( 51 ) 



therefore obvious that the nncertainty in the application of names is frequently 

 due to the names not being made monotypical in eacli case. It is, however, 

 interesting to note that Kolenati, although he made so many types, evidently 

 took his descriptions in most instances from a single specimen. In the case of 

 the bat-fleas, which alone are treated of in tliis paper, a considerable variation 

 obtains in the number of spines in the combs. Kolenati, on the contrary, describes 

 the combs as containing always one certain number of spines. The hosts that 

 lie gives for the various bat-fleas appear to clearly demonstrate that Kolenati 

 had before him, however, specimens belonging to various species in which the 

 combs are very diS'erent. All the specimens in Kolenati's collection contained 

 in the Paris, Berlin, and British Museums prove the statements made above to 

 be correct. The observation repeated in several of Kolenati's papers that the 

 live-combed bat-flea has only two spines instead of four at the anterior corner 

 of the head on the two sides taken together, was doubtless the result of the 

 e.xamination of a single specimen in which one of the spines was broken off, and 

 again points to the fact that Kolenati did not test by the e.Kamination of a series 

 of specimens the constancy of the speciflc characters which he mentions. There 

 is another point which we think should be borne in mind when considering the 

 reliability of Kolenati's descriptions, a point which conclusively proves that his 

 statements should not be taken too literally. In Parasiteii dcr Chiropteni 

 Briiun, LSoO*, p. 32, Kolenati says that the siiuirrel flea, Ceratopsi/llas sciuri, is 

 " monoctenus," which statement one must interpret as referring to the flea 

 usually found on the squirrel. In another paper, Wien. Ent. Mon. 1857, p. 65, 

 he states, when referring to the same flea, that it chiefly occurs on Rhinolophus 

 fi-ii-nm-equinum. In 1860, in the MoiKxjr. Europ. Ckiropt., the species is 

 mentioned amongst the i)arasites of the same bat, with the qualification " probably 

 acquired"; and finally, in 1862, in the Hot: Soc. Ent. Ross., the squirrel is given 

 as the host, Kolenati adding, " I also found it once on Rhinolophus ferriim- 

 equinum Daubenton." The species in question we refer to again later in the 

 present paper. 



The figures published by Kolenati, rough as they are, prove to be of great 

 help in the application of the names. In his paper of 1856, Die Parasiten der 

 Chiroptern, Kolenati describes the bat-fleas under the generic name of Cerato- 

 psi/Uus Curtis. This name, however, is not restricted by him to the bat-fleas, but 

 embraces all the fleas which have one or more dorsal combs, with the exception 

 of those species which also have a genal comb. These latter he separates in 1856 

 in the paper mentioned under the name of Ctenophtkalmus, mentioning as species 

 which belonged to it musridi, talpae, canis, fdis, etc., and also erinacei. The 

 genus CeratopsyUtis, Kolenati states in a footnote, would be better called 

 CtenopsijUus, from ktew, a comb, as these fleas have combs at the hindmari'in 

 of the pro- and metanotum, and frequently also on some of the abdominal tero-ites. 

 Obviously, therefore, this name, Ctcnopnyllits, is nothing but another name in 

 place of Ccratopsyllus. AVe have, however, in a previous paper f shown that 

 the name Ceratopsi/llus cannot be retained, as it is a synonym of Ceratophyllus 

 (Jurtis (1826), and consequently the genus CtenopsjUus Kolenati (1856) would 

 have to be employed for the bat-fleas, if no older name were available. This 



• The paper \v:is reissued at Dresden in 1857. 



t See KotUscljild, Nod. Zool. xiii. p. 17() (February 1(»0G), ;uk1 Oudemaus, Ent, Bcr'wht, ii. p. 123 

 (September I'JOO). 



