246 F. W. EDWARDS—THE AFRICAN 
Genus Mucipus, Theo. 
Mon. Cul. I, p. 268 (1901). 
|. M. scatophagoides, Theo., Mon. Cul. I, p. 277 (1901). 
M., sudanensis, Theo., Third Rep. Welle. Lab, p. 252 (1908). 
Tibiae with pale bands at the base, middle and apex, all of about equal 
breadth. All tarsi with pale basal bands, most marked on the hind pair. 
Wing-fringe with eight pale spots. 
The proboscis of WM. sudanensis is said by Theobald to haye a white band at 
the tip ; this is an error, and the statement was evidently intended to apply to 
the palp?, the last joint of which is white. The species is closely related to the 
Australian M, alternans, Westw., which differs in having the tibiae dark at the 
apex, with two narrow white bands. 
Sudan ; Gold Coast ; India. 
2. M. mucidus, Karsch, Ent. Nachr. 1887, p. 25. 
M. africanus, Theo., Mon. Cul. I, p. 274 (1901). 
M. grahami, Theo., Mon. Cul. V, p. 127 (1910). 
Fore and mid tibiae narrowly white at base, broadly white at apex. Hind 
tibiae narrowly white at base and apex and with a very narrow indistinct white 
band in the middle. Fore and mid tarsi all yellowish. Wing-fringe usually with 
seven pale spots. 
The type of M. grahami is a dark specimen, in which the pale fringe spots 
are indistinct, only four being clearly visible, and traces of two others. Apart 
from this it does not differ from M. mucidus. The type of M. africanus has seven 
pale fringe-spots, not five as stated by Theobald. 
M. alternans does not oceur in Africa; the Natal specimen included by 
Walker in his series of Culex commovens (= M. alternans) is apparently a variety 
of M. mucidus. 
Sierra Leone; Ashanti; S. Nigeria; N. Nigeria; Nyasaland Protectorate ; 
Delagoa Bay. 
Genus OcHLEROTATUS, Arrib. 
Rev. Mus. La Plata, II, p. 143 (1891). 
Culicada, Felt, N.Y. State Mus. Bull. No. 79, p. 391 b (1904). 
Culicelsa, Felt, lc. 
Mimeteculex, Theo., Third Rep. Welle. Lab. p. 258 (1908). 
Grabhamia, Theo., part. 
Coquillett (Science, vol. 23, p. 314, 1906) sinks both Culicada and Culicelsa 
under Ochlerotatus, and though Theobald (Mon. Cul. IV, p. 14) regards this as 
a retrograde step, it seems to be inevitable. The present writer is in entire 
agreement with Coquillett as to the taxonomic value of toothed or simple claws 
in the female, as all other characters seem to support divisions based on this, 
A more detailed study may reveal satisfactory characters by which to separate 
Culicelsa and Ochlerotatus (Culicada), but at present such have not been dis- 
covered. Dyar, using the male genitalia as a basis of classification, doubts 
whether the two genera can be kept separate. The chief structural difference 
appears to be that in Culicelsa the hind ungues are simple, while in Culicada 
they are toothed; but O. caliginosus and O. ochraceus have the hind ungues 
simple in the male, but toothed in the female, so that this character cannot be of 
very great importance. 
