EWING'S PROTURAN SPECIES — BONET AND TUXEN 299 



long 6 4 show the identity with barberi. Jn tho chaetotaxy the only 

 difference from the scheme given for barberi is that only 2 setae are 

 found in the posterior row of s I, but this variation was also found in 

 specimens of barberi. 



The only other difference is found in the shape of the comb of abd. 

 Y!II (fig. 84). The innermost pari is separated as a small lobe with 

 4-5 very small teeth. We have never seen this feature before in any 

 acerentomid and cannot say if it is an individual variation, which we 

 think most probable, or a specific character. It was found in both 

 specimens examined. 



The specimen taken in copula has a distended copulatory apparatus, 

 which we have drawn (fig. 85), as it shows the shape and chaetota.\\ of 

 this organ very distinctly. 



Thus we conclude that Acerentulus oculatus Ewing is synonymous 

 with A. barberi Ewing, the latter name having priority. 



Acerentulus bicolor Ewing 



Figure 86 



Acerentitloides bicolor Ewing, 1921b, p. 199. 

 Acerentulus bicolor Ewing, 1940, p. 543. 



Four slides are present in the series of this species, but two of 

 them (from Florida) are Acerentulus floridanus Ewing. The holotype 

 of bicolor is labeled, Takoma Park, Maryland, in decaying leaves and 

 twigs, April 10, 1921, II. E. Ewing collector. It is a male preimago. 

 The paratype, with the same label but only dated 1921, is a maturus 

 junior. We have examined these two specimens. 



Tho foretarsus is exactly like that of Acerentulus americanu s, except 

 that in the holotype b is a little longer than c; in americanus the oppo- 

 site is the case. The chaetotaxy, abdominal comb, and filamento di 

 sostegno are all alike. 



Womersley in 1927 abandoned the genus Acerentuloides as based on 

 immature specimens. Ewing in 1936 kept the genus, saying that it 

 was based on a female, but abandoned it in 1940 as based upon 

 variable characters. In fact the holotype is not a female, but a 

 preimaginal male (fig. 86), a mistake which even Berlese made 

 {Acerentulus cephalotes, see Tuxen, 1956a, p. 234). 



Unfortunately Bonet did not give the setae in his drawing of the 

 squama genitalis, and Tuxen forgot to correct this when in Washington. 



It is therefore concluded that not only the genus Acerentuloides 

 should be abandoned, but also the specific name bicolor Ewing, due 

 to the following synonymy : Acerentuloides bicolor Ytv;'mg= Acerentulus 

 americanus (Ewing). 



