176 of the PDF available at this portal page from the Iowa State University Digital Repository.

Additionally, as mentioned in Steve Scholnick's comment above, Miller's 1976 Ph.D. dissertation, entitled:

    "The taxonomy and biology of the Nearctic species of Homoneura (Diptera; Lauxaniidae)" also available as a 254 page PDF here.

re: PDF
Link is fine but illustrations often so badly reproduced as to be useless, as on p. 199.

Plates I-V (Figs 1-42) reproduced well on pp. 172-176 in...
...the reproduction of the published paper version in the PDF at my first link above (i.e. here). It appears those 5 plates are the same as the first 5 plates appearing in the dissertation (including pg. 199 there), judging from the identical captions (and what's discernible in the poor reproductions in the PDF for the dissertation in the 2nd link I gave above). Unfortunately the other plates (VI-XX) don't appear in the well-reproduced PDF of the published paper.

Nevertheless, I see your point...scanned copies of photos & figures from old papers are often frustratingly blurred or entirely darkened in reproductions. I've even seen copies of original printed papers with surprisingly poor photo reproductions (but not as bad as the pg. 199 you referred to). Such subpar work would never have made it out the door of my grandfather's old-fashion print shop—he was an absolute stickler for checking and guaranteeing the quality of anything he sent out ;-).

re: illustrations
Thanks--I didn't realize that the first five plates appeared in the link to the journal issue--they are more than adequate. But whoever did the photocopy of the typed original (University Microfilms, Ann Arbor) was obviously not invested in a good result. Am sorry for the author's sake. Would Iowa State redo it on request?