1929 ] Is Necrophylus the Larva of Pterocroce 317 
liams took a single female of chobauti “at light” at Wadi 
Digla is no evidence that Roux’s specimen was of that 
species. It is certainly more probable that it belonged to 
the common larva in the same and other localities about 
Cairo and that larva is the one identified by Withycombe as 
Pterocroce storeyi. The nomenclatorial problem centers 
about Schaum’s interpretation of Roux’s larva. The German 
entomologist evidently entertained no doubt that his speci- 
mens belonged to the same species. He may therefore be 
said to have validated Roux’s generic and specific names as 
those of his own specimens even if it can never be proved 
that the specimens taken at Gizeh and Beni Hassan are 
cospecific. 
I believe the answer to the second question, that of the 
identity of Schaum’s and Withycombe’s larvae, is even more 
clearly affirmative. In the rather extensive collection of lar- 
val and pupal Neuroptera accumulated by Dr. H. Hagen 
during his long association with the Museum of Compara- 
tive Zoology, I find two of the 20 larvae collected by Schaum 
in 1852. One of them measures 8.5 mm., and is therefore 
nearly full grown, the other 7.3 mm. They bear Schaum’s 
original label, with the remark : “Haufig auf dem Schutt der 
Felsengraber von Beni-Hassan, 400' fiber d. Nil, freilaufend. 
Schaum,” and additional labels in Hagen’s handwriting 
with an English rendering of the foregoing and “223. 
Nemoptera sp. — Necrophilus arenarius Roux. Hagen pi. f.” 
These specimens are mentioned by Hagen in his paper on 
the Nemopteridse (1888). After expressing his opinion 
that the larva of N. arenarius described by Roux and 
Schaum is probably that of Nemoptera (Brachy stoma) 
olivieri, he adds: “types of the larva are in my collection.” 
On comparing these types, or paratypes as we should now 
call them, with Eltringham’s and Withycombe’s figures of 
the larval Pterocroce storeyi, I am quite unable to detect 
any differences, except in coloration. Withycombe figures 
and describes a more and a less pigmented “form” of larva, 
and Hagen’s specimens are slightly paler than the latter. 
This, I am convinced, is due to bleaching by the alcohol in 
which the specimens have been preserved for nearly 78 
years. I conclude, therefore, that Roux’s, Schaum’s and 
