Cteniform Spiders of Ceylon, Burmah, &e. 337 
comparison of the types. I have to thank Dr. van Hasselt 
for information concerning the type and other important notes. 
dg ad. Hab. Sumatra. 
1895. COtenus barbatus, Thor. @ juv., 85 mm. Spid. 
Burma, p. 214. Kyeikpadem (Pegu), Burmah (Oates). 
Of this immature form ‘Thorell remarks, “ Femina nondum 
adulta et plane detrita, quam singulam vidi.”—* C. trabifero 
ad formam simillima, preter penicillo oris colore multo palli- 
diore presertim agnoscenda.” 
Under the circumstances one could have wished this form 
had not been described as a new species, seeing that identi- 
fication, from descriptions alone, is sufficiently difficult even 
in the case of adults. The type, which is before m>, might 
well be the young of any of the forms of which the ventral 
area of the abdomen is marked with rows of spots. 
1895. Ctenus denticulatus (Sim.), Thor. ¢ 9 al., 9 7:5- 
10mm. Spid. Burma, p. 216. Rangoon and Thara- 
waddy, Kyeikpadem (Oates). (PI. IV. tigs. 4-9.) 
Specimen identitied by Thorell in coll. Brit. Mus. Nat, 
Hist., originally described in 1884—Leptoctenus denticulatus, 
Sim. Ann, Mus. Genov. xx. p. 355. 
Genus LEeprocTrenus, L. K. 
Whether Z. agalenoides is or is not congeneric with the 
two-clawed ctenoid forms which are found in Sumatra and 
Borneo I cannot pretend to say. L. Koch himself says :— 
«Tibia i. and i. 4 pair of spines” (whether he includes the 
apical pair or not, I cannot say) ; also “no scopula.” The 
ctenoids from Borneo now before me have very distinct scopule 
on the anterior tarsi and protarsi, as well as the posterior tarsi ; 
and 5 pairs of subtibial spines on 1. and ii., one pair being 
apical. Otherwise, except that the anterior centrals are 
smaller in proportion in Koch’s figure, one would conclude 
them to be congeneric. ‘That the forms placed under Ctenus 
by Thorell (C. pulvinatus, valvularis, trabifer, &c.) are very 
closely allied to'those of the New World, taking albofasciatus, 
@, as an example, there is no doubt—the only difference I 
can detect being in the constant presence of a minute fifth 
tooth on the lower margin of the fang-groove, which is missing 
in all examples of Bornean ctenoids which have come before 
me, though it may possibly appear in some species. Whether, 
as Thorell suggests, Leptoctenus, L. K., differs from Ctenus, 
Walck. (C. dubcus), or from Lsoctenus, Bertk., is not easy to 
say in the absence of types. 
