184 [January, 



figure (cj) well shows the inequality in the two rows of costal 

 areoles, but the markings o£ the thorax and wings are very in- 

 differently indicated. 



Finally as to figures : that by Savigny (Descript. de I'Egypte, 

 Neuropt., pl. iii) indicates a ? Acanthaclisis that should be occitanica 

 according to the costal areoles and the labial palpi, but the markings 

 on the pronotum very badly I'epresent those in that species. Therefore 

 I consider there is just a little doubt as to the species intended, a 

 doubt that would not exist had Savigny been a less faithful follower 

 of Nature in his usually admirable figures. 



Some minor points (chiefly alluded to by Eambur) have not been 

 here considered in my endeavours to elucidate the chief distinctive 

 characters of A. occitanica and A. hcetica ; a difference in the form of 

 the tibial spurs is the most important. 



Hagen (Stett. Zeit., 1866, p. 289) alludes to an Acanthaclisis from 

 Japan (A.japoniea, Hag., McLach., Tr. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1875, p. 174) 

 as perhaps only a variety of A. hcetica. Undoubtedly it is nearer 

 hcdtica than occitanica in the costal areoles, appendages of ^ , &c., but 

 the markings of the pronotum, &c., are sufiiciently distinct, and, if I 

 mistake not, the labial palpi more nearly approach those of occitanica 

 in form. My materials for this species are not sufiicient, nor in abso- 

 lutely good condition. 



Lewisham, London : 



December, 1883. 



Concerning Tomateres pardalis, F., and T. clavicornis, Latr., two very closely 

 allied species of exotic MyrmeleonidcB. — In 1781, Fabricius described (Spec. Insect., 

 i, p. 398) a pretty ant-lion from " Coromandel," under the name of Myrmeleon par- 

 dalis, in Banks' collection (the original type exists, and is in the British Museum) ; 

 this species was subsequently described by Walker in 1853, as M. compositus. In 

 1830, Latreille figm-ed (Cuvier's Kegne Animal, iii, p. 438, pl. xix, fig. 4), a species 

 from Senegal as the " Fourmillon clavicorne." In 1866, Hagen formed for these 

 (and some others) the genus Tomateres, on account of the form of the club of the 

 antennte. 



The Indian T. pardalis was tolerably common in collections, but the Senegal 

 T. clavicornis remained almost unknown, and even Eambur (1842) could only give 

 a description after the original notes and figure ; the relationship with T. pardalis 

 was evidently very close. A few years ago numerous examples of a Tomateres 

 (excessively like pardalis) arrived in this country from Abyssinia ; on account of 

 the rather wide dii?erence in locality, I hesitated to consider them identical with 

 clavicornis, and regarded them rather as a slight variety of pardalis. By a lucky 

 chance, I found, two years ago, in one of M. E. DeyroUe's boxes at Paris, an un- 



