CLASSIFICATION OF THE MOSQUITOES 241 



(6) UNKECOGNIZBD SPECIES. 



The following species which have been credited to our country 

 have not been recognized with certainty ; some of them probably 

 do not belong to the present genus, while a few were evidently 

 founded on badly rubbed specimens in which the distinctive 

 characters were therefore wanting : 



annulimanus v. d. Wulp. I strongly suspect that this does 

 not belong to the present genus ; the description applies fairly 

 well to the male of Ciilex consohrinus Desv. 



ferruginosus Wied. This name was proposed for the species 

 previously described by Say under the name of Culex quinque- 

 fasciatus, but the description differs so decidedly from the one 

 published by Say as to give the impression that it is founded on 

 a different species. I strongly suspect that the type of ferrugi- 

 nosus is a rubbed example of Anopheles crucians, which was de- 

 scribed from the same locality. Say's description of his Culex 

 qui nquefasciatus agrees very well with the species which I have 

 identified as Culex impiger Walker. 



macuUpennis Meigen. According to Theobald this European 

 form is identical with our Anopheles quadrimaculatus Say. 



nigripes Staeger. This European species should be readily 

 recognized by its unspotted wings. 



alhimantis Wied. Differs from our other species by the snow- 

 white apices of the tarsi. 



pictus Loew. Is evidently closely related to crucians Wied. 



Our recognized species of Anopheles and their synonyms may 

 therefore be listed as follows, the synonyms indented : 



argyritarsis Desv. maculipennis Meigen. 



crucians Wied. quadrimaculatus Say. 



? ferruginosus Wied. punctipennis Say, 



hiemaUs Fitch. 



