ACARI 565 



of L. simplex are of tlie typical Parasitus sliape, while in our 

 species they bear a strong resemblance to the Laelaps-typo. 



Amongst the Parasitinae there is, however, one genus which 

 greatly resembles our species, viz. Euryparasitus Oudms. 

 In that genus there is an anterior and a posterior dorsal shield ; 

 the 9 epigynial shield is rounded anteriorly ; no distinct 

 metasternal shields exist, as they are coalesced with the ster- 

 nal shield ; an the epistoma is triangular. Euryparasitus is, 

 however, too singular and aberrant in the sliape of its cf man- 

 dibles and a legs II to aUow o any idea of referring our spe- 

 cies to it. 



The endeavour to find a place for our species amongst the 

 Parasitinae having so far proved futile, we proceed to the 

 Laelaptinae. In that sub-family there is one genus in which the 

 cT legs II bear processi, viz. Pseudoparasitus Oudms (1) ( = 

 Hoplolaelaps Berl.). 



la Pseudoparasitus, however, the Q anal shield is not fused 

 with the ventral one, and the dorsal shield is single. 



Consequently, it becomes evidently necessary to establish 

 a new genus for the présent for m, which I propose to call Pro- 

 tolaelaps, because I consider it a genus with sonie primitive 

 characteristics, which place it together with some other gênera 

 close to the point where the Parasitinae and Laelaptinae 

 originate. 



DIAGNOSIS. 



Two dorsal shields. Epistoma triangular, pointed. Maie 

 sterniti-metasternal shield separated from ventri-anal 

 one. Female epigynial shield anteriorly rounded, separated 

 from the large ventri-anal shield. Metasternal shields 

 in both sexes fused with sternal shield. Maie legs II with 

 calcar femoralis. Ambulacres I without empodia. Maie 



(1) OUDEMAXS refers Pseudoparasitus to the Parasitinae only on account of the présence of- 

 processi on cf legs II. This is, however, going too far, and attachiug too great importance to a 

 single characteristic. The d' legs II hâve processi of a type cjuite différent from that of tlie Parw 

 sitinae, a.nd tlie cT chela mandibuli is of the Lae laptinc- ty po. Berif.se is therefore uudoubt* 

 edly justified in referring the geuua to the Laelaptinae. 



