88 Records of the Indian Museum. [Vol. XVII, 



CULICIDAE. 



The subdivision and arrangement of genera and species in this 

 family ha? been a source of much difficulty. In the Anophelini 

 there has been no hesitation in referring the bulk of the species to 

 A nophdes itself, as is now done by most recent writers, the only 

 other groups accorded generic rank here being Calvcrlina and Biro- 

 nella. Chagasia, a non-oriental genus, was the only other one re- 

 garded as valid in the Anophelini in my " Critical Review." The 

 classification, however, of the rest of the Culicinae is still in a very 

 transitory state, and some attempt has been made to meet the 

 views of others. A ce.tain rumler of the recently established 

 genera are evidently valid, others appear entitled to subgeneric 

 rank, whilst the remainder must be regarded as of indefinite taxo- 

 nomic value at present. \Mien a genus with all its species has been 

 bodily sunk in another by Mr. Edwards, the synonymy has been 

 at once accepted, as the sooner invalid generic names are perma- 

 nently sheh-ed the better. No doubt a good manj' other genera 

 will be weeded out as synonymous when the oriental species have 

 been thoroughly overhauled by systematists. 



In the present catalogue the subfamily Culicinae is divided 

 merely into Anophelini and CuUcini, as though the group Megar- 

 hiiii is apparently distinct enough, it is more than can be said for 

 the groups or sections dominated by such genera as Acdcs, Culex, 

 Sabethes, etc., so that while the juggling of genera and higher 

 groups still continues even amongst those best fitted to dictate,' no 

 harm will be done bj' lumping them all together under the general 

 term Culicini without assigning it any definite taxonomic value. 



The accidental omission of the heading " Subfamily Megar- 

 hininac " in both my Catalogue of Culicidae and the vSupplement 

 gave the impression that the genera concerned were to be considered 

 Anophelines, which of course was never intended. 



Theobald's sequence of genera has been mainh' followed be- 

 cause that author's work is known to all students in this family, 

 and also because of personal inability to dogmatise. 



As regards specific synonymity it has frequently been a case 

 of " when doctors disagree ' ' both metaphorically and actually, 

 and in such instances I have usually followed the latest writer, or 

 whichever has had any purely entomological support 



The wholesale overthrowing of a large proportion of the re- 

 cently manufactured genera and species was early foretold by other 

 systematists as well as by me, and the truth of the prophecy is 

 visible in their continual reduction in almost every paper now 

 published. It is to be hoped that the new species erected now- 

 adays will prove to be founded on more reliable characters. 



As regards location of tj^pes in this family considerable diffi- 

 'culty has been experienced. Respecting L,eicester's species, Mr. 



' ThL-ie are. for instance several genera which .Mr. Edward-; regards as ano- 

 ni.tlous. 



