DISEASE RELATIONS 

 Unstudied . 



RH-IARKS 



Schulze (1944, p. 410) mentioned this species in a stiidy of 

 tick integument. 



Zumpt (l9/t2B,195ClA) considered R. long us to be a West and 

 Central African subspecies of R. capensis but has stated mare 

 recently (1950 correspondence )'~that, after having received addi- 

 tional material from Mozambique and Nyasaland, he has come to 

 regard each as a separate species. 



Santos Dias (1953D) confused R. longus and R. simus senega - 

 lensis and, in so doing described Tor the latter'yet another 

 species, obviously synonymous, R. pseudolongus . In an effort to 

 determine his ideas concerning This specxes, we sent him (1954) 

 Sudan specimens consisting of numerous R . simus senegalensis 

 which were returned marked as R. longus T ajid all ny nvmlgblft 

 R. longus , which were returnecfas R. capensis pseudolongus . 



R. longus is closely related to R. capensis , as already noted. 

 Zumpt" (1942B , 1950A) stated that the r'ange of "R. capensis c apensis " 

 includes the Sudan. This is most probably in error. ~ 



R. simus senegalensis males are mostly readily separated from 

 those~of R. longus, but individuals of the former species that 



have exceptionally heavy interstitial or secondary punctation may 

 moment ai'ily be confused withR. longus . Turning such a specimen 

 obliquely to the source of the light will reveal the typical ar- 

 rangement of larger posterior punctations as described for R. 

 simus senegalensis (cf . page 759) among the smaller, more super- 

 ficial, secondary punctations, a characteristic not associated 

 with R, longus . Both species may occur on the same host. 



IDENTIFiCATICN 



Male ; This is a fairly large, robust tick (up to 6.0 mm. 

 long and 3.5 rm. wide), usually jet black in color (smaller spec- 



- 667- 



