302 



E. BrunETTI : Catalogue of Oriental Culicidae. [VOL. I, 



There is, however, another town and state of the same name, in 

 the Rajputana District of N.-W. India, but this latter place is 

 usually spelt Jaipur. 



N.B. — In Mr. Theobald's Monograph, the following data 

 appear, attached to a number of species : " Perak (Wray), 22nd 

 November 1899 and 21st December 1899. " As it is not obvious 

 whether the dates refer to two separate days only, or are intended 

 to include the intervening period between them, I have omitted 

 them from my catalogue. 



It will be seen that I have admitted four sub-families only, — 

 AnophelincB, Culicincs, MdeoniyincB , and Corethrince^ — and I am 

 strongly inclined to the opinion that the first two would be in every 

 way sufficient. It has not been considered necessary to include 

 every reference known, and cases where simply the name of a 

 species is mentioned, have always been avoided. It has, however, 

 been my object to include all possible diagrams or plates, and to 

 give all the dates and localities available. 



I desire to express my obligations to Dr. Annandale of the 

 Indian Museum for his permission to use the Museum I^ibrary, 

 without which the compilation of this catalogue would have been 

 impossible. 



CATALOGUE. 

 Sub. Fam. ANOPHELIN^. 



ANOPHELES Meig., 1818. (sensu strictu) 



Sys. Besch., i, 10 ; pi. x, 5, 6. 



Macq. 1834, Hist. Nat. Dip., i, 32. 



Wlk. 1848, List Dip. Brit. Mus., i, 9. 



Sch. 1864, F. Austr., ii, 624. 



Wulp 1877, Dip. Neer., 329. 



Skuse 1889, Pr. Linn. So., N.S. Wales, p. 175 1 



Ficalbi 1896, Bull. So. Ent. It., 221. 



Theob. 1901, Mon. Culic, i, 115 (sensu latu). 



Id. 1903, Loc. cit., iii, 11 (sensu stricto). 



Giles 1902, Handbk., 2nd Ed., 283 (as restricted by 



Theobald) ; table of spp. p. 289. 



Theob. 1902, Proc. Roy. So. Lond., Ixix, 368 ; table 



of Indian spp. 



Theob. 1905, Gen. Ins. Fasc. 26, p. 6. 



Giles in '' Handbook," 2nd Ed., 283, gives as a reference of 

 " Anopheles as restricted by Theobald," Theob. Mon. Culic, i, 

 115 ; but this is incorrect. That reference is of the genus in its 

 wide (Meigen's) sense ; as Theobald had not created his other genera 

 till 1902. All the Anopheles in the first volume of the Monograph 

 are placed under ''Anopheles'' genus. Theobald's first reference 

 in that work to the restricted genus is in vol. iii, p. 11. Most of 

 the new genera were published in the " Jour. Trop. Med." (1902), 

 vol. v. 



