Some Ectoparasites in the South African Museum. 307 



(Procellana mollis], where the host may be expected to harbour 

 regularly more than one Lipenrus form, it would be rash to quote 

 Budow's authority. The final appeal must doubtless be to the type, 

 but one is supposing for the nonce that this is impracticable. We 

 briefly state our reasons for retaining " acutifrons." 



1. There appears to be great variety in the series of Lipeurus 

 infesting cormorants, duikers, etc. It seems reasonable to expect 

 that each host species has a fairly constant parasite in attendance. 

 " Straggling " may of course occur, but we have examined several 

 cormorants (P. carbo) and an immense number of shags (P. 

 graculus) without finding their Lipeurus species mixed. 



2. This material is from the same host as " acutifrons." 



3. The clypeus of these 5 examples is angled more sharply than 

 in other species we have seen. This may well have suggested the 

 name. 



4. Unless we use " acutifrons " the synonymy of the group will 

 be further burdened. Dr. Peringuey's gatherings correspond very 

 closely to the species Piaget figures as gyricornis, Denny. At 

 first we were inclined to quote them as " gyricornis, var.," but on 

 going into the matter we are far from being satisfied that Piaget was 

 right in identifying his material from Sula australis (Museum de 

 Leide) with Denny's species. Piaget remarks (Les Pediculines, 

 pp. 338-339) : " Denny a rencontre un male sur une Sterna hirundo ; 

 malgre ce qu'il y a d'incomplet dans sa description, je n'hesite pas a 

 adopter le nom qu'il a choisi pour 1'espece qui vient d'etre carac- 

 teris^e." The grounds for this confidence seem slender indeed. 

 Nor is it certain that Sula australis is the genuine host of the insect 

 Piaget had under consideration. His figure indicates a true 

 Phalacrocorax parasite. If Piaget, then, had not the real " gyricornis, 

 D," before him, and if "acutifrons" is rejected, we should have 

 possibly two unnamed species to deal with. Are we to erect two 

 new names because of this uncertainty ? It seems better to adopt 

 Budow's designation for the Lipeurus of Phalacrocorax capensis, and 

 to leave unsettled the identity of Piaget 's insect, which may be a var. 

 of acutifrons or a good species. 



LIPEURUS APER, Kellogg (1908). 

 L. afcr, Kellogg, Besults Sjostedts Kiliinandjaro-meru Expedition 



15 : 4. Mallophaga, p. 47, pi. vii. fig. 5, Upsala (1908). 

 6 $ $ , 27 ? 5 , 7 imm. Phalacrocorax africanus. Table Bay, 1913. 



In 1880 Piaget (Les Pediculines, p. 337) arbitrarily set aside 

 Denny's name brevicornis, given (Monogr. Anopl. Brit. p. 181, 



