70 F. W. EDWARDS. 



Anopheles immaculatus, Theobald. 



Swellengrebel and Swellengrebel de Graaf have recently suggested (Bull. EntT Res., 

 xi, p. 78, 1920) that this may be an albinoid form of A . vagus, Donitz. An examination 

 of the hypopygium of a male from Java presented to the British Museum by 

 Dr. Swellengrebel supports this possibility, since no tangible differences could be 

 discovered between the hypopygia of the two forms. 



Anopheles leucosphyrus, Donitz. 



Two rather well-marked forms of this species occur : — 



(1) The typical form. Female palpi with the white rings distinct, the last joint 

 white on at least its apical half. Proboscis of normal length, little, if any, longer than 

 the palpi. Dark markings of wings less extensive ; the spots on the first longitudinal 

 vein more broken up. 



(2) Var. hackeri, nov. Female palpi with the white rings very narrow, the last 

 joint white only at the extreme tip. Proboscis unusually long, longer than the palpi 

 by almost, or quite, or even more than, the length of the last two palpal joints. Dark 

 markings of wings more extensive ; the spots on the first longitudinal vein more fused. 



The var. hackeri has recently been noted by Dr. H. P. Hacker (Fed. Malay States, 

 Malaria Bureau Reports, ii, p. 33, 1921). A specimen collected by him and presented 

 to the British Museum is designated as the type ; the Museum collection also contains 

 a number of others from the Malay States, from Dr. Leicester's collection. The 

 distinction in colour between the palpi of the two forms is quite sharp, and in length 

 also it is very striking, but variable. Most specimens of the typical form have the 

 palpi as described, almost, or quite, as long as the proboscis. However, among a small 

 number from Borneo collected by Dr. Roper there is one which has an elongate 

 proboscis like that of the dark form. Probably, therefore, the two forms are not 

 specifically separable. 



Anopheles punctulatus, Donitz. 



This species has recently been discussed by Swellengrebel and Swellengrebel de 

 Graaf (Bull. Ent. Res.,xi, p. 89, 1920), who concluded that it was not specifically 

 distinct from A. tesselatus, Theo., and at the same time described a very similar 

 form under the name Nyssorhynchns annulipes var. mohiccensis. Finding that the 

 description of moluccensis agreed rather closely with my conception of pundulaUis, 

 I wrote to Dr. Swellengrebel, suggesting that the two were the same, and received the 

 following reply : — 



"As to Donitz's ptmctulata, there can be no doubt, judging from the pubhshed 

 photograph, that its proboscis is white on the apical half. Moreover, the black ring 

 near the apex of the second palpal joint is very narrow. This induced me to separate 

 moluccensis from it, and I still think that the specimen from which the photograph 

 was taken (probably the type) is a tesselata. As a general rule I believe it is well, from 

 a practical point of view, to separate these allied forms, if, at least, a separation is 

 practicable ; some of them may prove to be good carriers and others not {rossii and 

 hidloiai !)." 



After a close study of the literature and the British Museum collections, somewhat 

 different conclusions seem to be indicated from those arrived at by Dr. Swellengrebel. 



All the specimens in the Museum series of A. punctulatus prove to be practically 

 identical with moluccensis in palpal markings, and most of them also agree in having 

 the proboscis entirely black. One or two, however, including a specimen determined 

 by Donitz and coming from his type locality (Stephansort), show a pale area on the 

 underside of the proboscis towards the tip. The colour of the proboscis cannot, 

 therefore, always be used to separate moluccensis from tesselatus. I cannot agree 



