241 
THE AFRICAN SPECIES OF CULEX AND ALLIED GENERA. 
By F. W. Epwarps, B.A. 
(Published hy permission of the Trustees of the British Museum.) 
The writer’s original intention in publishing this paper was to give a key for 
the identification of those African mosquitos which might be taken by the non- 
specialist for species of Culex, without attempting to form any opinions as to the 
value or limits of allied genera. A study of the insects, however, led to the 
realisation that scale characters, in this group at least, are not of very great 
value for separating genera, and consequently the present paper gives the author’s 
views of the classification of the Culex group, and is more complete than it 
might otherwise have been. Time has not yet been available to deal with those 
species which have flat scales on the top of the head or on the scutellum 
(Stegomyia group). 
It will be noticed at once that a large number of names (nearly seventy) have 
been sunk as synonyms, and it may be as well to point out that this has, as a rule, 
only been done after a careful comparison of the types. Where there is room 
for doubt as to the synonymy of two names, this has been freely admitted. 
All that is claimed for this paper is that it may make the determination of 
good specimens a little easier than up to the present. The group of species in- 
cluding Culex invidiosus, and some other species, are very difficult to classify, and the 
author has not been able, much to his regret, to find any clearly marked distinctions. 
The CULICIDAE as a whole are classified as follows by Lt.-Col. Alcock 
(Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (8) viil., p. 241, 1911) :-— 
Sub-family A. Corethrinae, (Proboscis short.) 
Sub-family B. Culicinae. (Proboscis long.) 
Section 1. MEGALORHINI. (Proboscis very long and bent downwards. 
Usually large metallic species.) 
Section 2. HrpraturGt = Anophelinae of Theobald. (Palpi long in Q.) 
Section 3. CULICALES, comprising Culicinae, Heptaphlebomyinae, 
Dinoceratinae, Aedinae and Uranotaeniinae of Theobald. 
(Metanotum bare.) 
Section 4. METANOTOTRICHA, comprising Trichoprosoponinae, Den- 
dromyinae and Limatinae of Theobald. (Metanotum 
bearing bristles.)* 
This grouping of the main divisions of the family is in the present writer’s 
opinion the best that has yet been proposed. Many recent authors have adopted 
an essentially similar plan, but have made only three divisions of the CULICINAE 
(or, where the CORETHRINAE are regarded as a separate family, three sub- 
families of CuLiIciDAB), the MrcaLoruint (Megarhininae of Theobald) being 
included with the CuLicaLes. It seems better, however, owing to the many 
differences of structure between the two groups, to keep them separate. 
* [It has very reasonably been suggested to me that it is advisable to use similar terminations 
for the names given to groups of equal value; and further, that it is inadvisable to interfere 
with the established name of ‘“ Anopheline” for the malaria-carrying mosquitos. Mr. Guy 
Marshall proposes the names (1) Megalorhinina, (2) Anophelina, (3) Culicina, and (4) Metanoto- 
trichina, for the four sections of CULICINAE, and with this proposal I entirely concur.— 
A. Alcock. ] 
