ee . a 
RECLASSIFICATION OF SUBFAMILY AGRYPNINAE 271 
Fabricius (p. 62) and £. varius Olivier (p. 79) has shown that this is not 
the case. 
Candéze, Ernest Charles Auguste (1827-1898). Candéze’s real interest lay in 
the Lamellicorns, but Lacordaire persuaded him to undertake the classification 
of the Elateridae. As he had no intention of continuing work on this family 
once the Monograph was finished, Candéze did not build up a large collection 
of his own but based his work on material sent to him on loan by Museums 
and owners of private collections (1857: VII-VIII). Fortunately Candéze 
made a habit of recording the names of the owners of the specimens he 
described. In those cases where he does not mention the owner, I have 
assumed that the material was in his own possession. 
On completion of the Monograph in 1864 Candéze negotiated an exchange 
with Janson, giving him some (‘quelques’, Fleutiaux, 1945 : 79) of the Elaterid 
types in his possession in return for La Ferté Sénectére’s Lamellicorns. The 
exchange took place in 1869. Janson (q.v.) appears to have retained Candéze’s 
material which is now preserved in the BMNH. The BMNH possesses a 
manuscript catalogue of the Janson collection made by Waterhouse. In it 
Waterhouse records that ‘Mr Janson’s collection comprises La Ferte’s as well 
as Candéze’s’. 
The publication of the Monograph established Candéze as the acknowledged 
Elaterid specialist and he found that he was unable to carry out his intention 
of abandoning the family. Instead he embarked on a revision of the Mono- 
graph, which unfortunately remained unfinished, and began to build up a 
collection of Elateridae. At the time of his death he was the owner of a large 
and comprehensive collection which included the Elaterid collections of 
Lacordaire, Laporte de Castelnau, Reiche (8 boxes), Semper (Philippine 
material), Buquet, Monchicourt (including Raffray’s Zanguebar collection), 
Mniszech, Gebler, Falderman, Duport, Helmberg (Alaskan material), Wallace 
(New Guinea, etc.) and Fairmaire’s exotic material. This second collection 
which presumably included any specimens, including syntypes, retained in 
1869, was purchased by the Belgian government in 1899 (1899, Annis Soc. 
ent. Belge 34 : 31, report) and is preserved in the IRSNB, Brussels. 
Candéze described a number of species from ‘des Indes-Orientales’. 
Subsequent records of certain species (e.g. Adelocera tostus (= Agrypnus of 
the present work) (Candéze), Fleutiaux, 1927 : 78) suggest that this rather 
imprecise locality includes eastern India, Burma, Thailand, Indochina, Malaya 
and Indonesia. In many cases Janson’s replacement locality labels bear 
only the word ‘India’. 
Fleutiaux (1945 : 81) states that Candéze was in the habit of retaining 
the specimens submitted to him for identification. Experience (see note on 
the Andrewes collection p. 270) has shown that this was not always the case. 
Except in those cases in which he had only a single example, Candéze did 
not generally record the number of specimens on which he based his description. 
In addition he did not always record the exact locality on the specimen so 
that the published locality and that on the type material do not always agree. 
