1914- J B. Brunetti : Review of Genera in Culicidae. 33 



by spots and lines of black, white or yellowish scales is a prevailing 

 feature of the genus in Meigen's sense. 



Of over twenty genera proposed since Anopheles, I can only 

 personally recognize four, Chagasia, Cruz, Calvertina, Ludl. 

 Bironella, Theob. and Dactylomyia, Newst. and Cart. 



Two of the latest workers in this group, Col. Alcock and Mr. 

 Edwards, are disposed to return the bulk of the known species to 

 Anophele proper, that is, in Meigen's sense. All the recent 

 genera set up merely on scale characters are utterly untenable and 

 must be abandoned by the systematist. 



Col Alcock shows (Ann. Mag, Nat. Hist. (8) viii, 240, etc.) how 

 many of the so-called genera in the Anophelini grade into one 

 another and concludes "the so called 'genera' of the proposed 

 subfamily ' Anophelinae' cannot be separately focussed as distinct 

 generic conceptions, but must all be merged in a generalization." 



Mr. Edwards (Bull. Ent. Res. iii, 241) observes that the so- 

 called genera ' ' grade imperceptibly into one another and are not 

 founded on any structural differences, while Anopheles in the 

 broad sense is a very well defined genus easily recognizable even 

 by an amateur." 



He deprecates the erection of a number of even subgeneric 

 names as tending to obscure larger relationships and increase the 

 difficulty of determination. " The differences found in the larvae, 

 like those between the adults are very slight, and moreover they 

 do not seem to support the classification by scale characters." 



In an earlier volume (loc. cit, ii, 141) the same author in 

 writing on the West African species of Anopheles agrees with sink- 

 ing most of the recently established genera of Anophelina in 

 Anopheles but provisionally respects Stethoniyia, Chagasia, Calver- 

 tina and BironcUa. 



It is striking that three out of four of his retained genera 

 should be the same as those admitted by me working on quite 

 independent lines. Dadylomyia had not been proposed at the 

 time he wrote. I can also agree with Mr. Edward's remarks on 

 synonymy (I.e., p. 141). 



The differences between the genera admitted here are suffi- 

 ciently shown in the following table : — 



Table of genera in Anophewni. 



A 1st submarginal cell subequal to 



the 2nd posterior cell, both of 



normal length. 



B Antennae without whorls of scales. 



C No shoulder tubercle . . • • Anopheles, Mg. 



CC A finger like tubercle on each 



shoulder .. •• Dady/omyw, Newstead 



and Carter, 

 BB Antennae with whorls of scales 

 (Dense long outstanding scales 

 at sides of thorax) • ■ Chagasia, Cruz. 



