o4 Major Parry’s Catalogue 
CLADoGNATHUS SENEGALENSIS, Klug. 
Lucanus Senegalensis ¢, Klug, Erm. Reis. Atl. 38, 103. 
Dr. Burmeister in his Handbuch der Entomologie, v. 371, 
gives this insect as synonymous with Zwcanus Antdlopus ¢, 
Swederus (Act. Holm. 1787, iii. 186, tab. viii. fig. 3); in this 
I do not feel disposed to agree, since Swederus describes the 
prothorax of his species as “ lateribus subrotundatis,” and figures 
the four posterior tibiae as being unarmed—characters quite at 
variance with the true Lucanus Senegalensis of Dr. Klug, a spe- 
cimen of which from my own collection I have recently compared 
with the typical insect in the Berlin Museum. ‘This species is 
readily distinguished in having the posterior angle of the pro- 
thorax strongly emarginate, as well as the anterior angle of this 
emargination being armed with a small acute spine ; hence Mons. 
Gory applied the specific epithet of bispinosus to the female 
(according to a specimen so ticketed in the Oxford Museum). 
The mandibles are nearly straight in all their different developments, 
and the four posterior tibia are armed each with a single spine. 
As regards the veritable Z. Antilopus of Swederus, I am inclined, 
from the description as well as from the figure, to refer it to 
Lucanus quadridens, Hope (var. minor), with which it agrees in 
the form of the mandibles (representing evidently those of an 
undeveloped male, and characterized as such by the description 
*‘mandibulis capite vix longioribus’”), in the posterior angles of 
the thorax being rounded, and in the absence of the spines from 
the four posterior tibie; although I must remark that in fully 
developed individuals a minute tubercle is occasionally seen on 
the intermediate tibia. These spines or tubercles on the tibiz, 
however, are, as I have already had occasion to state, most 
capricious, depending considerably, as to their size, and even for 
their very existence, on the maturity of growth the insect may 
arrive at, and can in no way be relied upon either specifically or 
generically. 
In respect to the L. Antilopus, Burm., Hand. der Ent. v. 371, 
this insect may possibly be identical with Z. Senegalensis, Klug, 
but as no mention is made of the posterior angles of the prothorax 
being rounded or emarginate, or of the existence or non-existence 
of the spine alluded to by Dr. Klug, it is difficult to fix exactly 
the species to which it ought to be referred. If identical with 
Senegalensis, Klug, it certainly is not the Antilopus of Swederus; 
and should it bea more fully developed specimen of Antilopus, Swed., 
(as the mandibles are described as being as long as the head and 
