IN ORIENTAL CULICIDAE. 227 



14. Ochlerotatus niveus (Ludlow). 



Stegomyia nivea, Ludlow, J.N.Y. Ent, Soc. xi, p. 139 (1903). 



Stegomyia pseudonivea, Theo., Ann. Mus. Nat. Hung, iii, p. 75 (1905). 

 S. pseudonivea was supposed to be distinguished from S. nivea " by the fore and 

 mid ungues [of the female] being uniserrated and not simple, and by the femora 

 being dark above, not white as in nivea." An examination of specimens shows 

 that the teeth on the claws are very minute, and may easily have been overlooked 

 by Miss Ludlow, apart from the fact that they may be variable in this species as 

 in a few others. The description of S. nivea only states that the hind femora are 

 white dorsally on the basal two-thirds, and as this is also the case in all the 

 specimens of S. pseudonivea in the British Museum, there can be no reasonable 

 doubt about the synonymy given above. 



15. Ochlerotatus taeniorhynchoides (Chris.). 



Leslieomyia taeniorhynchoides, Chris., Paludism, no. 2, p. 68 (1911). 



Pecomyia metadata, Theo. (nee Meigen), J. Econ. Biol, i, p. 24 (1905). 

 Meigen's Cnlex maadatus is an Ochlerotatus, and therefore Theobald's name is 

 not available for this species. There are two slight discrepancies in the descrip- 

 tions of Theobald and Christophers : (1) Theobald states that there are both 

 " flat " and " narrow-curved " scales on each lobe of the scutellum, while 

 Christophers says the middle lobe has " narrow-curved," the lateral ones " flat " 

 scales. Very likely the scaling of the scutellum is variable, but I find on 

 examination that there are really no flat scales on the middle lobe of the 

 scutellum of Theobald's specimens. (2) Theobald describes the hind claws of 

 the male as unequal, while Christophers says they are equal ; also, according to 

 Theobald the larger claws of the fore and mid legs of the male are unindentate, 

 according to Christophers bidentate. In this case Theobald's observations are 

 certainly correct for his specimen, so that unless this is another case of variation 

 in the claws, the two species may possibly be distinct. If that can be proved to 

 be the case Theobald's species will require renaming, but for the present it is 

 deemed better to regard it as synonymous with 0. taeniorhynchoides. 



16. Ochlerotatus pipersalatus (Giles). 



Stegomyia piper salata. Giles, Gnats, Ed. ii, p. 372 (1902) (Q only). 



Pseudograbhamia maadata, Theo., J. Bomb. Nat. Hist. Soc, xvi, p. 244 

 (1905\ 

 Giles' description was a composite one, as the male and female types belong to 

 quite different species. The male type differs from the female in all the points 

 mentioned by Giles, but, apart from this, it has no obvious intermingling of 

 black and white scales on the wings and legs, which Giles rightly regarded as 

 of considerable taxonomic importance ; his figure must represent a female and 

 not a male wing. I have therefore chosen to restrict the name to the female 

 type ; the male will subsequently be redescribed and renamed. There is no 

 doubt at all that Theobald's Pseudograbhamia maadata (known in both sexes) is 

 the same species. O. pipersalatus much resembles O. taeniorhynchoides, but the 

 scaling of the scutellum and the coloration of the thorax are quite different. 



