Appendix 



It is unfortunate that I was unable to include in this revision the 

 recent work on the Australian Acroceridae by Paramonov (1957). I 

 was, however, able to include his new species in the list of world species 

 on page 316, although I did not include his synonymical findings. 

 A brief review of his work follows. 



Paramonov recognized 4 genera, 29 species, and 1 variety of Austral- 

 ian acrocerids. Of these, 11 species and 1 variety were described as 

 new. The genus Ogcodes (as Oncodes) comprised more than one-half 

 of the article and included a key which distinguished 18 of the 22 

 recognized species. Altogether, 10 new species of Ogcodes were de- 

 scribed: armstrongi (9) waterhousei (9), wilsoni (d*), deserticola (cf), 

 pusillus (cf), tenuipes (cf), hirtifrons (cf9), canherranus (cf), glom- 

 erosus (cf) and lucidus (cf). Judging from Paramonov's descriptions 

 it seems probable that these new species belong to the following species 

 groups as set forth earlier in my revision. In the pallidipennis group 

 are armstrongi, waterhousei, pusillus, deserticolu, and wilsoni. In the 

 colei group are tenuipes, canherranus, glomerosus, and lucidus. The 

 other new species, hirtifrons, very probably belongs to the new sub- 

 genus Protogcodes, which was described above from New Zealand. 

 Also on the basis of Paramonov's paper it seems probable that victo- 

 riensis Brunetti, insignis Brunetti, and variegatus Brunetti belong in 

 the pallidipennis group, and that tasmanica Westwood, ignava West- 

 wood, Havescens White, and fratellus Brunetti (all of which Paramonov 

 believed were sjmonyms of jortnumi Westwood) belong in the colei 

 group. The positions of nigrinervis Wliite, doddi Wandolleck, casta- 

 neus Brunetti, nnd fumatus Froggatt remain unknown. 



For the most part Paramonov's descriptions are quite adequate; 

 however, in several instances mention was made of the difficulty in 

 finding structural dift'erences between the species. For example, he 

 described wilsoni and deserticola (both cf cf) as new species closely 

 related to insignis Brunetti, and stated under the latter (p. 538) that 

 both of them were "extremely closely related to insignis and probably 

 belong to it." Although certain color differences were noted, here is a 

 case where an examination of the genitalia would very probably have 

 solved the problem of specificity. Other than color, no mention was 

 made for any species in regard to the male genitalia. 



I have been able to examine three of Paramonov's species, all repre- 

 sented by type material: armstrongi (9 only), deserticola (cf only), 



321 



