Sept.,1907] Knab : Deinocerites again. 121 



notum rather narrow, elongate, with a group of set;^ near the apex. Postscutellum 

 clothed with dull brown scales and with many pale setae, somewhat produced at the 

 middle where there is a double ridge of erect scales. Abdomen long and slender, 

 blunt at the apex, the cerci small, slender and pointed. Vestiture of the abdomen 

 above dull brown, beneath dull yellowish bronze. Wings rather broad, the scales of 

 the veins brown and mostly narrow. Basal cross-vein slightly oblique, more than its 

 own length behind the anterior cross-vein. Knobs of the halteres brown scaled. 

 Legs brownish black, unicolorous. Claws small and simple. 



Length of body, about 5 mm. ; of wing, 4 mm. 



Male : Very similar to the female. The antennK even longer ; the third seg- 

 ment hardly shorter than the second, the fourth but little shorter than the third ; 

 terminal segments much shortened. Palpi slender, about equal to those of the female 

 in length. Abdomen subcylindrical, slightly expanded at the apex and with large 

 very stout claspers. All the claws simple, those of the front and middle legs very 

 long, those of the hind legs small. 



Length of body, 4 mm. ; of wing, 4 mm. 



Locality. — Port Limon, Costa Rica (2 9 9, i cf, F. Knab). 



Type. — No. 10291, U. S. National Museum. 



This mosquito has a deceptive resemblance to Deinocerites cancer 

 Theob. and like it occurs in crab-holes. My remarks in Psyche, xiii, 

 p. 95, on the occurrence of Deinocerites cancer at Port Limon apply 

 to this species. At the time the article was written the specimens in 

 question were in the hands of Mr. Coquillett and were not accessible 

 for study. 



DEINOCERITES AGAIN. 



Bv Frederick Knab, 

 Washington, D. C. 



In Psyche for February, 1907, Miss Evelyn G. Mitchell, attempts 

 to defend the subfamily Deinoceritinte, erected by her in Psyche, xiii, 

 1906, pp. 1 1-2 1. The last article is so pretentious in character and 

 presents such a mixture of ideas that it calls for some criticism. 



I will first take up the larval characters of Deinocerites which are 

 made use of by Miss Mitchell. While in her original article it is not 

 directly stated that the " groove " is a unique structure, one is led to 

 infer from her statements that this was her belief. What I asserted in 

 my article on Deinocerites, Psyche, xiii, pp. 96-97, and still maintain, 

 is that a mere matter of difference in size and shape of the structure in 

 question can have no great systematic value. The '^angulation'' of 



