RECLASSIFICATION OF SUBFAMILY AGRYPNINAE 19 
it seems reasonable to assume that he based his description on material in the 
Knoch collection or on specimens received from Knoch. At the beginning of 
the nineteenth century South American material was still something of a rarity 
and as Zincken (1818) makes no mention of any such material in his account of 
Knoch’s collection it is probable that none was present. The belief that ovalis is 
not a South American Opatelus species is supported by the fact that Candéze 
(1857 : 132), who examined Germar’s ovalis material, did not recognize it as a 
member of his own new genus. 
In the absence of any known species or undetermined material agreeing with 
Germar’s description of ovalis, the only course left open is to consider the possibility 
that Germar misinterpreted certain structural characteristics of the species included 
in his interpretation of Lacon and that as a result his generic diagnosis is inaccurate 
and misleading. This is not beyond the bounds of possibility, as some of the 
included species are small and the position taken up by the legs when the beetles 
are killed tends to obscure the details of the structure of the underside. Germar’s 
optical equipment also will have been very inadequate by present-day standards. 
It was probably no more than a simple hand-lens. It is also possible that the 
inflammation of the eyes which afflicted Germar during the last ten years of his 
life (he died in July, 1853) was already causing his eyesight to deteriorate (Schaum, 
1853 : 380). 
In order to discover whether this is the case, Germar’s material of his Lacon 
species was, as far as possible, located and examined. The details of the specimens 
are recorded in the catalogue portion of this work. The results of this investigation 
are presented in the following table. 
From the table it is immediately obvious that all Germar’s Lacon species differ 
from his generic diagnosis in that the antennal groove does not extend the entire 
length of the prosternum, or in other words it does not attain the anterior coxae. 
In this characteristic all the species resemble caliginosus, which Germar regarded 
as an exception, remarking that the antennal grooves extend only a little way 
beyond the middle of the length of the prosternum. In all twelve known species 
the tibial spurs are not merely indistinct but entirely absent. 
It is not unreasonable to assume that ovalis possesses the same characteristics as 
the other twelve species included in the genus. Evidence that this assumption 
is justified is found in the work of Candéze (1857 : 130), who appears to have been 
the last man to see Germar’s material. Candéze places ovalis in his interpretation 
of Lacon, which differs from that of Germar in that the prosternopleural suture 
is closed posteriorly so that the antennal groove does not attain the anterior coxae. 
In the same work Candéze (1857 : 130) described Lacon occidentalis from Senegal, 
remarking that this species could at first sight be confused with ovalis Germar 
but can be distinguished by the presence of white scales among the black ones 
clothing the body. The lectotype of L. occidentalis Candéze (a synonym of A delocera 
| parcus (Boheman), see p. 43) is in the BMNH. 
Additional information concerning the structure and appearance of ovalis is 
| provided by Baudi (1871 : 49), who refers to ovalis Germar in his description of 
| Lacon pygmaeus from Cyprus, remarking that his species may be little more than 
| 


