BaSgjggti SSSiSSi . ftvcrzjfTtJ; : tr . .: ::: . f »? » - : • * • " ' * •"* - :»fif .r.fU-fM.' Wt. IH'PT*. ti'. BittffiaiSra fit: * r* ; KU :: ;trj:.*rtrtiu:«w fiji!' TifnffilltP jjrjW: i • « *v nmmit/t;|3 *>*.frt«r*rt * rtxtm: 3£^; ; * I : I? ~t niriiii.fv:* .'Hi ?i f ; ‘~~ti 2 *“4 4' nrnTnnriTir -• :• :m : nr rfrfH i i 4 L i „• u tzzzzil.’ :* ;« ;* tii ; xssr •; • ft i „ i.i TTr8Wpii in eight papers entitled "Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice." These appeared as Volume II of what was in part entitled Leland Stanford .Junior Publications, University Series, and in part Stanford University Publications, University Series, Biological Sciences. In them will be found illustrations of almost all of the species known up to 1935> together with a statement of the sources of the material upon which the work was based. Owing to the cumbersome nature of the full citation, this work will herein be cited merely as "Contribu¬ tions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice." This volume is closed as of July 1, 1951* Stanford University, California vii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I The Ectoparasites of birds and Mammals . 1 CHAPTER II The Morphology and Anatomy of the Auoplura . CHAPTER III Growth and Development . 50 CHAPTER IV The Taxonomic Status of the Sucking Lice . 53 CHAPTER V The Classification (Vithin the Order Anoplura . 63 CHAPTER VI Review of the Families, Subfamilies, Genera, and Species of the Anoplura 71 Errata . 285 CHAPTER VII Host List . 286 304 311 CHAPTER VIII The Distribution of the Anoplura . INDEXES . IX CHAPTER I The Ectoparasites of Birds and Mammals When in the course ol' their evoLution the birds achieved leathers and the inanunaLs achieved hair, a new world to conquer was offered to the Arth- ropoda which must have swarmed upon the earth from almost the earliest a^es of terrestrial life. Some of the arthropods moved into this new world and became adjusted to the peculiar conditions of life that it presented. From these pioneers came the ectoparasites that today infest in some measure probably every species of bird and evex'y species of mammal except the Ce¬ tacea and the Sirenia. These ectoparasites, as we see them today, have been derived from many sources. One may surmise that the earliest to enter this world of hair and feathers were mites, for the mites are a very ancient group and they may very' well have fed upon the blood of hairless amphibians and reptiles, even as they do today, before the birds and mammals had evolved. Today the mites constitute probably the major ectoparasitic fauna ol' the vertebrates. They have penetrated into the lungs of their hosts, into the ears, into the skin, and even at times into the intestine and bladder and they swarm in the hair and the feathers. They induce pathological conditions of their hosts by their own activities and they act as transmitting agents of numer¬ ous diseases that are already' known and undoubtedly many more that are not yet known. They are the greatest of all the groups of ectoparasites and scarcely more than a beginning of their study has yet been achieved. It seems probable that only after hair and feathers had become well de¬ veloped did the insects move in. These insect ectoparasites have come from various Orders. There are the blood-sucking flies of the family Hippobos- cidae, which occur on both birds and mammals, and the families Streblidae and Nycteribi idae , which occur only on bats. There are the "bedbugs," which are llemiptera, of the family Cimicidae, and which occur chiefly on birds and bats. There is the more or less closely related Hemipterous fam- i Ly Polyctenidae, which occurs only on bats and which numbers scarcely two dozen known species. There is at least one speciesofthe Order Dermaptera, which occurs on an African rodent. There are a few beetles, including that singular parasite, Platypsylla castoris Ritsema, which occurs only on beavers. There is even a moth which lives in its larval stages in the hair of a sloth and which may justifiably be included in the list. There is the whole Order Siphonaptera, the fleas, which in their adult stage live upon both birds and mammals and feed upon their blood. There are two groups of what are commonly called lice. One of these groups comprises what are frequently called "bird lice," although a consi¬ derable number of them live upon mammals. They are more appropriately- called "biting lice" and constitute what is here considered to be the Order Mallophaga, which includes something more than 2,000 known species. And finally, there is the little group which is the subject of this volume, the sucking lice, comprising what is here called the Order Anoplura. At pres¬ ent scarcely more than 225 species of Anoplura are known. They live exclu¬ sively upon mammals and feed upon the blood oi their hosts. The ectoparasites of birds and mammals present many features of general biological interest. Some of them are zoological curiosities because of their unusual modit ications ot structure or habit. Thus, the paiasitic bat flies of the families Streblidae and Nycteribiidae are strange forms be¬ cause of their structural modifications alone. But combined with this strangeness of form, the members of these two families and of the more or 1 less related family Hippoboscidae have the habit, rare among insects, of retaining the larva within the body of the female where it is nourished by glandular secretions until it is ready to pupate. The members oi the little family Polyctenidae likewise retain the immature insect within the tody of the female until it is partly grown, but in this case it is nourished through what is functionally a placenta that is developed from the body of the young itself. The extraordinary developments of both structure and habit which occur among the mites offer an endless variety, the exploration of which has scarcely more than begun. Throughout the entire series of these ectoparasites there are phenomena of special interest from the point of view of evolution. There are beau¬ tiful examples of what appears to be convergent evolution which has re¬ sulted in the development of similar habits and similar structures in quite unrelated forms. There is the problem of perennial interest which has to do with the occurrence of related parasites upon related hosts and the con¬ sequent suggestion that the relationships of the parasites may perhaps throw some light upon the phylogeny of the hosts and, conversely, that the relationships of the hosts may throw some light on those of the lice. This will be discussed in detail in a section of this work. Above all there is the circumstance that certain of these ectoparasites are concerned with the transmission of disease. Most of what is known con¬ cerning this has to do with the transmission of disease in man, but it seems clear that the same thing must occur in the case of many other ani¬ mals. Since numerous diseases of man have unquestionably come over to him from other animals the whole picture of the epidemiology of these diseases cannot be grasped until the background in the animals from which a particu¬ lar disease has come is understood. In many instances the occurrence of a particular disease in man is to be regarded as purely an accident. This, for example, seems to be true of "murine typhus, " which arises each time independently from the background formed by certain rodents and their para¬ sites. One of the most illuminating instances of this sort is the recogni¬ tion — as late as 1947 — of the disease called "rickettsial pox, " a disease that was previously unknown and was shown to have been transmitted to man through the agency of mites from the ordinary house mouse, an animal that had previously not been known to be connected with any disease of man. We are not here attempting to recite the story of the relation of ecto- parasitic insects to the transmission of disease. The intention is merely to emphasize the principle that no blood-sucking arthropod, even if it occurs only on a bat on some remote island, may be eliminated entirely from the range of our interest. The time is at hand for the building up of greater knowledge of blood-sucking ectoparasitic insects in all groups. Almost none of these groups, except perhaps the fleas, has received the attention which it deserves. And, as will appear in subsequent sections of this volume, our knowledge of the little Order of the sucking lice is still barely past its earliest stages. 2 CHAPTER II The Morphology and Anatomy of the Anoplura As has already been noted, the sucking lice are very peculiar forms. They are commonly described as degenerate, but this is a word which has no proper place in a biological vocabulary, since it carries with it certain purely anthropomorphic connotations that involve a flavor of reproach. It would be better to say merely that they are highly specialized for life in the peculiar environment which they occupy. The evolutionary processes which have been at work upon them have produced a large amount ot speciali¬ zation by loss and reduction of parts. There is not the slightest vestige of wings. The eyes have been very greatly reduced, being scarcely or not at all recognizable in the majority of species and consisting of a single facet even when best developed. The tarsi have been reduced lrom live to one or at the most two segments. The antennae have been reduced to at the most five segments. In many species the sclerotization of the abdomen has been almost completely lost. There has been a reduction of the number of spiracles, no known species having more than one pair on the thorax and six pairs on the abdomen. The structures which comprise the ovipositor of the more generalized insects are reduced to mere vestiges. Along with these reductions and losses there have gone some specializa¬ tions of a quite different type. Thus, the mouthparts of the sucking lice are perhaps as highly specialized as are to be found anywhere among the in¬ sects and the claws have become highly developed in correlation with the habit of clinging to hair. The great degree of reduction and modification found in these insects has led^to much misunderstanding concerning their morphology and this mis¬ understanding has centered especially about the mouthparts. Here, even yet, we cannot give a final answer to all the questions involved although we are undoubtedly somewhere near that answer. In the preparation of the following section on morphology and anatomy, Mr. Stojanovich has done all the laborious work of dissection and of pre¬ paring the illustrations. Parts of this material have already been pub¬ lished by him in a paper entitled "The Head and Mouthparts ol the_ Sucking Lice," which appeared in "Microentomology , " Volume 10, Part 1 (194b). There are certain minor points concerning the anatomy of the lice which have not yet been adequately explored, but the lollowing account will cover the major features, especially those which may at some time have a bearing upon problems of taxonony. The Head Preliminary Statement The most difficult problems connected with the morphology of the suck¬ ing lice are those which concern the mouthparts. The head itself is not difficult to understand, but before entering into a discussion of its mor- pholon- it may be well to review certain developments which have occurred within" recent years in the study of the comparative morphology of the in¬ sects. These developments have resulted chiefly from a series of papers which have appeared in the journal 'Microentomology," which is published from the Natural History- Museum of Stanford University. A briel summary ol the conclusions which have been derived from this work and which are pertinent to an understanding of the Anopluran head follows. 3 There has long been difference of opinion among morphologists as to the segmentation of the insect head, opinion as to the number of segments in¬ volved having varied from as low as four segments to as many as nine. Fur¬ thermore, there has been much disagreement as to the arrangement of these segments and certain concepts that we believe to be based upon grievous errors have become deeply imbedded in the literature of the comparative morphology of the insects. Not until those errors have been removed is it possible to arrive at any understanding of the morphology of a specialized head such as that of the Anoplura. The work that has been done in this laboratory has involved studies of external structure, of musculature, and of the segmental distribution of nerves. The study- of the nervous system of the head region has been carried through a long series of forms ranging from the Oligochaete and Polychaete worms to the insects and has demonstrated that a unified system of segmen¬ tation of this region exists throughout the Annulata. The following con¬ clusions have been derived from these studies. 1. The head of insects involves a total of six segments, these — in mor¬ phological order — being the labral, clypeal, ocular-antennal, mandibular, maxillary, and labial segments. 2. The labral segment is segment one of the body' and the anterior por¬ tion of the alimentary canal, which is called the stomodaeum, is an invagi¬ nation of this segment. The ventral portions of this segment are much re¬ duced and seem to involve only the "hypopharyngeal suspensor plates, " upon which the mouth angle retractor muscles insert. The clypeus is the dorsal element of segment two and the hy-popharynx is basically the ventral portion of this segment. 4. The hypopharynx is primarily a ventral lobe of segment two, but it is possible that in some insects elements derived from the mandibular segment may be involved in it. 5- The ocular-antennal segment bears the antennae, the ocelli, and the compound eyes. It is commonly divided transversely by a suture, usually called the epicranial, suture, which usually forms a Y-shaped line across the head, with the lateral arms terminating on each side between the com¬ pound eye and the corresponding antenna. This suture is definitely intra- segmental and is something more than a mere line of weakness along which the derm splits at the times ol ecdysis. It is a line of very ancient ori¬ gin, the antecedents of which can be seen even in the Polychaete worms. The area anterior to this suture and posterior to the clypeofrontal suture may properly be called the frons. No ventral, element ascribable to the ocular-antennal segment can be identified in any insect thus far examined, although morphologically some such element, however much reduced, should theoretically be present. No muscles ascribable to this segment, other than those of the antennae and cei tain evanescent muscles ol the ptilinum in flies, are known to exist. The anterior tentorial pits apparently belong to this segment. 6. In cases where the mandibles have been lost the mandibular segment may entirely disappear, at least as lar as any muscles and anyr sclerotized elements are concerned. 7. The maxillary- segment is usually much reduced and in many insects is entirely membranous. In many insects it forms no part of the sclerotized head capsule. The posterior tentorial pits seem to belong to this segment. ,lhe Lablai segment is always much reduced dorsally and no insect is known in which the dorsal wall of this segment is sclerotized and enters into the composition of the sclerotized head capsule. The area called the submentum, however, is commonly sclerotized and forms a portion of the ventral or posterior-wall of the head capsule, although at times this area may- he entirely membranous. The submentum is merely a portion of the ventral wall ol segment six. The salivary glands belong to segment six 4 and the point of opening of the salivary duct belongs to this sequent and is a definite landmark of this segment. It does not belong to the hypo pharynx although it may become involved with this structure. 9. The distribution of segmental nerves to sensory structures and mus¬ cles is a positive indication of segmental homo Louies when all uerves are present. At times nerves may be lost, if the structures which they serve are Lost, and at times the clarity of segmental relations may be disturbed by the fusion of nerves. 1U. The insertions of muscles are constant, but the origins may shill, even from one segment to another, if the ectodermal areas upon which they primitively originated are lost or displaced. With these general conclusions in mind it is possible to proceed to the problem of the organization of the Anoplurau head. Of ail the species of Anoplura now known, those of the genus Pediculus seem to present the least modification of the head. Therefore it is appro¬ priate to begin with the head of Pediculus. The Head Capsule of Pediculus humauus Figures 1, 2 In this head the anterior apex is more or less membranous and fox-ms a slightly eversible protuberance, commonly called the haustellum, which sur¬ rounds the apparent mouth opening and is beset with small hooks. In this membrane, on the dorsal side, there is a small, sclerotized plate which is by all criteria the labrum. Posterior to the labriun is a large plate which extends across the head in front of the antennae and is continued somewhat to the ventral side. This plate is clearly the clypeus, since it bears the origins of the cibarial muscles and the place of origin of these muscles is constant in all insects that have been examined. This plate is separated by a broad suture from the next plate, which makes up the greater part of the dorsal wall of the head. The entire posterior portion of the head cap¬ sule, dorsally, is composed of the ocular-antennal segment. The antennae are attached to the head at the anterior-lateral angles of this plate and the eyes are placed on each side at about the middle of the lateral border. The plate is divided by a V-shaped suture, the lateral terminations of which are between the eyes and the antennae. The base of the V is connect¬ ed with the median coronal suture. The portion of the ocular-antennal seg¬ ment anterior to this V is the frons, while the areas posterior to the su¬ ture constitute the ocular lobes or, as they are sometimes called, the pa- rietals. The dorsal sclerotization of the ocular-antennal segment extends around somewhat to the ventral side of the head. There are no dorsal areas that can be assigned definitely to the gnathal segments. Except for the reduction of the dorsal elements there is nothing in any way peculiar thus far about this head capsule. On the ventral side of the head the areas not occupied by the ventral extensions of the dorsal sclerotization are entirely membranous and show- no indications of segmentation. The tentorium, as in all Anoplura, is lacking and there are consequently no tentorial pits. , . , , . . . , The mouthparts are entirely retracted within the head and will be con¬ sidered later. The Head Capsule of Haematopinus suis Figure 3 The head capsule of this species is considered because it presents cer¬ tain features which would not be readily understood on the basis ol what os a <1) > (J o a. to ro "ro a; O 3 QO o 03 CL to 03 "ii to O ■a < Head structures as shown in Pediculus hurnanus Linnaeus Figure 1 6 clypeus^ grig in of labial compressor muscle bauslelhim labium origins of cibarial muscles or if/ in of lateral pharyngeal muscle v WV > . N \ \ origins of antennal muscles**' origin of mandibular muscle - / clypeo frontal sul are origin of dorsal labral retractor prigins of _ >/ pharyngeal muscles 1st anlennal segment rye origin of formal muscle antennal segment coronal sutur / postfrontal suture ocular lobe Origins of muscles in head of Pediculus humanus Linnaeus Figure 2 7 Structures and origins of muscles in head of Haematopinus suis (Linnaeus) Figure 3 8 is found in Pedlculus. It will be noted that in this head there is no external indication of eyes. However, the ocular nerves are present and end in a small spot, just at the base of the areas designated in the illustration as the oculai points, which are morphologically the eyes. Webb has demonstrated that in some specimens, at least, definite but small lenses can be recognized. In comparison with the head of Pedicul us i t wi 11 be noted that one transr- verse suture is missing. On the basis ol all the available evidence, in¬ cluding the study of other species not here considered, we interpret the conditions as follows. We assume that the clypeus has been produced pos¬ teriorly until it has crowded out the frous, and the frontoclypeal and postfrontal sutures have become confluent. Therefore nothing is lelt ol the Irons except the small areas at each side which bear the antennae. The transverse, V- or U-shaped suture is therefore morphologically the post¬ frontal + clypeo frontal suture. This conclusion is supported by the posi¬ tions of the origins of the cibarial muscles. One other feature of this head calls for mention. At the posterior border of the head are two invagiuated sclerotizations, the occipital apophyses. To these attach muscles which serve to retract or elevate the head. Evidence derived from the innervation ol these mus¬ cles indicates that they and the structures upon which they insert belong to the head. To just what segment of the head they belong remains to be determined. „ .. , , ., The ventral side of the head is so similar to that ol Pedlculus that it is not here illustrated. The Head Capsule of Other Anoplura There are some modifications ol the head capsule in other species ol Anoplura, but they can all be accounted for on the basis of the two species which have been discussed. Consequently, we need belabor this subject no further. The Mouthparts and Internal Structures As has already been noted, the mouthparts ol the sucking lice are ol a very peculiar type which is not found elsewhere in the insects. Function¬ ally they are to be described as "piercing and sucking, but their mecha¬ nism is very different from anything that is to be lound in other piercing and sucking forms such as the Hemiptera and the blood-sucking (lies, lhey have been the subject of much controversy and there are still certain de tails which remain doubtful and which will require emhiyological work lor their final elucidation. ... ,, . , , Since, apart from the space occupied by the brain, the internal struc tures of the head are almost exclusively associated with the mechanism ol feeding we may consider all these structures together. The°first necessary step is that of forming a clear picture ol the re l a tionship of the piercing structures and the food channel. It must be grasped at the very beginning that the piercing structures do not in any way form the food channel. In order to understand this clearly, reference maV be made to Figure 4. In Part A of this figure is shown a longitudinal section through a normal insectan head, with the lateral parts such as man dibles and maxillae omitted. The roof of the oral chamber or cibanum is here formed by a continuation of the ventral wall of the labrum and the floor of the chamber by the hypopharynx and the anterior wall ol the labium. Leavincr aside any argument as to where the true mouth opening actually is we ma\B for the present consider it to be the opening into the pharynx. Note especially the opening of the salivary duct between the hypopharynx 9 Diagram of mouthparts Figure 4 10 ami the labium. In Part B oi' this figure is shown a similar diagram of the head of a sucking louse. Note that the upper portion of the head remains unchanged and the modifications involved are all in the lower — morphologically the posterior — portion. It is evident that the parts involved in the piercing structures have been pulled back into a sac that lies entii'ely beneath the mouth. The three needles which form the piercing instrument originate from the base of this sac. When the instrument is brought into action it is ex¬ truded through a small opening in the lloor ol the oral chambei jusi in from the apex of the head. It is very' evident that the blood of the host does not pass into this sac on its way into the alimentary canal. The ac¬ tual arrangement of the sac and its relation to other parts is shown in less diagrammatic form iu Figure ?• The questions at issue have to do mostly with the homologies ot the three stylets which comprise the piercing instrument. In the diagrammatic illustration they are greatly exaggerated in thickness. Actually, they are exceedingly delicate and are closely appressed together. However, the questions concerning these stylets are not all there is to the problem, since there are certain other structures which do not appear in this dia irram and which have to be explained. For our explanation it is necessary to turn to the musculature and the innervations of the muscles. . Perhaps the most favorable subject for study ol these problems is the hoj louse, Haematopinus suis. This is a rather large species and it shows ail the structures. It may be noted that all the work on which the accom¬ panying illustrations were based was done by the method ol dissection em ploying powers up to xll5 of the binocular dissecting microscope. In Figure 6 are shown the structures which appear upon removal ol the dorsal wall of the head. We may in passing note the muscles ol the anten¬ nae, which originate upon the dorsal wall. In insects which possess a ten¬ torium they would originate upon that structure, but since the tentorium is here lacking the origins must of necessity shift to another position, some Anoplura they originate in part upon the lateral wall ol the head ven trad of the antennae. , „ , The "brain" is relatively large and is composed of the supraoesophageai and suboesophageal ganglia* which are connected by the very short ^circuni- oesophaber£i these are 53 2nd instar Nymphal stages of Pediculus mjobergi Ferris 3rd instar Figure 27 54 55 2nd instar 2 Nymphal stages of Polyplax spinulosa (Burmeister) Figure 29 recognizable in the second instar, while in Pedicinus obtusus they do not appear until the third instar. Also, in these species there are certain changes in the antennae, the last three segments being scarcely or not at all indicated in the first three instars. This is not generally true, the first stage usually having five antennal segments as does the adulf. Of other species, there are at hand only a few immature individuals, no complete developmental series being represented. Consequently, it is dif¬ ficult to assign these specimens to their proper instars. On the basis of present indications, however, it appears that th*e only species in which the immature stages present any especially peculiar developments are those of the genus Hoplopleura. In this genus there seems to be a general tendency toward the development of sclerotized tubercles on the antennae and on the ventraL side of the head and also of unusual setae on the abdominal margins. It is not clear in which stage the paratergites appear in these forms. The appearance of the immature stages in the genus Hoplopleura is such that an incautious worker might very well be led to suspect the presence of more than one species. Illustrations of some of these stages of this genus are herewith presented. 56 intermedia First stage of species of Hoplopleura pelomydis CHAPTER IV The Taxonomic Status of the Sucking Lice Historical Review The sucking lice are for the most part very small forms and require special methods of preparation for study under the microscope. Such meth¬ ods were scarcely available until comparatively recent times and in fact have reached a satisfactory decree of development only within the last thirty- five years; even yet very few entomologists have become fully aware of them or have become proficient in their use. Moreover, the members of this group of ectoparasites were long regarded as merely "disgusting para¬ sites" and therefore scarcely worthy of the attention of anyone possessed of esthetic feelings. And still beyond that, it requires a special effort to secure material of any large representation of the group, since the col¬ lector must first obtain specimens of the mammals upon which they occur. For all of these reasons they have until relatively recent years received but little attention from entomologists. Their taxonomic history repre¬ sents a series of stumbling attempts to assign them to some generally ac¬ ceptable position in the scheme of classification of the insects and to de¬ vise a system of classification within the group itself. Even yet there is no absolute agreement in regard to either of these aspects of their classi¬ fication. Fahrenholz,* in a paper published in 1936, gave a detailed review of the taxonomic history' of the group, which has been utilized in preparing the following summary. This has been supplemented from other sources and brought up to date, especially with the aid of a work on the history of the development of insect classification published in 193V. ** We need not concern ourselves with anything thatmayhave been done prior to the appearance of the tenth edition of Linnaeus' "Systema Naturae" of 1758, upon which our present system of classification and nomenclature is ground¬ ed. In this work Linnaeus adopted the ancient Latin name Pediculus for a genus into which he threw almost everything that could conceivably be called a "louse," placing this genus in the insect Order Aptera along with the mites, fleas, and the primitively wingless group now called the Thysanura. The genus contained a weird assortment of forms, including biting lice, sucking lice, Corrodentia, a beetle triungulinid and a Hippoboscid fly. In 1775, Fabricius, in his "Systema Entomologiae", included the genus with essentially the same composition in his Order Antliata, placing in it a mis¬ cellaneous assortment of forms that included mites and some flies, and this system was followed in his "Systema Antliatorum" which was published in 1805- In 1806, Latreille recognized the Order Parasita, which was composed of the two groups of lice — the biting lice being placed in the genus Ricinus and the sucking lice in the genus Pediculus. Also in 1806, Lamarck, in his "Histoire Naturelle des Animaux sans Ver- tebres, " placed these genera in the Order Arachnides Antennistes, in the strange company of the centipedes, the myriopods, and certain insects now generally referred to the Order Thysanura. In 1815, Leach, in the "Edinburgh Encyclopaedia," placed the lice in the •Fahrenholz, H. Zeitschrift filr Parasitenkunde, Volume 9, Part 1, pages 50 - 57 . 1936. *• Wilson, H. F. , and M. H. Doner. The Historical Development of Insect Classification. 1937. 58 uew Order Anoplura, this including two genera of sucking lice, Fediculu s and Huematopinus; and one jfenus of biting Lice, Nirmus. This arrangement was adopted also by him in "Zoological Miscellany" in 1817, where he placed the sucking lice in the f;unily Pediculidae and the biting lice in the lam ily Nirmidae. In 1818, Nitzsch, in a paper entitled "Darstel lung der Familien uud (jat- tungen der Th ierinsekteu, " published in Volume ill of Geimar's Magazin fiir die Entomologie, recognized these two groups but placed the sucking lice in the Hemiptera Epizoica and the biting lice in the Orthoptera Epizoica. In 1823, Dumeril, in his "Considerations generates sur le classe des in- sectes, " placed the sucking lice in the group Khinaptera along with the fleas and at least some mites. In 1825, Latreille, in his "Families uaturelles du regne animal," re¬ tained the Oilier Parasita and divided it into two groups, Siphunculata for the sucking lice and Mandibulata for the biting lice. In 1826, Kirby and Spence, in Volume IV of their "Introduction to Ento¬ mology," placed all the lice together in the Order Aptera, still along with the Thysanura, the inyriopods and various arachnids. At some time between 1835 and 1840, burmeister, in his "Handbuch der Eu- tomologie, " which was published in five volumes during these years, placed the sucking lice under the Order Rhynchota and the biting lice in the Order Mallophaga, this apparently being the first use of the latter name. In 1842, Denny, in his "Monographia Anoplurorum britanniae," restored the Order Anoplura, dividing it into two suborders. For the sucking lice he employed the subordinal names Rhynchota or Haustellata and for the bit¬ ing lice the names Mallophaga or Mandibulata, in each case apparently as alternatives. In 1874, Giebel, in his great work "Insecta Epizoa, " placed the sucking lice as the family Pediculina in the Order Hemiptera, calling the group Hemiptera Epizoa. In 1880, Piaget, in his monumental "Les Pediculines, " very frankly a- voided the use of any ordinal names, but regarded the sucking lice as con¬ stituting a single family, the Pediculidae, and the biting lice as two fam¬ ilies, Liotheidae and Philopteridae, the three families being considered as of equal rank. In 1896(7), Haeckel referred the two groups of lice to the Order Phthi- raptera and this name has recently been taken up by Weber and by Eichler, these authors using it to include the suborders Anoplura, Mallophaga and Rhynchophthirina, the last name being that which was proposed by Ferris for the reception of the genus Haematomr/zus. At some time during the latter part of the nineteenth century the idea became established in the minds of entomologists that the sucking lice are related to the Hemiptera. Thus in the earlier editions of Comstock's "Manual for the Study of Insects," and in fact in an edition as late as 1913, they are placed as the Suborder Parasita under the Hemiptera. In Kellogg's "American Insects" (1908) they are thus placed. On the other hand, the Mallophaga were recognized by Comstock as a separate Order as early as 1895- In 1903, Cholodkovsky, in "Zoologischer Anzeiger, " Volume 27, recognized the sucking lice as an independent Order and proposed the name Pseudorhyn- chota for them. In this same journal and volume Shipley proposed the ordinal name Eliipoptera for them in an attempt to establish a uniform system of endings for the names of the insect Orders. Also in this same journal and volume Borner, in a projected classifica¬ tion of the insects, recognized the sucking lice as the Order Siphunculata, crediting the name erroneously to Meinert. In 1908, Handlirsch, who probably had a broader understanding of insect 59 classification than any other man who has ever lived, recognized the suck¬ ing lice under the ordinal name Siphunculata and he adopted this assignment in°a section of Schroeder's "Handbuch der Entomologie, " which was published in 1923. In 1908, Dalle Torre, in Wytsmann's "Genera Insectorum, ' published a catalogue of the sucking lice, calling them the Order Anoplura. In 1910, Mjoberg, in a work entitled "Studien iiher Mallophagen und Ano- pluren," which appeared in Volume 6 of "Arkiv for Zoologi," reverted to the opinion that these two groups constitute a single Order, for which he ap¬ parently used the name Siphunculata, while employing the subordinal names Anoplura for the sucking lice and Mallophaga for the biting lice. In 1916, Lancelot Harrison, in a paper published in Volume 18 of the "Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society," also supported this view. Apparently as a result of the conclusions of these last two authors, the writers of various textbooks — notably Imms in his "General Textbook of Entomology" — have adopted this opinion and have united the two groups, Imms employing the ordinal name Anoplura for both. Ferris, in his series of papers entitled "Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice"— published in the Stanford University Publica¬ tions, Biological Sciences Series, over a period from 1919 to 1934 — consid¬ ered the sucking lice to belong by themselves in the Order Anoplura. Fahrenholz, in a paper published in 1936 in "Zeitschrift fur Parasiten- kunde, " Yolume 9, followed this procedure, but included in the sucking lice the peculiar genus Haematomyzus, which has but one species, the louse of the elephants. Ferris had shown earlier that this insect is not a sucking louse, being an insect with biting mouthparts and probably more closely re¬ lated to the Mallophaga, to which Order he assigned it. Fahrenholz retained it in the sucking lice purely on the grounds that functionally it is a sucking form. He divided the Anoplura into two Suborders — Rhvnchophthirina, a name previously proposed by Ferris as a Suborder of the Mallophaga for inclusion of Haematomyzus ; and the new name Inrostrata, for the true sucking lice. In 1939, Weber, in "Biologisches Zentralblatt, " Volume 59, took up Haeckel's name Phthiraptera, as already noted, placing under it as suborders the three groups Anoplura, Mallophaga, and Rhynchophthirina, the last named including only the louse of elephants. In 1946, Eichler, in "Archiv fur Naturgeschichte," Neue Folge, Volume 10, Heft 3, also adopted this arrange¬ ment . In 1946, Webb, in "Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, Volume 116, adopted the opinion that the lice constitute a single Order, to which he applied the name Anoplura. In 1949, Hopkins, in Volume 119 of the same journal, followed Weber's procedure of placing all the lice in the Order Phthiraptera. Throughout all this time the authors of various textbooks of entomology and parasitology, none of whom had any personal acquaintance with the in¬ sects involved, have adopted one or another of the various arrangements and one or another of the various names. It would be useless to consider these textbooks, since they contribute nothing original. The problem of the name to be used for the sucking lice involves two as¬ pects, one being purely nomenclatorial, the other zoological. The problem of nomenclature being the simpler may be disposed of first. To the question of what name should be employed for the sucking lice there is no absolute answer. The International Rules do not cover situations of this kind, since they do not extend to the names of groups above the super- family and even here are not definite. The only rule that can be followed is some rule of reason. The subject is subjudice at the moment, to be set¬ tled, perhaps, at Copenhagen in 1953- 60 Apparently the first ordinal name employed for all the 1 ice was Paras i ti , proposed by Latreille in 1796. If priority holds, this name would have to be maintained either for al L the lice together as combined in a single Or der, or for one of the groups if the Order be divided. But priority does not necessarily hold in such circumstances and there is the objection to this name that it is entirely too broad in its connotations. Furthermore, the name Parasitidae has been employed also for a family of mites. The second available name seems to be Anoplura, proposed b) Leach in 1815. This name has come into quite general use and conveys no suggestion of applicability to any group other than the lice. The opinion here held is that there is no reason why it should be replaced by any of the names which were later proposed. Now, since this name was originally proposed for the biting and the sucking lice as combined in a single group, the question arises as to which group should inherit it if the Order is divided. The opinion is here main¬ tained that since the biting lice were very early removed as the Order Mallophaga and were thus supplied with a name that has long been employed, the reasonable procedure is to retain the name Anoplura for the sucking lice if they be recognized as an independent Order. We come now to the zoological question involved, that of whether the two groups should be recognized as separate Orders or merged in a single Order. This problem has no objective solution, whatever answer is adopted being merely one of opinion . The two groups exist, but the rank to be assigned to them depends solely upon the mental processes of the protagonists of either opinion and upon subj ective ideas concerning philosophical questions involved in the general process of classification. The groups are nearly enough alike to justify union, or they are sufficiently different to justify sepa¬ ration, either step being dependent upon the weight assigned to similarities of habit on the one hand or to differences in morphology on the other. The author, being a morphologist, claims the greater weight for mor¬ phology. And from the point of view here adopted this argues for ordinal separation. The principal distinction between the sucking lice and the biting lice (the latter including the Rhynchophthirina) lies in the mouthparts. The feeding mechanism of the sucking lice, which will be described in detail in a later section, differs very greatly from the mechanism found in the biting lice and there are no known transitional forms between the two groups. Nor is this all. The arrangement of the thoracic elements is quite different in the two groups. As a matter of fact, the idea that the biting lice and the sucking lice are related finds but little actual morphological support, although there is a suggestion of some sort of remote relationship. The feeling of rela¬ tionship0 seems to arise chiefly from the fact that the biting lice offer the only known source from which the sucking lice could have been derived. The writer is not impressed by Webb's insistence upon the evidence afforded by the tracheal system, in the light of the very profound differences in the feeding mechanism. The opinion is here maintained, therefore, that the sucking lice should be recognized as the Order Anoplura. The Characteristics of the Order Anoplura An insect Order the members of which are, as far as known, ectoparasites exclusively upon mammals, living in the hair, feeding upon the blood of the host throughout their entire life cycle, and attaching their eggs to the hairs of the host. Metamorphosis of the type commonly called hemimetabolic, consisting chiefly of changes in size or proportions of parts, in the de¬ gree of sclerotization and in the development of the sexual apparatus. 61 Antennae normally five-segmented, although at times apparently only three-segmented or four-segmented. Mouthparts highly modified, being formed of three stylets which are re¬ tracted into a trophic sac, lying beneath the pharynx, these stylets being protrusible . Thorax with the three segments closely fused but recognizable, the true notum being reduced in all segments to a narrow, median, membranous area or at times to a median pit and slight lateral extensions which surround the spiracles. The apparent thoracic nota formed almost entirely of subcoxal (=pleural) elements and these at times fused entirely across the notum, thus almost completely obliterating the true notal plates. Never more than one pair of thoracic spiracles, these belonging to the mesothorax. Ovipositor of the female present, but reduced to at most a pair ot flat¬ tened lobes which represent the gonopods of segment eight and a pair of small, sclerotized areas or mere tufts of setae which probably represent the gonopods of segment nine. Male never retaining the gonopods of segment nine^and consequently without claspers, but usually retaining the parameres, the genital structures being retracted into the body when at rest. Legs modified as clasping organs by having the distal, ventral angle of the tibia prolonged into a thumb which opposes the claw. Tarsus normally one-segmented and at most only obscurely two-segmented. Tarsal claws al¬ ways single except in a few instances where a very doubtful second, claw¬ like structure is present on the anterior legs. NOTES. The extraordinary mouthparts, which are among the most highly modified that are to be found in the Insecta, are the principal basis for the recognition of the Order as distinct from the Mallophaga. No transi¬ tion between such mouthparts and those of the Mallophaga is known to exist. However, other distinctive characters are to be found in the thorax. In the Mallophaga the pro thorax is always definitely separated from and mov¬ able independently of the other segments and the dorsa of at least the pro¬ thorax and the metathorax seem always to be composed of the true notal plates. In the Anoplura the prothorax is always fused with the mesothorax in such a manner that it cannot be independently movable, and the thoracic dorsum throughout is composed primarily of the pleural (=subcoxal) elements. While it is highly probable that the two groups go back to some common an¬ cestry, that ancestry- is entirely hypothetical and even if definitely known would still not preclude their being considered as separate Orders. The feeling that the two groups should be united into a single Order seems to rest chiefly upon the similarities of habit and metamorphosis. Thus, the members of both groups attach their eggs to the hairs of their host, but exactly the same procedure is adopted by certain mites and by flies of the family Oestridae. Webb has considered the two groups to be closely related because of resemblances in their spiracles and tracheal systems. No comparative study of the spiracles through various Orders was made. Thus spiracles in some respects very- similar to those both of Ano¬ plura and Mallophaga appear in members of the families Polyctenidae and Cimicidae of the Order llemiptera. We have here a situation very- similar to that of the presence of "combs" of setae, such as those on the fleas, which occur in various ectoparasitic groups but which are also found in other forms that are not parasitic when once those forms are examined by the same methods which are employed in the case of the ectoparasites. It is quite true that no other group than the Mallophaga is ‘known to which the sucking lice may be closely related, but this in itself is no ar¬ gument for combining the two groups into a single Order. Concerning the general relationships of the sucking lice, it may simply be noted that if there is in fact some connection with the Mallophaga then the Anoplura are probably remotely related to the Corrodentia, since the Mallophaga seem thus to be connected. 62 CHAPTER V The Classification Within the Order Anoplura For many years after the formal naming of the genus Pediculus by Linnaeus all the known species of lice, both biting and sucking, were referred to this genus. It was not until 1806 that the biting lice were removed and placed in the genus Rtclnus. It was then not until 1816 that the sucking lice remaining in Pediculus were in part transferred to two new genera, Haematopinus and Pthirus. The next genus of sucking lice, Pedlcinus, was not named until 1844 and the next, Ecdinophtdirius, not until 1871. As late as 1880 Piaget recognized only these genera, most of the species being referred by him to Haematopinus. In 1891 Osborn named the genus Haematopin- oides and in 1896 the genus Kuhaematopinus, which is definitely a synonym of Haematopinoides. During all this time — perhaps fortunately — no attempts were made to develop a higher classification, Giebel, in 1874, placing all the species in the family Pediculina and Piaget, in 1880, using the same arrangement with the alteration of the family name to Pediculidae. As late as 1904 but seven genera had been named as belonging to the suckiug lice, and of these one was a synonym and one, Haematomyzus, is now known not to be a sucking louse. In 1904, Enderlein began the publication of a series of papers which represent the first really intelligent work done on the group. He recog¬ nized the superficial character of the genus Haematopinus and hegan the process of dismembering it. He uamed a total of eight new genera, of which six were removed directly from Haematopinus and two were based upon new species. At the trine when Enderlein began his work there were, according to a count later made by Fahrenholz, but 6 ‘S known species, one ol which was later shown not to belong to the Anoplura, and nearly 60 were referred to the genus Haematopinus. Up to this time there was no need for a system of classification above the generic level. Enderlein essayed the beginnings of such a system and this was later followed by Dalla Torre and by Ferris. Eliminating the genus Haematomyzus , the sole member of the family Haema- tomyzidae established by Enderlein, which we now know is not a sucking louse, Enderlein's system was as follows: FAMILY Pediculidae Leach FAMILY Haematopinidae Enderlein Subfamilies Subfamilies Haematopininae Enderlein Linognathinae Enderlein Euhaematopininae Enderlein Pediculinae Enderlein Pedicininae Enderlein FAMILY Echinophthiriidae Enderlein In 1909, Enderlein, in a paper on the lice of marine mammals published in the report of the Deutsche Sudpolar Expedition, Volume X, divided the Echinophthiriidae into two subfamilies, Echinophthiriinae and Antarctoph- thiriinae. „ it . , . „ . . In 1908, Dalla Torre published a catalogue of the Anoplura m Wytsman s "Genera Insectorum." This work, while useful as a first attempt at a cata- logue, was an entirely mechanical bit of bibliography involving no knowledge of^the insects on the part of the author and represented a none- too- thorough search of the literature. Only 65 species were listed. The classification adopted by Enderlein was followed. „ . In 1916, Ferris published a "Catalogue and Host List ol the .Anoplura in the "Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences, (Fourth^ Series), Volume VI. The system proposed by Enderlein was here followed. Some names were overlooked and there was some false synonymy, but the number of known 63 species at this time must have been quite close to the 120 listed. In 1929, Ewing, in a book entitled "A Manual of External Parasites," proposed an extended classification. This still included Haematomyzus and the family Haematomyzidae . Excluding the Haematomyzidae the system was as follows: FAMILY Haematopinidae Enderlein Subfamilies Enderleinellinae Ewing Hybophthiriinae Ewing Uoplopleurinae Ewing Linognathinae Enderlein Neolinognathinae Ewing Haematopininae Enderlein FAMILY Haematopinoididae Ewing Subfamilies Haematopinoidinae Ewing Hamophthiriinae Ewing FAMILY Pediculidae Piaget Subfamilies Pediculinae Enderlein Pedicininae Enderlein Phthirpediculinae Ewing FAMILY Phthiriidae Ewing Contains but one genus Phthirus FAMILY Echinophthiriidae Enderlein Subfamilies Echinophthiriinae Enderlein Antarctophthiriinae Enderlein Lepidophthiriinae Ewing In 1931, Ferris, in an extended paper in "Parasitology," Yolume XXIII, showed that Haematomyzus does not belong to the sucking lice. He trans¬ ferred this genus doubtfully to the Mallophaga and proposed for it the sub¬ ordinal name Rhynchophthirina. In 1932, Bedford, in a check list of the parasites of birds and mammals of South Africa, published in the "18th Report of the Director of Veterinary Services of the Union of South Africa, " considered the biting lice and the sucking lice together to constitute the Order Anoplura, with three Subor¬ ders, Mallophaga, Rhynchophthirina, and Siphunculata. Under the Siphuncu- lata he adopted the system proposed by Ewing. In 1936, Fahrenholz, in a paper in "Zeitschrift fur Parasitenkunde, " Volume IX, Heft 1, proposed a classification in which he considered the suckincr lice to constitute the Suborder Inrostrata of the Order Anoplura. to Under this Suborder he proposed the following arrangement: FAMILY Echinophthiriidae Enderlein Subfamilies Echinophthiriinae Enderlein Antarctophthiriinae Enderlein FAMILY Haematopinidae Enderlein Subfamilies Haematopininae Enderlein Linognathinae Enderlein Polyplacinae Fahrenholz Haematopinoidinae Ewing Lemurphthirinae Fahrenholz Hamophthirinae Ewing FAMILY Neolinognathidae Fahrenholz Containing the single genus N eolinognathus FAMILY Pediculidae Leach Subfamilies Pedicininae Enderlein Pediculinae Enderlein In 1946, Eichler, in "Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, " Neue Folge, Volume X, Heft 3, adopted the name Phthiraptera of Haeckel, for an Order which in¬ cluded the three Suborders Mallophaga, Anoplura, and Rhynchophthirina. Un¬ der the Suborder Anoplura he proposed the following arrangement. If we substitute the term "superfamily" for his "family series" we shall be more nearly in accord with usual entomological practice. FAMILY Echinophthiriidae Enderlein Polyplacinae Fahrenholz Subfamilies Lemurphthirinae Fahrenholz Echinophthiriinae Enderlein Hamophthirinae Ewing Antarctophthiriinae Enderlein FAMILY SERIES Pediculiformia Eichler FAMILY Pediculidae Leach FAMILY Haematopinidae Enderlein Subfamilies Subfamilies Pedicininae Enderlein Haematopininae Enderlein Pediculinae Enderlein Linognathinae Enderlein Phthirinae Ewing 64 In 1946, Webb, in a paper in the "Proceedings of the Zoological Society ot‘ Loudon, " Yolume 116, Part 1, proposed a partial system ol‘ classi Ideation of the sucking lice "based solely on differences in spiracle structure " as he himself said, but influenced to a considerable degree by considera¬ tions based on the distribution of the lice according to hosts. The system as there presented was only partial, since some genera were not placed in it. Webb's system, as far as it has been carried at the time of the present writing, is as follows: The biting lice and sucking lice are uuited in the Order AnopLura and are regarded as Suborders, the names Mallophaga and Siphuuculata being employed for them. The Siphunculata, so lar as treated, are divided into six families — Docophthi ri idae, Pediculidae, Eulinognath- idae, Linognathidae, Haematopinidae, and Echinophthiri idae . No subfamilies are named. In the opinion here held this classification is in part correct. But in part it also rests upon some very peculiar concepts of taxonomy. Thus the louse of elephants, Haematomyzus elephant is, is not only regarded as a sucking louse but is even placed in the family Haematopinidae on the basis of spiracle structure alone! In 1949, Hopkins, in the "Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London," Volume 119, recognized the biting and sucking lice together as constituting an Order Phthiraptera with the three Suborders Anoplura, Mal- lophaga, and Rhynchophthirina. Under the Anoplura he recognized but three families — Pediculidae, Haematopinidae, and Neolinognathidae. In attempting to develop an intraordinal classification ol the sucking lice, here considered to be the Order Anoplura, consideration has been given only to morphology. It is here held that the problems associated with the distribution of the lice on their various hosts should be approached only after conclusions have first been reached by way of morphological studies. It may be very agreeable in the end to find that the conclusions drawn from the lice themselves are in accord with those drawn 1 rom their hosts and if the two sets of conclusions serve to confirm each other we may be justified in feeling that some approach to truth has been achieved. But to use A to develop B and then to turn about and use B to develop A is a process that presents certain illogical aspects. This is especially true if a priori ideas concerning A and B have been employed. On the other hand, if A has been competently and logically developed and then B is found to agree closely with A there may very well be situations where, a point in A beiug doubtful, B may at least be used as a tentative aid in testing A or in supplementing it. Thus in developing a classi fication of the sucking lice, if on morpholog¬ ical grounds a certain set of relationships is clearly indicated and then a definite correlation with the distribution of the lice according to hosts appears in harmony with these indications, we may be justified in employing the evidence of distribution to supplement the evidence or morphology where the latter is inadequate or confused. But we are certainly not justified in employing the evidence trom distribution if it completely denies or is otherwise not in harmony with clear evidence from morphology. Especially is this true when the evidence from distribution is itself based upon ques¬ tionable concepts. , . , . , . For example, the genus Polyplax is a large group which is confined to rodents of the family Muridae, except for one or two species which occur on shrews. To say that since the shrews and the Muridae are not closely re¬ lated to each other lice of the genus Polyplax should not occur on shrews and that therefore these lice actually from shrews do not belong to the renus Polyplax, despite the morphological evidence, is an utterly illogical procedure'. To say that such genera as Schizophthirus and Ancistroplax can¬ not be related to the genus Hoplopleura because of the wide differences in the assumed relationships of the hosts would be to deny the plain evidence 6^ of morphology. But in the case of the Enderleinellinae we have a different situation. The genus Enderleinellus, which is of considerable size, is known only from Sciuridae. There are two peculiar genera, M icrophthirus and Verneckia, which in certain respects are like Enderleinellus but which depart from that genus in the lack of a certain structure that we are inclined to accept as of morphological significance. But in certain other respects these two genera are like Enderleinellus and all three generaareas far as known confined to the squirrels. The totality of the evidence thus indicates that the absence of the structure in question is probably not sufficient to indicate that the two genera which lack it should be excluded from the Enderleinellinae. We are not here denying the evidence from morphology, we are merely supple¬ menting it where it is weak, for experience in other fields of taxonomy in¬ dicates that the loss of a structure in the course of evolution may occur without disturbing or invalidating the evidence of relationship that is de¬ rived from other sources. What it does disturb is really nothing more than the ease with which keys for identification may be developed. In attempting to develop a classification of the sucking lice certain considerations should be kept in mind. 1. This group is probably something of a remnant of what it once may have been. The living mammals represent but a very small part of all the species of mammals that have existed in the past. Let us reflect upon the number of proboscideans that are known only as fossils. What were their parasites? The single louse-like parasite of the elephants is all that is left to accompany the dwindling line of its hosts. The same situation may very well hold in regard to other lice. 2. Being a very small, very' specialized, and perhaps remnant group, we have left but few or none of the connecting links that one may hope to find in the Orders of insects that still contain thousands of species. 3. There has evidently been a very large amount of evolution by loss among the Anoplura and this leaves us with a rather small complement of structures with which to work. 4. We still know probably not more than half of the species of sucking lice that exist in the world. 5. Under these conditions we have but limited bases for judgment as to the relationships of such forms as Hybophthirus notophallus, the louse of the aard vark; Haematopinoides squamosus , the louse of certain moles; the two known species of Neolinognatlius from elephant shrews; as well as some other peculiar forms. Each of these genera contains the solitary' or almost solitary representative of some ancient line and we have no basis for judg¬ ment as to whether its peculiarities are merely those of an individual spe¬ cies or were common to the members of what may once have been a much larger group . Actually, whatever basis for classification we may adopt, the grouping of the genera of the sucking lice is not at all clear. Certainly no satis¬ factory arrangement can be obtained by focusing attention upon a single set of characters. We must take into consideration the totality of the charac¬ ters which are available. The opinion is here held that in the light of our present knowledge of the Anoplura any system of classification within the Order which elaborate¬ ly divides it into superfamilies, families, subfamilies, tribes, subtribes, genera, and subgenera, can be nothing more than pretentious nonsense. Such minute subdivision can very well wait until a substantially larger propor¬ tion of the species is known. In the light of these considerations the system here adopted will be rather conservative, only families, subfamilies and genera being employed. It is presented with a full realization of the possibility that it may very well be inadequate and at some points may actually be wrong. However, there 66 is the thought that the number of species concerning which error is most likely to exist constitutes only a small part of the whole. Thus, there may be question concerning the seven species referred to the Fedicininae and to certain isolated species. But the great mass of the species and genera fall into clearly recognizable groups. The genera of Anoplura are reasonably clear and uncomplicated, except as they may be complicated subjectively by workers who see a new genus in every slight departure from the normal form. These genera to a consider¬ able degree fall into groups, the central pattern of which is rather evi¬ dent, but which becomes clouded as we pass out from it. In fact, around their peripheries these groups become so misty that no very definite out¬ lines can be detected and it is here that the principal difficulties arise. To name families that cannot be defined is to create difficulties lor all future workers, to overemphasize the differences that exist and exaggei'ate the boundaries among these differences. At an earlier time, when 1 ittle or nothing was known about the morpholo^ of these insects, certain ideas concerning their classification seemed valid which now appear at least dubious. Thus it was assumed that the presence of a distinct lens marking each compound eye separated the Fediculidae from all the other lice and defined a family. We now know that such lenses are present in various other forms which seem not to be closely related to Pediculus and this once apparently beautifully defined family becomes ex¬ tremely difficult to define. Evolution by loss has occurred so extensively in the Anoplura that the persistence of a structure, may indicate only the retention of what was once a widespread character in all the ancestors of the group. It is therefore difficult to properly evaluate the remnants that are left. One other quite secondary, but nevertheless important, problem arises. This has to do with the names which should be employed for the families and subfamilies that are recognized. This is a problem which is inherently difficult and which, probably because of this difficulty, is not even touched upon by the "International Rules of Zoological Nomenclature." Should priority rule? If so, what constitutes' priority? Does it date from the first recognition of the existence of a group in any status what¬ soever or from the first unequivocal employment ot a group name with a par¬ ticular ending? Are family and subfamily or any lower category names such as tribes and^ subtribes to be regarded as nomenclatorially equivalent, m the nammer in which generic and subgeneric names are equivalent? What de¬ termines the type of any category? Should it be the oldest genus referred to the category — as some maintain — or should it be the genus upon which the category name was first based — as others maintain? And who is to be cited as the author of a group name— if this recogni¬ tion must willy-nilly be accorded to someone? Shall it be the ^person who first recognized the group and employed a group name of any^rank? Or shall it be the person who used the name which is now employed? Thus, is the author of a subfamily name to be regarded as the author of the name if it is elevated to family rank, or shall it be the person who first used the name to characterize a family? If a subfamily is raised to 1 am ily rank and then reduced again to a subfamily of some other family, who is the author of the name? Or should we refuse to bother about the name of the author of ^There are no fixed answers to these problems and in the absence ol an¬ swers one is left very' much to follow whatever course seems reasonable. The writer of these lines has puzzled long over all these questions and has come to no answers to any of them that are entirely satisfactory to himself. As far as classification is concerned, there is on the one hand the undesirability of obscuring facts by too comprehensive groupings or on the other hand of going beyond all reasonable limits by the indiscriminate 67 naming of groups that cannot be supported by any cogent reasons. As to nomenclature, the stand here adopted is in part based upon prior¬ ity in actual recognition of a group, whatever category may have been as¬ signed to it, and in some degree upon arbitrary action in refusing to rec¬ ognize a group — such as the Haematopinoididae — which would assign a family name to a large group on the basis of a very aberrant member. As to authors' names, it is here held that the matter is too unimportant to bother with, or above all to argue very much about one way or another. The names of authors are indicated in accompanying discussions but not con¬ joined with the names of the groups in section headings. THE SYSTEM HERE EMPLOYED Family Echinophthiriidae This family, which was established as such by Enderlein in 1904, is re¬ tained. It was united with the Haematopinidae by Hopkins but this step is regarded as erroneous on morphological grounds. Two subfamilies — Echinoph- thiriinae and Antarctophthiriinae — were recognized by Enderlein and accept¬ ed by most later workers, but are here rejected since it does not appear that anything is gained by recognizing them. Family Haematopinidae First established by Enderlein to contain the vast majority of the suck¬ ing lice and later accepted by all workers with various restrictions. It is here accepted for two genera, Haematopinus and Pecaroecus. Family Hoplopleuridae This family contains within it the genus Haem.atopinoid.es which, under the synonymic name Euhaematopinus, was placed by itself in the subfamily Euhaematopininae of the family Haematopinidae by Enderlein and later, under its correct name Haemal opinoides, placed by Ewing in the family Haematopin¬ oididae. This family is rejected as zoologically unjustified and referred to the Hoplopleuridae. It may very well be argued, and perhaps correctly, that the family name Haematopinoididae should be employed for the family Hoplopleuridae, to which it is here referred, but it is a very aberrant form which is quite unsuited to be used as the type of the family. The group of which H op l op l eur a is here taken as the type was recognized by Ewing in 1929 as the subfamily Hoplopleurinae of the family Haematopinidae. Since at—the same time Ewing recognized the subfamily Ender leine.llinae, it is necessary to make a choice between these two names for the family here considered to include the two groups. Hoplopleura is chosen as being more nearly central than is Enderleinellus . Subfamily Enderleinellinae Ewin»r v to Established by Ewing in 1929 as a subfamily of the Haematopinidae. Here accepted as a subfamily of the Hoplopleuridae, to contain three genera. Subfamily Hybophthirinae Ewing This group was named by Ewing in 1929 as a subfamily of the Haematopinidae. Webb has considered the members of this group to be closely related to Haematopinus and has placed them in the family Haematopinidae, but since he also placed in this family the genus Haematomyzus — which is not even an Anopluran — the importance of the spiracular characters which he employed may be somewhat discounted. 68 The three genera here placed in the Hybophthiri inae are, in their tree paratergal pLates of the abdomen, much more closely similar to the members of the Hoplopleur idae than to any other group. They agree among themselves in the possession of a claw-like structure arising beside the claw on the anterior legs and in this appear to be related most closely to each other. Subfamily Pedicininae Enderlein It is concerning this group that there will probably be the greatest difference of opinion and the writer does not expect agreement with the point of view here adopted. The group was first recognized by Enderlein as a subfamily of the tamily Pediculidae, which was restricted to Pediculus, Pthirus, and Pedlcinus. The genus Pedlcinus has, ever since, been placed as a subfamily ol the Pediculidae because of two factors. One ol these factors is undoubtedly that of the feeling that anything occurring on the Primates should be re¬ lated to Pediculus. The other factor is that of the common possession of eyes by Pediculus and Pedlcinus and this character was employed as the dis¬ tinguishing mark of the Pediculidae. But in the light ol' what is now known it does not appear that this character by itself is especially significant, since it is known that genera such as Pecaroecus and Hicrothoracius — which certainly do not belong with Pediculus — have eyes and they can even be dem¬ onstrated in Haematopinus although they are not there so evident. In fact, present evidence indicates merely that the presence of eyes represents merely the retention of a primitive character, once common to all the sucking lice and their ancestors. If we remove the eyes from consideration, the remainder of the body in Pedlcinus contraindicates any association with Pediculus. In fact, with the eyes removed all the characteristics of the body seem much closer to what is found in the Hoplopleuridae . The free paratergal plates and the absence or great reduction of the gonopods of segment nine in the female are more nearly in harmony with what appears in this family. We might raise Pedlcinus to family rank, but this is merely to increase the number of families by emphasizing the difference in one structure. With these thoughts in mind the author has decided to "take the bull by the horns" and remove the genus Pedicinus from close association with Pediculus , assigning it to the family with which it shares the majoritj ol its features, regardless of whether or not it ouiht to be related to the Pediculidae . Subfamily Polyplacinae Established by Fahrenholz in 1936 as a subfamily of the Haematopinidae . It is here considered to contain the genus Eamophthirus , which was employed by Ewing in 1929 as type of his subfamily Ramophthirinae of the family Haematopinoididae and thus on grounds of priority it might be argued that the name Ramophthiriidae should be employed for it. However, the genus Hamophthirus is very badly described and quite unsuitable to stand as the type of any group. , , „ , . , It contains also the genus Lemurphthirus which was employed by fahrenholz in 1936 as type of the subfamily Lemurphthirinae of the family Haematopin¬ idae. This subfamily is here rejected. Family Linognathidae First recognized by Enderlein as the subfamily Linognathina^ of the tam- ily Haematopinidae and retained in this position by later workers. It is here elevated to family rank. 69 Family Neolinognathidae This group was first recognized by Ewing as the subfamily Neolinognathinae of the family Haematopinidae and later raised to family rank by Fahrenholz. Family Pediculidae This family was apparently established under a family name, with the fam¬ ily ending as now employed, hy Piaget in 1880, although it had earlier been recognized by Giebel under the name Pediculina. It is here utilized for two genera only, the genus Pedicinus — which has usually been assigned to the Pediculidae — here being regarded as belonging rather to the Hoplopleuridae. 70 CHAPTER VI Review of the Families, Subfamilies, Genera and Species of the Anoplura Family ECHINOPHTOIRllDAE Enderlein 1904. Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28:136. (Names the family.) 1909. Enderlein, Deutsche Siidpolar Expedition 10:506. (Divides the family into two subfamilies, Echinophthiriinae aud Antarctophthiriinae.) 1910. MjSberg, Arkiv f8r Zoologi 6:177. (Names the family Lepidophthiri- idae . ) 1916. Ferris, Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences (Series 4) 6:180. (Rejects the family Lepidophthiriidae as a synonym of Ech- iuophthiriidae. ) 1928. Freund, Die Tierwelt der Nord-und Ostsee, Teil XI dx. (Reviews the family and accepts the two subfamilies Echinophthiriinae and Lepi- dophthirinae .) 1929. Ewing, A ManuaL of External Parasites, page 148. (Recognizes three subfamilies, Echinophthiriinae, Antarctophthiriinae, and Lepidoph- thiriinae. ) 1936. Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fiir Parasite nkunde 9 : 56 • (Recognizes the two subfamilies Echinophthiriinae and Antarctophthirinae. ) 1946. Eichler, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte , Neue Folge, 10:345-398. (Recog¬ nizes the family with two subfamilies, Echinophthiriinae and Ant¬ arctophthiriinae and places the family in the "Family Series Echi- nophthiri formia. ") DESCRIPTION OF THE FAMILY. .Anoplura which occur exclusively upon marine mammals of the Suborder Pinnipedia of the Order Carnivora. Eyes not exter¬ nally evident. Antennae four- or five-segmented. Body more or less thick¬ ly beset with setae which are in some species modified into scales, in others only somewhat flattened and in at least one species normally cylin¬ drical. Abdomen never with sclerotized tergal, paratergal, or sternal plates, membranous or leathery. Abdominal spiracles of a distinctive type, with a lom>', slender, and more or less membranous atrial chamber, the walls of which donot bear transverse markings. Female with the gonopods of seg¬ ment ei^ht never forming free lobes. Males with the genital sac forming a flattened, median plate, alongside which lie the flattened parameres. Thorax never with a sternal plate which is apically or marginally free, al¬ though at times with an irregular sternal sclerotization. Middle and pos¬ terior legs always with a very stout tibiotarsus, in which the tibiotarsal division Is scarcely or not at all evident. Anterior legs usually small and slender, with the tibiotarsal division evident, but in at least one species similar to the others. ... . , NOTES. Nothing is to be gained by dividing this family into two sub¬ families, and still less by dividing it into three as has been proposed. Division on the basis of the presence or absence of scales is contraindi¬ cated by the fact that Proechinophthirius fluctus (Ferris), which lacks scales is in other respects very similar to Antarctophthtrus callorhini (Osborn) in which the vestiture of scales is less than that to be found in other members of the latter genus. A division on the basis of number of antennal segments also is contraindicated, since such a division would cut directly across any division on the basis of the presence or absence of scales/ Nor is anything to be gained by division on the basis of the dis tribution of the species for, upon whatever basis such division may be made, it does not follow the relationships of the hosts. 71 Key to the Genera of ECHINOPHIHIRIIDAE 1. Antennae ^segmented . ANTARCTOPHTHIRUS Antennae 4-segmented . 2 2. Abdomen with scales . LEPIDOPHTHIRUS Abdomen without scales . - . 3 S. Leers all of same size and shape, with stout ti bio tarsus and claw . . ECHINOPHTHIRIUS Anterior legs much smaller than the others and with small, slender claw . PKOECHINOPHTHIRIUS Genus ANTARCTOPHTHIRUS Enderlein 1906. Antarctophthirus Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 29:661. 1910. Arctophtirius Mjoberg, Arkiv for Zoologi 13:177. 1934. Antarctophthirus, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 7:484. 1941. Achimella Eichler, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, Neue Folge, 10:375- GENERIC TYPE. The typ.e of Antarctophthirus, by original designation, is Antarctophthirus oimorhini Enderlein. The type of Arctophtirius Mjdberg is, by original designation, Eaematopinus trichechi Bohemann. The type of Achimella is, by original designation, Eaematopinus callorhini Osborn. CHARACTERS. Echinophthiriidae with five-segmented antennae. Anterior legs small and with slender claw; middle and posterior legs very large and stout and with stout claw. Body more or less beset with flattened, scale¬ like setae. NOTES. There is no justification for the recognition of the genus Arc¬ tophtirius Mjoberg. There is perhaps some justification for the recogni¬ tion of Achimella, but that evidence is not considered sufficient. Key to Species of ANTARCTOPHTHIRUS 1. Thoracic sternum beset only with slender setae; scales on the abdomen very few, arranged more or less in patches on the dorsum of the abdo¬ men and on the posterior portion of the venter; occurring on the Alaska fur seal . CALLORHINI Thoracic sternum bearing scales; scales very abundant on the abdomen.. 2 2. Thoracic sternum with a few long setae on its posterior border . 3 Thoracic sternum without long setae along its posterior border . 4 3. Scales of the abdominal dorsum all very uniform in size and shape, ovoid, the apex slightly pointed; occurring on Phocarctos, Eumeto- pias, and Zalophus . MICROCHIR Scales of the abdomen (according to Enderlein) elongated-oval and of various sizes; occurring on Lobodon . L0B0D0NTIS 4. Ventral side of the head beset with small, flattened, oval setae in ad¬ dition to scales; occurring on Ogmorhinus . 0GM0RHINI Ventral side of the head with long hairs or with minute hairs only.... 5 5. Ventral side of the head with many long hairs posteriorly . TRICHECHI Ventral side of the head with only 3~4 minute hairs posteriorly MAWSONI Antarctophthirus callorhini (Osborn) 1899- Eaematopinus callorhini Osborn, In The Fur Seals and the Fur-Seal IsLands of the North Pacific Ocean 3:553; figure 1. 1915- Antarctophthirus monachus Kellogg and Ferris, Anoplura and Mallo- phaga of North American Mammals, Stanford University Publications (no volume number), page 49; text figures 17A and 18; Plate III, figure 4. 72 1934. Antarctophthirus cal lor hint (Osboru), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Fart 7:495; figures 289, 290. 1941. Achlnella cal lorhini (Osborn), Eichler, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, Neue Folge, 10:275- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. The types of Osborn's Haemal op in us cal lorhin i were from Callorhirius alashanus from the Pribilof Islands. The specimens upon which the name monachus were based came from Osborn as a loan but bore no data other than as from "seal," but they were in ail probability from the type lot. Since that time a tew more specimens have come to hand lrom the type host on St. Paul and Pribilof Islands in the Bering Sea. Antarctophthirus lobodoutis Enderleiu 1909. Antarctophthirus lobodontis Enderlein, Deutsche Siidpoiar Expedition 10:510; Figures KK, NN. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known only from the original record from Lobo- don care inophagus , Booth Wandel Island in the Antarctic. Antarctophthirus mawsoni Harrison 1937. Antarctophthirus mawsoni Harrison, Australasian Antarctic Expedi¬ tion, 19 11-1914, Scientific Reports, Series C-Zoology and Botany 2:1:11; figure 1. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Ommatophoca rossi, King George V Land in the Antarctic. Antarctophthirus microchir (Trouessart and Neumann) 1888. Schinophthir ius microchir Trouessart and Neumann, Le Naturaliste 10: 80; figures. 1906. Antarctophthirus microchir (Trouessart and Neumann), Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 29:663; figures 3, 4. 1934. Antarctophthirus microchir (Trouessart and Neumann) , Ferris, Contri¬ butions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 7:489; fig¬ ures 285, 286. 1939. Antarctophthirus microchir californianus Fahrenholz, Mitteilungen aus dem entomologischen Verein Bremen, page 42. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Types from Phocarctos hookeri, Aukland Island. Recorded also from Zalophus californianus and Eumetopias jubata from the coast of California. NOTES. The supposed variety californianus was named by Fahrenholz pure¬ ly upon the basis of differences in the illustrations presented by Enderlein and Ferris. These differences are of an order inevitably associated with differences in the preparation of specimens and involve no actual morpho¬ logical characters. Actually the agreement between specimens from Califor¬ nia and the beautiful illustrations given by Fkiderlein is extremely close. The supposed variety is here rejected. Antarctophthirus ogmorhini Enderlein Figure 31 1902. Echinophthirus setosus (Burmeister) , Rothschild, Report of the Southern Cross Expedition, page 224. (Misidenti fication > 1906. Antarctophthirus ogmorhini Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 29:662; text figures. 1909. Antarctophthirus ogmorhini Enderlein, Enderlein, Deutsche sudpolar Expedition 10:509; figures 174, 175, 181, 182. 1934. Antarctophthirus ogmorhini Enderlein, Ferris, Contributions Toward a 73 Antarctophthirus ogmorhini (Enderlein) Figure 31 74 Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Fart 7:486; figures 282, 283- 1937. Antarctophthirus ogmorhlnt Enderlein, Harrison, Australasian Antarc tic Kxpedition, 1911-1914, Scientific Reports, Series C, /oology and botany 2:1:11. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION . Described as from Otnorhinus leptonyx, Victoria Land and booth Waude 1 Island in the Antarctic. This is apparently now placed in the genus Hydrurga. NOTES. The accompanying illustration was made from the types in the British Museum. Antarctophthirus trichechi (Bohemann) 186 5 . Haematoplnus trichechi Bohemann, Vetenskaps Akademie Forhaudl inger, Kobnhaven 22:557; Plate 35, figure 2. 1909. Antarctophthirus trichechi (Bohemann), Enderlein, Deutsche Siidpolar Expedition 10:512; figures 172, 173. 185-188. _ 1910. Arctophtirus trichechi (Bohemann), Mjoberg, Arkiv tur Zoologi 1U : I3 : 178; figures 90-92. . 1934. Antarctophthirus trichechi (Bohemann), Ferris, Contributions loward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Fart 7:492; figures 287, 288. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded by various authors from the walrus, Odobaenus rosmarus and Odobaenus obesus, from various places in the Arctic. Genus ECHINOPHTHIRIUS Giebel 1871. Bchinophthirius Giebel, Zeitschrift fur die gesamten Naturwissen- schaften 37:177- 1934. Bchinophthirius, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph ol the Sucking Lice, Part 7:475- . , u. . 1946. Bchinophthirius, Hopkins, Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 11, 12:566. (Bears date of 1945, but published May, 1946) GENERIC TYPE. Pediculus phocae Lucas, which is considered to be a syno¬ nym of Pedlculus horridus von Olfers. CHARACTERS. With four-segmented antennae. Legs all ol essentially the same size and form, stout and with stout claw. Abdomen thickly beset with stout, flattened, but not scale-like, setae. HOSTS. Occurring as far as known only on seals ot the genera Halichoerus and Phoca, of the family Phocidae. NOTES. Ferris 11934) reviewed a considerable amount ol material ann concluded that this genus contains but one species. Hopkins (1946) sug¬ gested although apparently not on the basis of an examination ol specimens, that "anaLogy with other genera suggests the possibility that it may prove necessary to divide the genus again into several species or subspecies. After reviewing such material as is available, the opinion is here still held that the genus contains but one species, as far as morphological evi¬ dence goes, although at present nothing certain can be said concerning the supposed subspecies from seals in Lake Baikal. Echinophthirius horridus (von Oilers) Figures 32, 33 1816. 1834. 1838. 1857- 'edlculus horridus von Olfers, De vegetativis et animatis corporibus animatis reperiundis commentarius, Part 1, page 84. (Fide Fahren •edlcuLs phocae Lucas, Guerin's Magazin de Zoologie 4:Classe IX; Plate 121. „ x o • > ediculus setosus Burmeister, Genera Insectorum. Species 12. ’edlculus annulatus Schilling, Gurlt, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte 23: 281. 75 Echinophthirius horridus (von Olfers) Figure 32 1874. Echinophthirius setosus (Denny) (sic), Giebel, Insecta Epizoa, page 42. 1880. Echinophthirius setosus (Lucas), Piaget, Les Pediculines, page 656; Plate 54, figure 1. 1886. Echinophthirius iroenlandicus Becher, In Die Internationale Polar- forschung 1882-1883, Beobachtungs Ergebnisse 3:60; Plate 5, fig* 1* 1897* Echinophthirius sericans Meinert, Vetenskabelige Meddelser Kjobenhavn 58:177* 1919. Echinophthirius horridus (von Olfers), Fahrenholz, Jahresbericht des Niedersachsischen zoologischen Vereins zu Hannover 5-10:22. 1928. Echinophthirius horridus (von Olfers), Freund, In Die Tierwelt der Nord- und Ostsee, Teil XI dj:6; figures 1, 2. 1934* Echinophthirius horridus (von Olfers), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 7:475; figures 277, 278. 1935* Echinophthirius horridus baikalensis Ass, Travaux de la station lim- nologique de Lac Baikal 6 : 21:25-29 ; 5 figures. 1946. Echinophthirius horridus (von Olfers), Hopkins, Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 11, 12:5 66. (Bears date of 1945, but published May, 1946) female genitalia male genital plate male genitalia Echinophthirius horridus (von Olfers> Figure 33 HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described by von Olfers as from Phoca vitulina. The type of phocae Lucas was said to have been taken from the same host species in a zoological garden in Paris. The type of ser icons Meinert was from Phoca iroenlandica and the type of iroenlandicus Becher was ascribed to the same host. The species was recorded by Ferris from Phoca vitulina from the Shetland Islands, from Scotland, and from specimens taken at the Hamburg Zoological Garden; from Phoca hispida in the Beaufort Sea off Alaska; from Phoca richardii at Pacific Grove, California. The species has been recorded on various occasions from Phoca v itulina, Phoca v ar ieiata, and Halichoerus ir’jphus from the North Atlantic. Freund recorded specimens from Phoca baikalensis from Lake Baikal. NOTES. Hopkins has reviewed the literature and has pointed out that the name annulata is a nomen nudum and that Burmeister's name setosus was pro¬ posed merely as a substitute for phocae Lucas. The status of the supposed species iroenlandicus is somewhat obscure. Ferris has examined specimens from "Greenland seal," but it is possible that this label meant nothing more than "a seal from Greenland." Mjoberg recorded specimens from Phoca iroenlandica which he considered to be horridus. Freund, who reviewed the whole subject, considered it very ques¬ tionable that a distinct species occurs on this host. It is here held that the evidence is all against the distinctness of the species Echinophthir ius iroenlandicus Becher. Freund examined specimens from Phoca baicalensis which he considered to belong to horridus, this being anterior to the description of the supposed subspecies baikalensis from this host. We may therefore consider this sup¬ posed subspecies to be a synonym of horridus. As already pointed out in connection with the discussion of the genus, the opinion is here held that there is no evidence to justify the naming of more than one species of this genus. Genus LEPIDOPUTHIRUS Enderlein 1904. Lepidophthirus Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28:44. 1934. Lepidophthirus, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck¬ ing Lice, Part 7:498. GENERIC TYPE. Lepidophthirus macrorhini Enderlein, the only included species . CHARACTERS. Echinophthiriidae with four-segmented antennae. Anterior legs much smaller than the others and with slender claw; middle and poster¬ ior legs very large and stout, with stout claw. Body very thickly beset with setae of various sizes and shapes, these mostly more or less flattened and the dorsum of the abdomen also very thickly beset with scales. Lepidophthirus macrorhini Enderlein Figures 34, 35 1904. Lepidophthirus macrorhini Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28:46; figures 1-5* 1929. Lepidophthirus macrorhini Enderlein, Bedford, Director of Veterinary Services, Union of South Africa, Report 1^:607. 1934. Lepidophthirus macrorhini Enderlein, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 7:499; figures 291, 292. 1937. Lepidophthirus macrorhini Enderlein, Harrison, Australasian Antarc¬ tic Expedition, 1911-1914, Scientific Reports, Series C-Zoology and Botany 2:Part 1: 13- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known only from the southern sea elephant or elephant seal, from Kerguelen Island and also from near Cape Town, South Africa, and from Macquarie Island. 78 ? Lepidophthirus macrorhini Enderlein Figure 34 79 Lepidophthirus macrorhini Erderlein genitalia of male Figure 35 80 Genus PROECH INOPHTH 1 RIUS Ewing 1923. Proec hlnophthir i us Ewing, Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 13:149. 1934- Proechinophthirius, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph ol' the Sucking Lice, Part 7: 48U. GENERIC TYPE, Echinophthirlus fluctus Ferris, the only included species. CHARACTERS. Echinophthiriidae with four-segmented antennae. Thorax with uo sclerotized sternal areas. Abdomen beset with setae ol various shapes and sizes, but none flattened and none being scale-like. Anterior legs smalL and with weak, slender claw; middle and posterior legs large and stout, with stout claw. Proechinophthirius fluctus (Ferris) Figure % 1916. Echinophthirius fluctus Ferris, Entomological News 27:366; figure. 1923. Proechinophthirus fluctus (Ferris), Ewing, Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 13:149* 1934. Proechinophthirus fluctus (Ferris), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 7:481; figures 279. 280, 281. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. The types of the species were taken from the stuffed skin of an Otariid pup in the collection of Stanford University, this bearing no data. The pup was identified as being that of a Stellar s sea lion, Eumetopias jubata, but this may have been an error. The species has since been taken from the Alaskan fur seal, Callorhinus alashanus, on St. Paul Island and on the Pribilof Islands in Bering Sea. Family HAEWATOPINIDAE Enderlein 1904. Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28:136. DESCRIPTION OF THE FAMILY. Anoplura in which the paratergites of the abdominal segments are strongly sclerotized and form lateral lobes or prom¬ inences but are never marginally free from the body wall. Spiracles with the atrium beset internally with numerous points. Legs all of substantial¬ ly the same size and with claws of the same size and shape. Clearly de¬ fined eyes present or absent, if absent the head with pronounced ocular points just posterior to the antennae. Thorax always with a well-defined notal pit and with a pair of sternal, apophyseal pits. Abdomen usually with the derm of the dorsum at least very' finely wrinkled, at times slight¬ ly sclerotic, and with sclerotized areas, which, while somewhat more sclero¬ tized than the surrounding derm, are defined more by the absence of this minute wrinkling. Gonopods of segment eight of the female always well de¬ veloped. Genitalia of the male never with free parameres. Female apparent¬ ly without spermatheca. . NOTES. At one time this family was considered to include the great ma iority of all the sucking lice, but it has been progressively reduced until here it is considered to contain but two genera, Baemtopinus and Pecaroecus, the latter having but one species. Webb (1936) considered it to include four genera — Haematopinus , Baemtomyzus, Bybophthirus, and Scipio and pos¬ sibly also the genus Mlcrothoracius. Baemtomyzus, as has already been and cannot too strongly be — emphasized, does not belong in this Order and the present writer is unable to see any special affinity between Baemtopinus and the two rrenera Bybophthirus and Scipio. There has been some temptation to include Mlcrothoracius in the family, but this has finally been resisted. Actually the family is very difficult to define, unless it be restricted to the single genus Baemtopinus . In the past, when the presence of deiin 81 f/cnitalia of female Figure 36 ite eyes was recognized only in Pedlculus, Pthirus, and Pedictnus, the problem was not difficult, hut now that well-defined eyes with a distinct lens are known to occur in Pecaroeus and morphologically true — although ex¬ ternally scarcely recognizable — eyes have been established in Haenatopinus, there remains little by which the Pediculidae and the Haematopinidae can be separated. Perhaps even yet it has not been possible to tree our thinking from the presupposition that the classification of the lice should follow the phylogeny of the hosts. This matter will be considered further in con¬ nection with the discussion of the Pediculidae. Key to the Genera of Haematopinidae Head with pronounced ocular points posterior to the antennae. . . HAEM ATOP 1NUS Head without ocular points . PECAROECUS Genus HAEM ATOP IN US Leach 1815- Haenatopinus Leach, Edinburgh Encyclopaedia, Supplement 1:24. 1842. Haenatopinus, Denny, Monographia Anoplurorum Lritanniae, page 24. 1880. Haenatopinus, Piaget, Les Pediculines," page 6 33 • 1904. Haenatopinus, Enderlein, Zooiogischer Anzeiger 28:138. 1933* Haenatopinus, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 6:419. 1942. Haenatopinus , Webb, Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 118:578. GENERIC TYPE. Pediculus suis Linnaeus. CHARACTERS. Haematopinidae in which the head is produced into distinct ocular points posterior to the antennae, but with distinct eyes lacking. Legs with a prominent, apically free, and more or less sclerotized process on the ventral side between tibia and tarsus. NOTES. The members of this genus occur on hosts of the families Suidae, Bovidae, and Cervidae of the Order Artiodactyla and the family Equidae of the Order Perissodactyla. Key to Species of HAEMATOPINIJS The species breviculus is omitted from this key because of the inadequate description. 1. Female with the gonopods of segment eight slender, apically acute, curved and almost sickle-shaped; known from Equus burchelli in Africa . ACUT1CEPS Otherwise . ;2 Female with the gonopods of segment eight elongate and narrow, their mesal margins straight and divergent; occurring on Cervus unicolor in India . UONGUS Otherwise . 3 Genitalia of the male with the penis strongly asymmetrical, strongly sclerotized at one side, this sclerotization much swollen and forming a large knob or hook at its base . 4 Genitalia of the male with the penis otherwise formed, V- or Y-shaped if present . . . Female with a deeply pigmented, somewhat W-shaped spot in the wall of the vacrina just anterior to the vulva; occurring on Taurotraius and Streps iceros . TAUROTRAGI Female without such a spot . ;••••• . With 5-8 slender setae in a cluster on the posterior side of each of the lateral lobes of the abdomen; occurring on Bos bubalus normally and apparently also on camels . TOBERCULATUS 2. 3- 83 With not more than 2-3 setae in this position on any segment . 6 6. Head very short and broad, the length only slightly greater than the breadth: occurring on domestic cattle throughout the world . . EURYSTERNUS Head elongate, from 2-2.5 times as long as wide; occurring on Equidae.. . T . . . ASINI 7. An elongate, slender species in which the paratergal plates of the ab¬ domen form prominent, acutely conical points; occurring on Syncerus caffer . BUFALI Stout-bodied species, the paratergal plates forming rounded prominences _ . . . . . 8 8. Head very short and broad, the width of the hindhead more than half as great as the length of the head . ....9 Head relatively slender, the width of the hindhead normally definitely less than half the length of the head . 10 9. Margin of the vulva with a pair of marginally serrate lobes between the bases of the gonopods; occurring on Phacochoerus . PHACDCHOERI Margin of the vulva with an undivided and simple median lobe between the bases of the gonopods; occurring on Poramochoerus . LATHS 10. A stout-bodied form with well-developed, broad, paratergal plates and with the dorsum of the abdomen normally with sclerotized areas; oc¬ curring on domestic pigs . SUIS A more slender-bodied form with very weakly developed paratergal plates and with the dorsum of the abdomen membranous; occurring on the wild boar of Europe . APRI Haematopinus acuticeps Ferris 1933- Haematopinus acuticeps Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 6:467; figure 275. 1948. Haematopinus acuticeps Ferris, Webb, Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 118:581; Plate I, figure G. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known only from the original record, from Hip- potigris (= Equus ) burchelli, Mpwapwa, Tanganyika Territory, East Africa. This host is later cited by Webb as Equus burchelli muansae. NOTES. Whatever may be the status of the two supposed subspecies bur- chellis and elegans of Haematopinus asini which actually or presumptively occur on this same host, there can be no question of the status of acuticeps. The form of the gonopods of the female is alone sufficient to distinguish it. Haematopinus apri Goureau 1866. Haematopinus apri Goureau, Bulletin de la Societe des Sciences His- toriques et Naturelles de l'Yonne, Auxerre 20:205. 1870. Haematopinus urius (Nitzsch), Giebel, Insecta Epizoa, page 45; Plate 2, figure 2. 1880. Haematopinus urius (Nitzsch), Piaget, Les Pediculines, page 654; Plate 48, figure 4. 1933* Haematopinus aperis Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 6:431; figures252B, 253B, 255A-D, 256F, G, M, N. 1939. Haematopinus suis (Linnaeus), Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fiir Infektion- skrankheiten, parasitare Krankheiten und Hygiene der Haustiere 55: 2:138; figures 1-5. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Sus scrofa, the wild swine of western Europe. NOTES. The confusion of this species with Haematopinus suis (Linnaeus) will he discussed in more detail in connection with the latter species. It is sufficient here merely to remark that the lice of Sus scrofa, the wild 84 boar of western Europe, seem clearly to be distinct from the lice of the domesticated swine of the present day, which are thought to have been de rived from pigs of eastern Asia that have been imported into Europe. The purely uomeuclatorial problem concerning the proper name lor this species presents some difficult points. In pre-Liunaeau times the name Pediculus urius was used very evidently for lice from the pigs of Europe which were derived from the wild swine of Europe, but Linnaeus did not em¬ ploy this name. It was revived by Nitzsch in 1818 and used by him, clearly as a substitute for the name suis employed by Linnaeus, since suis is placed as a synonym of urius. In 1870 Giebel used the name urius for lice of domestic and wild swine. His illustration was said by him to have been prepared by Nitzsch in 1805. In the writer's opinion it clearly represents the lice of wild swine. A case might, therefore, be made out for the use ot the name urius since the type of the name urius as employed by Nitzsch would fix the application of the name if suis be regarded as a separate species. In 1880 Piaget used the name urius. The writer has examined Piaget's material and used his specimens as the types for the name aperis, which was published in 1933 * However, according to Eahreuholz, the name Haematopinus apri Goureau was proposed in 1866 for the lice of wild swine of Europe. The present writer has not seen this work and accepts the name on Fahrenholz ' word. In any case this name certainly reduced aperis to synonymy. Hopkins has expressed the opinion that this form should be regarded as a subspecies of suis, but the writer cannot concur in this. Haematopinus asini (Linnaeus) Figures 37, 38 1758. Pediculus asini Linnaeus, Sjystema Naturae, Edition X, page 612. 1829. Pediculus asini (Linnaeus). Stephens, Catalogue of British Insects 2: 329 . 1838. Pediculus macrocephalus Burmeister, Genera Insectorum, Rhynchota, Species 18. 1916. Haematopinus elegans Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, Abteil- ung A, 81:11:22; figure 8. 1916. Haematopinus minor Fahrenholz, Zoologischer Anzeiger 48:90. 1933. Haematopinus asini (Linnaeus), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 6:464; figures 273, 274, 275C. 1948. Haematopinus asini asini (Linnaeus), Webb, Proceedings of the Zoolog¬ ical Society of London 118:578. 1948. Haematopinus asini macrocephalus (Burmeister), Webb, Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 118:578. 1948. Haematopinus asini minor Fahrenholz, Webb, Proceedings of the Zoolog¬ ical Society of London 118:580; figures g-i ; Plate I, figure U. 1948. Haematopinus asini burchellis Webb, Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 118:580; figures d-f; Plate I, figures A, B, E. 1948. Haematopinus asini elegans Fahrenholz, Webb, Proceedings of the Zoo¬ logical Society of London 118:580. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. The type host is Equus asinus. Recorded also from domestic horses in various parts of the world and, in the opinion here adopted, apparently occurring normally on zebras. The type host of macro¬ cephalus apparently was the domestic horse. That of minor was Equus bur- chelli, and it is recorded also from Equus burchelli grant i. The type host of burchellis is Equus burchelli grant i. The type of elegans was not speci¬ fied, being recorded merely as from Gobabis, Southwest Africa. NOTES. ^In these species from the genus Equus we have a most extraordi¬ nary’ situation. Webb (1948) has reviewed the group and adopted the point 8^ Haematopinus asini (Linnaeus) Figure 37 86 Haematopinus asini (Linnaeus), details Figure 38 of view that we have to do with a series of "subspecies," some of which occur upon the same host. They are described by him as differing only in the form of the head. It may be noted that Haematopinus acuticeps Ferris occurs also ou Equus burchellt , but this species is very evidently distinct in every respect, including the genitalia ol the female. The point of view adopted by the present writer toward the establishment of subspecies in this group will be considered elsewhere in this paper. It is the opinion here adopted that in the case of these supposed subspecies the evidence for their separation from asini is not convincing except in the case of the form identified by Webb as minor. The present writer exam¬ ined the types of this species in connection with his earlier work and no¬ ticed no difference which would justify the recognition of this form in any way, but the illustration given by Webb (his Plate I, figure D) suggests that it may merit some recognition, although it is not evident that the form illustrated by him is the same as that to which the name was applied by Fahrenholz. Haematopinus breviculus Fahrenholz 1939. Haematopinus breviculus Fahrenholz, Mitteilungen aus dem entomolog- ischen Verein Bremen, page $2; figures 1-3- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION . Based upon a single female, without indication of host or origin. Said by Fahrenholz to be very close to eurysternus. 37 Haematopinus bufali (de Geer) 1778. Pediculus bufali de Geer, Memoires pour servir a l'histoire naturelle des insectes apteres 7:68; Plate I, figures 11, 12. 1781. Pediculus bufali-capensis Fabricius, Species Insectorum, Volume 2. 1816. Pediculus papillosus von Olfers, De vegetativis et animatis corporibus in corporibus animatis reperiundis commentarius, page 85. 1844. Pediculus phthlriopsis Gervais, In Walckenaer, Histoire naturelle des insectes apteres 3:366. 1915* Haematopinus neumanni Fahrenholz, Arch iv fur Nat urge schichte , Abteil- ung A, 81: 11:8. 1935* Haematopinus bufali (de Geer), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 6:460; figures 270-272. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Originally described as from "le Buffle d'Afrique," from the Cape of Good Hope. Later recorded from Buffelus caffer and "buffalo" in Nyasaland and the Congo Free State. Mr. G. H. E. Hopkins has kindly supplied specimens from Buffelus (or Syncerus) caffer radcliffei on the shores of Lake Edward. Haematopinus eurysternus (Nitzsch) Figures 39. 40 1818. Pediculus eurysternus Nitzsch, Germar's Magazin fur die Entomologie 3:305. 1829. Haematopinus eurysternus (Nitzsch), Stephens, Catalogue of British Insects 2:329. 1916 . Haematopinus quadripertusus Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, Abteilung A, 81:11:19; figures 15-17. 1916 . Haematopinus parviprocursus Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, Abteilung A, 81:11:21. 1933- Haematopinus eurysternus (Nitzsch) , Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 6:448; figures 263, 264. 1950. Haematopinus quadripertusus Fahrenholz, Muesebeck, Journal of Eco¬ nomic Entomology 43:119, 133* HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Originally described from domestic cattle in Europe and known from these hosts from many parts of the world. NOTES. Haematopinus quadripertusus was described from males only, from cattle at Banjo, in the Cameroons. Haematopinus parviprocursus was de¬ scribed from females only from unknown host from the then German Southwest Africa. The types of both these supposed species were examined by Ferris, who came to the conclusion that they represent the same species and that this species is to be identified as Haematopinus eurysternus. This question has been reviewed again in connection with the present work and the opinion previously expressed is still maintained. It was pointed out by Ferris (1933) that specimens from cattle in tropical coun¬ tries seem to be much larger and of deeper pigmentation than those from northern areas, although no morphological differences could be detected. The only basis then for the separation of the cattle lice into two or more species is that of size. It must be noted, however, that the cattle of many tropical areas, such as Asia and Africa, are derived apparently from a different source from the cattle of Europe and North America, the former apparently having come largely from the "hump- backed" type and there may be an association with these differences of host origins. Specimens of the large form have been collected in Florida in the United States. These were sent to the writer by Dr. C. F. W. Muesebeck of the United States Department of Agriculture and the information noted above was imparted to him. He elected to regard these specimens as representing a species different from that usually found in the United States and has pub- 88 Haematopinus eurysternus (Nitzsch) Figure 39 89 female genitalia ventral - male genitalia - dorsal Haematopinus eurysternus (Nitzsch), details Figure 40 lished the record, using the common name "Cattle tail louse," for this form. The question of the specific name to be used for this form, if it be recognized, arises. It would appear that the name quadripertusus Fahrenholz is available. However, this form is not here accepted as distinct. Haematopinus latus Neumann 1909. Haematopinus latus Neumann, Archives de Parasitologie 13:595; Fig¬ ures 6-9. 1911. Haematopinus peristictus Kellogg and Paine, Bulletin of Entomological Research 2:145. (In part) 1912. Haematopinus incisus Harms, Zoologischer Anzeiger 40:293- 1933* Haematopinus latus Neumann, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 7:477: figures 260C, 262. 1939. Haematopinus latus Neumann, Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fiir Infektions- krankheiten, parasitare Krankheiten und Hygiene der Haustiere 55: 151 ; Plate 4, figures 9-11. 1939. Haematopinus latus latissimus Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Infektions- krankheiten, parasitare Krankheiten und Hygiene der Haustiere 55: 152; Plate 4, figure 12. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. The types of latus were recorded as from Potomochoerus africanus at Kaporo, Nyasaland. The types of the supposed variety latissimus are the specimens recorded by Ferris from Potomochoerus choeropotamus , Luangwa Valley, northeastern Rhodesia. Recorded from the same host from Zululand and South Africa and also from Potomochoerus affinis from the former German East Africa. 90 NOTES. This species has at times been contused with Haematopinus phacochoer l Enderlein, but is clearly distinct. The writer sees no excuse for the naming of the supposed variety latis- simus. Among the specimens at hand are some of evidently very early adult females and others of fully adult individuals. There is enough difference among these specimens to suggest the presence of two forms and this seems to be the only basis for Fahrenholz' supposed variety. Haematop inus longus Neumann 1912. Haematopinus longus Neumann, Bulletin de la Society Zoologique de France 37*141; figure 1. 1933 . Haematopinus longus Neumann, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 6:469; figure 276. HOSTS .AND DISTRIBUTION. Known only from the original record, from Cervus unicolor, at Kota, Nepal, India. Haematopinus phacochoeri Enderlein 1908. Haematopinus phacochoeri Enderlein, Wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der Schwedische Expedition nach dem Ki limandj aro, dem Meru, und dem umgebenden Massaische Steppen 11:7; figure. 1911. Haematopinus peristictus Kellogg and Paine, Bulletin of Entomological Research 2:145; Plate 4, figures 3-6 (in part). 1933. Haematopinus phacochoeri Enderlein, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 6:444; figures 260, 261. 1939. Haematopinus phacochoeri Enderlein, Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur In- fektionsk rankhei ten , parasitare Krankheiten und Hygiene der Haus- tiere 55:149; figures 9a, 9b. 1939. Haematopinus phacochoeri peristictus Kellogg and Paine, Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Infektionskrankheiten, parasit&re Krankheiten und Hygiene der Haustiere 55:150. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. The types of phacochoeri were from Phacochoerus aeliani massaicus in the region of Mt. Kilimanjaro and those of peristictus from Phacochoerus aethiopicus , at Akamanga, North Nyasa, Africa. The species has been recorded from Phacochoerus sp. in the former German East Africa, and from phacochoerus sundevali in Zululand. In addition, there are records given as merely from "wart hog, " in East Africa, northeastern Rhodesia and southern Rhodesia. Certain records from "buffalo," in Kenya are open to doubt. . «... • . NOTES. There has in the past been some confusion ot this species with Haematopinus latus Neumann, but it appears that these two species are char¬ acteristic of different host genera. Fahrenholz has attempted to resurrect the name peristictus as a variety, but the types of this name are at hand and offer no justification tor this procedure. Haematopinus suis (Linnaeus) Figures 41, 42 1758. Pediculus suis Linnaeus, Systema Naturae, Edition X, page 611. 1810. Haematopinus suis (Linnaeus), Leach, Encyclopaedia Brittannica, Sup¬ plement 1, page 24. « nn p- 1818. Pediculus urius Nitzsch, Germar s Magazin der Entomologie 1903. Haematopinus irritans Law, Textbook of Veterinary Medicine ^:13- 1911. Haematopinus suis aduenticius Neumann, Archives de Parasitologie 14. 406 ; figure 8. . 1916. Haematopinus suis chinensis Fahrenholz, Fahrenholz, Zoologischer An- zeiger 48:90. 91 Haematopinus suis (Linnaeus) Figure 41 92 thcrax antenna genitalia genitalia 'Haematopinus suis (Linnaeus), details Figure 42 93 Haematopinus suis germanus (misprint tor germanicus) Fahrenholz, Zo- ologischer Anzeiger 48:90. Haematopinus suis sardiniensis Fahrenholz, Jahrbuch der Hamburgisch- en Wissenschaftlichen Anstalten 34:Beiheft 2:10. Haematopinus suis (Linnaeus), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 6:425; figures 252A, 253A, 254. Haematopinus adventicius Fahrenholz, Ewing, Proceedings of the Hel¬ minthological Society of Washington, page 76. Haematopinus chinensis Fahrenholz, Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur In- fektionskrankheiten, parasitare Krankheiten und Hygiene der Haus- tiere 55:Heft 2:138; Plate 3> figures 1-3- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. The name Pediculus suis was applied specifical¬ ly By Linnaeus to the lice of domestic swine, presumably those of Sweden. Since that time it has been used for the lice of domestic swine, as recorded from almost all parts of the world. The only records from undomesticated swine seem to be those given by Ferris (1933) from Sus cristatus, from Tanjong Badak, Tenasserim and from Dinapore, India. NOTES. Concerning this species we have a problem that is compounded of both nomenclatorial and zoological questions, for none of which is there at present a satisfactory answer. The story is long and complicated and nothing more than a mere abstract of it can here be presented. The reasons for the complications rest largely upon the fact that the domesticated swine population of Europe has changed within relatively recent times. The domesticated swine of western Europe, throughout most of his¬ toric times, were presumably derived from the wild swine of that area. Early in the eighteenth century domesticated swine from eastern Asia were introduced into Europe and swine of this type have now become the common domesticated animals of almost all the world. Because of these facts, references to the lice of swine in European lit¬ erature, certainly prior to such a date as 1758, undoubtedly concerned the lice of the wild boar of Europe, Sus scrofa. Even at that date, 1758, the population of domestic swine in Europe was changing. Now, if the native swine of Europe originally had upon them a louse of a species different from that of the domesticated swine of eastern Asia — as seems to be true — to which of these species should the name suis apply? There are two indirect approaches to the problem. One of these rests upon pre-Linnaean history and the other upon post-Linnaean history. On the basis of pre-Linnaean history it is clear that the name suis should apply to lice from the wild swine of Europe. But on the basis of post-Linnaean history the name has been used for almost 200' years to apply to lice de¬ rived from the swine of eastern Asia, which even at the time of Linnaeus were beginning to replace the other type. No one knows what Linnaeus actually had in hand when he named the species Pedicuius suis. The probabilities certainly are that he used the name for lice of swine of the older European race, although it must be noted that the Asiatic swine had been introduced into Sweden a few years before the appearance of the tenth edition of the Systema Naturae and it is possible — since they undoubtedly attracted a considerable amount of attention — lice may have been taken from them and come to Linnaeus' notice. From the point of view of the present writer the reasonable procedure is to accept the name suis for the lice of domestic swine as we now find them and to consider that as used by Linnaeus the name covered a compound species. We may legitimately argue that the general usage of the last 150 years or more constitutes a de facto restriction of this name to the form for which it has commonly been used and that to change this at the present date is unnecessary and confusing. Furthermore, it should be noted that as early as 1818 Nitzsch revived the old, pre-Linnaean name urlus as a substitute for suis, and that later 1916. 1917. 1933- 1934. 1939. 94 evidence has indicated that lie actually had at hand the lice ol the wild swine. This name might be considered thereby to have become established. In any case, in 1866 these lice were definitely given the name Haemtopinus aprl Goureau. Fahrenholz and Ewing have opposed the point of view here held and have maintained that the name suts should be transferred to the lice of the wild swine of Europe, thus leaving it to be detennined what name should be used for those from the present-day domesticated swine. Fahrenholz has main¬ tained that the proper name to be used is Haema top inus cbinensis Fahrenholz, while Ewing has supported Haematopinus advent ictus Neumann, both overlooked the earlier name Haematop inus trritans Law. The problem can in the end be settled only by a ruling of the Interna¬ tional Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, and lor the present the writer refuses to disturb the long-established nomenclature. So much for the nomenclatorial problem. The zoological problem is also involved and complicated. To begiu with, it appears that the lice of the wild swine of Europe dif¬ fer to such a degree from those ot domesticated swine tliat they utiy justi¬ fiably be called a distinct species. After we have eliminated the lice of the wild swine of Europe from consideration, there remains the question ol the forms to be found among the lice of domesticated swine. Among these there is present a considerable variety ot size, lorm, pigmentation, and ol some morphological characters. At least three of the forms have been first named as varieties and then elevated to the rank of species by Fahrenholz. Ferris (1933), on the basis of an examination of specimens from numerous parts of the world, gave an extended account of the variations to be found among them. Here and there appeared individual collections which, if taken by themselves alone, might justify some nomenclatorial recognition. But after these specimens are removed we are left with a residue ol material which presents almost every possible combination of the characters seen in the others, indicating a completely interlinked genetic chain which con¬ forms to the concept of species here adopted and previously discussed. In the end the problem can be settled — if at all — only by genetic studies. For the present the single name Haemtopinus suis (Linnaeus) will here be used to cover this complex of forms. Haematop inus taurotragi Cummings 1914. Haematoptnus taurotragi Cummings, Bulletin of Entomological Research 5:155; figures. _ 1933. Haematopinus taurotragi Cummings, Ferris, Contributions I oward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 6:453; figures 265, -66. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION, type from Taurotragus oryx ( =Boselaphus oreas) , from a menagerie in England. Later recorded by Bedford from the same host at various placed in South Africa and also from Strepsiceros kudu in South Africa. Haematopinus tuberculatus (Burmeister) Figures 43, 44 1800. Pedtculus bufall-europaei Latreille, Histoire naturelle et parti culi- ere des crustaces et des insectes 8:96 (nomen dubium,) . 1839. Pedtculus tuberculatus Burmeister, Genera Insectorum, Khynchota, 1862 Haematopinus tuberculatus (Burmeister', Lucas, Annales de la Socieie Entomologique de France (series 2) 10:529; Plate 11, number 2. 1869 . Haematopinus punctatus Rudow, Zeitschrift fur die gesamten Naturwis- senschaften 34:16*. 95 Haematopinus tuberculatus (Burmeister) Figure 43 96 neutral male genitalia dorsal female genitalia Haematopinus tuberculatus (Burmeisterb details Figure 44 1919. Haematopinus bufali-europaei (Latreille), Fahrenholz, Zeitschnft fur angewandte Entomologie 6:154. . 1933. haematopinus tuberculatus (Burmeister), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 6:455; figures 26 / 269 - HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION . Burmeister' s name was based upon specimens irom the "common buffalo or buffalo of India," presumably Bos bubalus, i and t.here are manv records of the species from this host in India, China, the Philip pine Islands and Guam. In addition, there are records of the species ; from the yak, Bos trunniens, and from camel in Australia and Africa. Latreill s snecimens were recorded as from buffalo Irom Ital} . . , , NOTES. There is a strong probability that the species named 3 La rei (1800) is the same as that named by Burmeister in 1839, but the writer has In the oast declined, and still declines, to accept the synonymy involved. A verv considerable literature has grown up under the nam e tuberculatus, while' under the clumsy name bufali-europaei there have been but occasional nassinii references since it was first proposed. P Specimens from camel have been examined by the writer. They seem differ from the typical form only in smaLler size. 97 Genus PECAROECUS Babcock and Ewing 1939- Pecaroecus Babcock and Ewing, Proceedings of the Entomological Soci¬ ety of Washington 40:197. GENERIC TYPE. Pecaroecus javalii Babcock and Ewing. CHARACTERS. Haematopinidae with distinct eyes, these being represented by a facet and a pigment spot just posterior to each antenna. Legs without a sclerotized plate in the "palm" of the tibia. Thorax without a sclero- tized sternal plate. Abdomen with small, sclerotized, tubercle-like para- tergites present. NOTES. The single known species of this genus is a strange form which seems rather definitely to be related to Haematopinus. Pecaroecus javalii Babcock and Ewing Figures 45, 46 1938* Pecaroecus javalii Babcock and Ewing, Proceedings of the Entomologi¬ cal Society of Washington 40:199; figures 103 - HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known from a single record, from Pecari aniula- tus, between Juno and the Pecos River, State of Texas, United States. NOTES. Specimens from the type lot have been made available through the kindness of Mr. Babcock and the accompanying illustrations are based upon these. Family HOPLOPLEURIDAE Ferris, new family DESCRIPTION OF THE FAMILY. Anoplura in most of which there is no exter¬ nal indication of eyes, lenses being present in only one genus. Abdomen, in all but one species, with paratergal plates on at least one segment, these plates always at least in part with an apical portion which is free from the body and not forming a mere cap over the apex of lateral lobes of the abdomen. Thoracic sternal plate usually developed, commonly with its posterior apex free, but at times weakly sclerotized and at times lacking. Ventral prothoracic apophyseal pits lacking. Abdominal tergal and sternal plates very commonly present and well developed. Antennae normally five- segmented, in one species described as three-segmented, at times with the terminal three segments tending to be more or less fused together, frequent¬ ly sexually dimorphic, the male having either the apical preaxial angle of segment three more or less produced and bearing one or more short, stout, retrorse setae dorsally, or having such a seta on the dorsal side of each of the last three segments. Female with the gonopods of the ninth segment usually short and not strongly developed, never elongated and leaf-like. NOTES. As here understood this is the largest family of the Order, most of its members occurring on rodents, but a few on Insectivora and Primates, and one on Ungulata. The principal objection that may be urged against this family is the in¬ clusion in it of the genus Pedicinus, which has long been associated with the Pediculidae. This matter will be discussed at length under the sub¬ family Pedicininae and it may here simply be noted that in the writer's opinion the genus is more closely related to the Hoplopleuridae than it is to Pediculus . The general pattern of the Hoplopleuridae is reasonably consistent, be¬ ing marked especially by the development of the paratergal plates of the abdomen, which always have at least an apical point free from the body wall. The famiiy name is chosen from a genus which is large and in which the characters of the family are especially well developed. The family is here divided into five subfamilies, which may be separated by the following key. 98 Pecaroecus javalii Babcock and Ewing Figure 45 99 genitalia of female Pecaroecus javalii Babcock and Ewing, Figure 46 100 Key to the Subfamilies of Hoplopleuridae 2. 3- 4. Eyes present externally as a pair of distinct lenses; occurring on Old World monkeys of the superfamily Cercopithecoidea . PEDlCININAE Without any external indication of eyes . . • “ With a small, claw-like process alongside the true claw on the anterior legs . ’ . HYBOPHTHIRINAE Without such a claw-like process on the anterior legs . •••3 Anterior and middle lej/sot the same size and ionn, both small and slen- der, with slender claw; ventral side of the abdomen in all species except three, with a pair of small, sclerotized, detached plates on the venter of abdominal segment two; restrictei to Sciuridae . . ENUE KLEIN ELLIN AE Anterior legs the smallest of the three pairs, the second pair at least somewhat larger than the first and with stouter claw; venter ot ab¬ dominal segment two without such a pair of detached plates, except as the pa rater gal plates of this segment may be longitudinally divided into a dorsal and a ventral piece . ••••• •• ** •*.••• * Second abdominal segment with its sternal plate extended laterally on each side to articulate with the corresponding paratergal plate...... . HOFLOPLElIKLN AL Second abdominal segment with its sternal plate never thus lat¬ erally . POLYP LACINAE Subfamily EN DERLELNELLIN AE Ewing 1929. Ewincr, A Manual of External Parasites, page 132. DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBFAMILY. Hoplopleuridae with the two anterior pairs of le.rS slender and with slender claw, the two pairs being of the same size and shape, the third pair stout and with stout claw. All but three ol the included species provided with a pair of small, highly sclerotized plates on the ventral side of the second abdominal segment, each ot these plates bearing a strongly sclerotized, flat projection. Usua ly very sma species. All the known species occurring on the rodent family Sciuridae. NOTES. The members of this subfamily are among the smallest ol e Anoplura, some of them attaining a length of scarcely, more than .3? mm- The peculiar plates on the venter of the second abdominal segment are at present of undetermined homology. In some species each plate articulates laterally with the corresponding paratergite. It nay be either a detache oortion of the paratergite arising from some such phenomenon as the ventral portion of the longitudinally divided paratergites of this ■innpars esDeciallv clearly in the genus Fahrenholzia — or it may be an ex treme development of the divided sternal plate of the second segment which appears in s^ch genera as Schizophthirus and Haematopinoides and is at times indicated in Roplopleura itself. In any case the development seen in ^ ^ iCo" -enera —Hicrophthirus and tterneckia— totaling three species, which are here assigned to the Enderleinellinae, lack these plates but in o respects seenTproperly to be associated with Enderletnellus , both on the basis of general structure and host relationships. Key to the Genera of Enderleinellinae The pair of pUtes on the venter of abdomnal se^t two^res^i...^^ ^Seteroaal SplaTes°of abdominal segments' three' to 'six iaih connected ventrallyP»ith the corresponding sternite by a narrow, sclerotized 1. 2. 101 bridge; paratergal plates with their posterior margin not free from the body wall; occurring on American flying squirrels. . .MICROPHTHIRUS Paratergal plates of the abdominal segments not thus connected with the stemites, their apices free from the body wall; occurring on African squirrels . WERNECKIA Genus ENDERLEINELLUS Fahrenholz 1912. Enderleinellus Fahrenholz, Zoologischer Anzeiger 39:56. 1919. Enderleinellus, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck¬ ing Lice, Part 1:7. 1929. Cyclophthirus Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, page 195 * 1929. Euenderleinellus Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, page 197. 1929. Hoplophthirus Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, page 194. 1929. Rhinophthirus Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, page 196. GENERIC TYPE. Pediculus sphaerocephalus Nitzsch = Enderleinellus nitzschi Fahrenholz. GENERIC SYNONYMS. Cyclophthirus Ewing, type Haematopinus suturalis Osborn. Euenderleinellus Ewing, type Enderleinellus larisci Ferris. Hoplophthirus Ewing, type Enderleinellus euxeri Ferris. Rhinophthirus Ewing, type Enderleinellus heliosciuri Ferris. CHARACTERS. Enderleinellinae in which a pair of small, sclerotized plates is present on the venter of abdominal segment three, these plates bearing a flattened point which is apically free from the body. All the known members of the genus occur on hosts of the rodent family Sciuridae. NOTES. In 1929 Ewing proposed to divide this genus, forming from it a total of five genera. Actually, if one wishes to overlook the basic simi¬ larities which exist throughout the group' and to seize upon the peculiari¬ ties of individual species, this number of genera could be doubled with no special effort. It may very well be that when the numerous species that must still remain to be discovered have been incorporated into the system some division will be justified and at least a part of the names proposed by Ewing will deserve to be accepted. For the present nothing much seems to be gained by such division and all the species are here retained in Enderleinel lus. Certain very troublesome problems arise in connection with some of the groups of species within the genus. These can be illustrated especially by referring to the group which occurs on New World members of the genus Sciurus. A very considerable amount of material representing this group has been assembled, but there remain many host species from which nothing has yet been collected. Within this material it is possible to recognize a wide variety of form in the genitalia of the males, although all the dif¬ ferences represent merely modifications of a single pattern. Some speci¬ mens are so different from others that it would appear nonsensical to refer them to the same species, but there are numerous instances of intermediate forms differing only in some small detail. We have on the one hand the constantly pressing temptation to name a new species or "variety" for each of these slightly different forms, or on the other hand to throw all these variants into a few species. Either method produces results which are un¬ desirable and which may equally effectually obscure any approximation to truth. At, the time when the section on this genus was prepared by Ferris for his "Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice," he was but an inexperienced student of the systematics of insects. Disgusted by the results of unrestrained "species mongering" he revolted against the prac¬ tices of certain other workers and went to the other extreme. It now ap¬ pears that this conservatism was in its turn unsupportable and certainly some of the so-called species recognized by Ferris are actually species groups. 102 Dr. Fabio Werneck, of the Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, of kio de Janeiro, Brasil, in the course of a few months spent at Stanford University, inde¬ pendently worked over the extensive collection oi Enderletnel lus there a vailahle . He detected some of the errors, not only of judgment but ol ob¬ servation, on the part of Ferris and named certain new species Irom the collection. However, a considerable amount of material was lelt b) him as still doubtful and remains for further study to elucidate it. With the addition of the species recognized by Werneck the number ol species now assigned to the genus is 29, which we may suspect represents scarcely more than halt the species that exist. El lender, in his review ol the rodents, recognizes *14 genera in the Sciuridae, these containing ap proximately 1300 named forms. The vast majority of these forms are listed as subspecies and as there appears to be an averaged about live subspecies for each species it may be assumed that about 300 actual species exi^t in the family. Of these only about 50 have as yet yielded species of Knder- leinellus, although the evidence indicates that every Sciurid possesses a member of this genus. It therefore seems probable that the total number ol species of the genus in existence will probably be between oO and 60. When the majority of these are knowu we shall be in a much better position than at present to develop a classification of the group. Key to Species of ENDERLELNELLUS 1. Paired ventral plates of abdominal segment 2 each produced laterally to meet the corresponding paratergal plate . ••••• . * . Paired ventral plates of abdominal segment 2 circular, not thus produced laterally and completely detached from the paratergites . •• 2 (1). Abdominal segments 4-8 each with a pair of very long setae on the paratergal plates or at the lateral margins of the body, the lat¬ eral margins thus fringed with pairs of long setae; occurring on Marmota in North America . •••••; . MARMOT AE Such long setae present only on the paratergal plates...... . J 3 (2). Female with 2-4 very long setae on the dorsum oi abdominal seg™ent 4, these setae reaching to the apex ot the body; known lrom Ci tel lus beecheyt, Cttellus variegatus, and Cite ll us teret icaudus in southwestern and extreme western United States . UbttJKNi Female without such long dorsal setae; known from many species ; ol Citellus from Siberia throughout North America . aJiLRALiS 4 (1). Paratergal plates present only on segments 2n4.. . Q’ Paratergal plates present on segments ^2-5 or z-b . . 5 (4). Spiracles present only on segments S~i. . . . . E Spiracles present on at least segments 3-5 and at times on 3 6 (5). Both sexes with abdominal setae, both dorsally and ventrally , 1' g , ^ flattened, elongate-cuneiform; known from Both* sexes with the abdominal setae, both dorsally and ventrally’, all slender; known from Paraxerus in Africa. .......... - Z/UhAlbS 7 (6). Dorsum of the abdomen very sparsely haired, the lemale with no more than 4-5 setae on each half anterior to segment, these all very ’ong; the male with not more than 3-4 such setae and with a median series of pairs of very small Dorsum^fn^both' sexes j with seUe more numerous and none much longer than the length of its segment . . . q (7) Dorsum of the abdomen with numerous setae, there being as many as 8 UorsumQ ^ ^ almost continuous row across segments 4-6 m both sexes: known from Lartscus in Borneo . •••••• . . . LAKlbtl Dorsum of the abdomen with not more than 8-10 setae in any row in 103 the female and less on the male; known from Menetes in Siam . . MBNETJNSIS 9 (4). Paratergal plates present on abdominal segments 2-6 . 10 Paratergal plates present on abdominal segments 2-5 . 12 10 (9) . Thoracic sternal plate with a slender, median, anterior prolonga¬ tion which extends forward between the anterior coxae; occurring on the European Sciurus vulgaris . NITZSCHI Thoracic sternal plate without such anterior prolongation . 11 11 (10). Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 3 bearing a seta which is as long as the abdomen itself; known from Xerus erythropus in Africa . EUXERI No seta on any paratergal plate longer than the plate itself; known from Dremomys pernyi in China . DREMOMYDIS 12 (9) . Thoracic sternal plate with a narrow, median, anterior prolonga¬ tion extending forward between the anterior coxae . 15 Thoracic sternal plate without such median anterior prolongation.. . 13 13 (12). All spiracles extremely large, their outside diameter equaling almost half the width of the plates which bear them; known from members of the genus Calloscturus in the Malayan Region . . MALAYS! ANUS Spiracles small, equaling only a small fraction of the width of the plates which bear them . 14 14 (13) . Paratergal plates of segment 4 with 1 of their 2 setae equaling 2-3 times the length of the plate that bears it ; attributed (possibly erroneously) to the North American Tamtas striatus... . TAMIASIS Paratergal plates of segment 4 with the setae much shorter than the length of the plates; known from Nannosciurus in Java . . . NANNOSCIURI 15 (12). Thoracic sternal plate divided longi tudinally into 2 oval, strong¬ ly sclerotized pieces which are separated from each other by a more or less membranous median area; occurring on New World squirrels of the genus Sciurus and closely related genera (see special key); the group of . LONGICEPS Thoracic sternal plate without such division; known from Sciuro- t ami as in China . SCIUROTAMIASTS The Longi ceps Group The members of this group constitute an extraordinary complex of evi¬ dently closely related forms which occur on New World members of the genera Sciurus and Microsciurus , the latter being a little genus that is confined to Central America and northern South America. While a considerable amount of material is available, it represents only a small portion of the forms that probably exist. The development of an understanding of this complex has only begun and consequently uncertainty concerning the species which should be recognized must remain for a long time to come. All that has been accomplished thus far is to segregate a few of the forms that are clearly recognizable, while there are left on hand numerous specimens that cannot he assigned to one species or another. In his treatment of the genus Enderlelnellus in Part 1 of his "Contribu¬ tions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, " Ferris called attention to the existence of numerous variants of the males of the four species of this group which he recognized. Later, Werneck worked over this same material and from it and other specimens available to him later named six more species, bringing to ten the total number of species recognized in the group. Neither Ferris nor Werneck was able to point out characters by 104 which the females could be differentiated and the species were based almost entirely upon characteristics of the genitalia of the males. A renewed study of the group in connection with the present work has re¬ vealed certain minute characters which serve to make at least some of the species identifiable in the female also, but even yet there remain some which can be associated with their males only by being found in company with them. The males present what is probably the most unusual complex of struc¬ tures that is to be found in this sex in any of the sucking lice. Material upon which to base the much-needed dissections to explain these structures has not been available in connection with this work aud such a study must be left to the future. All that can be done at present is simply arbitral^ ily to identify the same structure throughout the series without attempting to discuss its morphological nature. In the material at hand and among the species which have been named there are males with genitalic structures so different that there is noth¬ ing to be done other than to regard them as distinct species, but between these extremes there exist many intermediate forms with which nothing can be done at present. These must either be left unnamed or referred tenta¬ tively to the nearest recognized species. Because of these facts separate keys are provided for males and females, that for the males being the most nearly complete. Key to Males 1. 2. 4. 7. 8. Arms of the basal plate bent laterally at the posterior end, but not expanded at the apex nor with apical lobes or with any subapical spur or expansion . 2 Arms of the basal plate expanded apically, or divided apically into two lobes or with a subapical, mesal spur or expansion . ....3 Piece X elongate, widened posteriorly; known only from Sclurus iriseus in California . KELLOGG! Piece X very short, transverse; typical of Scturus niter . LONGICEPS Arms of the basal plate with a distinct little subapical spur which is set well in from the acute and simple apex; type from Sciurus boothiae . HONDURENSIS Arms of the basal plate without such subapical spur . ;-;-4 Arms of the basal plate with the two very small apical lobes containing the articulation of the corresponding arm of the pseudopenis' and with a marked subapical, mesal expansion set well in from the apex: type from Orosciurus in South America . URDSCIURI Arms of the basal plate with a quite shallow apical emargination . 6 Arms of the basal plate with a deeply V- or U-shaped emargination - , Arms of the basal plate with the mesal apical lobe larger than the other and rounded at the apex; type from Sciurus aestuans in Brasil.. . BRASI LIEN SIS Arms’ of ’ the* basal" plate with the outer lobe larger than the mesal lobe and with both lobes apically acute; type from Sciurus nesaeus in Ven¬ ezuela . INSULARIS Median complex of the aedeagus with a pair of minute, recurved hooks at the mid-line, just posterior to the gonopore ; type from Sciurus truei in Mexico . ' . ; . MEXICANUS Median complex of the aedeagus without such hooks............... - Arms of the basal plate with the mesal apical lobe shorter than the other; pseudopenis with its apical stem at least half as long as its arms; type from Sciurus arizonensis . •.•••••••• . . . AKlZONeHSlo Arms of the basal plate with the two apical lobes equal m length, stem of the pseudopenis less than half as long as the arms, at times forming merely a short projection . 9 9. Arms of the basal plate with the apical lobes short and narrow, not ex¬ panded basally; from Microsciurus in Colombia . MICROSCIURI Arms of the basal plate with the apical lobes very large and broadened basally . 10 10. Arms of the basal plate with the mesal lobe definitely broader at the base than is the outer lobe; type from Sciurus social is in Guatemala. . .EXTREMUS Arms of the basal plate with the apical lobes of the same width at the base; type from Sciurus £riseo$ena in Venezuela . VEHEZUELAE The distinctive characters in the females are to be found in connection with the genitalia. The anterior margin of the vulva is beset with small fimbriae, medially forming a relatively stout and somewhat sclerotized point. Just anterior to this median point is to be seen a sclerotized structure which is presumably the spermatheca. Its exact relation to the surrounding parts remains to be determined from fresh material and here nothing more can be done than to describe and illustrate its appearance. In one species of the group ( kelloggi ) it appears to be lacking. In other species its form is quite distinctive and it ranges in size from a large, oval body as seen in venezuelae (Figure 41) to a very minute structure as in microsciuri (Figure 41). This structure maintains its characteristic shape throughout all the specimens available from the type host and is here illustrated for nine of the eleven species. A careful special study of the entire group is needed. Key to Females Figure 47 Two species, brasiliensis and urosciuri , are omitted from this key be¬ cause of lack of material. 1. Spermatheca apparently lacking; median tooth of the vulvar fimbriation strongly sclerotized, this sclerotization extending forward until it merges with the sclerotization of the genital pJat-' . KELLOGGI Spermatheca definitely present . 2 2. Spermatheca forming a relatively very large, oval body . VENEZUELAE Otherwise . 3 3. Spermatheca strongly bent, its ends expanded, the expansion of the an¬ terior end being larger than that of the posterior end . . . . ARIZONENSIS Not so . 4 4. Spermatheca forming a relatively straight, simple, tapering tube . 5 Not so . 6 5. Spermatheca with a slender, tubular, posterior prolongation .. .LONGI CEPS Spermatheca larger and stouter, without such posterior prolongation.... . INSULARIS 6. Spermatheca forming an elongate body which is anteriorly swollen, then reducing by an abrupt constriction to expand again gradually toward the posterior end, then becoming terminally truncate with a small, strongly sclerotized terminal appendix . EXTREWUS Not so . 7 7. Spermatheca forming an elongate body which is more or less constricted about the middle . MEXICANUS Not so . 8 8. Spermatheca extremely minute, short, anteriorly swollen, and then con¬ stricting, its posterior end prolonged into delicate tube MICROSCIURI Spermatheca similar in form but much larger and apparently without the slender prolongation . HONDURENSIS 106 arizonensis hondurensis extremus microsciuri insularis Details of genitalia of females of the Enderlei nellus longiceps group kelloggi Figure 47 107 Eaderleinellus arizonensis Werneck 194S. Eaderleinellus arizonensis Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 45:288; figures 13— 15 * HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Sciurus arizonensis from the Huachuca Mountains in Arizona. Also recorded by Werneck from Sciurus apache from Colonia Garcia, Chihuahua, Mexico; Sciurus alleni from the Sierra Guadelupe. and Sciurus nayaritensis from the Sierra Madre, Zacatecas, Mexico. NOTES. ■'This species was included by Ferris in Eaderleinellus extremus Ferris. Enderleinellus brasiliensis Werneck 1937. Enderleinellus brasiliensis Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 32:399; figure 11. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Sciurus aestuans at Abaete, state of Para, Brasil . Enderleinellus dremomydis Ferris 1919. Enderleinellus dremomydis Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:29; figure 16. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Dremomys pernyi, West Szechuan, China. Enderleinellus euxeri Ferris 1919. Enderleinellus euxeri Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:37; figures 22, 23- 1929. Hoplophthirus euxeri (Ferris), Ewing, AManual of External Parasites, page 194. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described as from Euxerus microdon, which is a synonym of Xerus erythropus, from Wambugu and Oni, British East Africa. Enderleinellus extremus Ferris 1919. Enderleinellus extremus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:24; figure 12. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Sciurus socialis at Nenton, Guatemala. Also recorded from Sciurus aureogaster from the states of Vera Cruz and Oaxaca; from Sciurus deppei from the state of Tabasco; from Sciurus griseo- flavus, state of Chiapas; from Sciurus negligens , state of Tamaulipas; from Sciurus poliopus, state of Oaxaca; ail these being from Mexico. All of these specimens are left in extremus by Werneck. Enderleinellus heliosciuri Ferris 1919. Enderleinellus heliosciuri Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:40; figures 24, 25. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION . Type from Heliosciurus gambianus (as undulatus) from British East Africa and from the same host (as rufobrachlatus and multicolor) from Uganda; from Heliosciurus ruwenzori i, Mt. Ruwenzori, British East Africa; from Protoxerus stanieri , British East Africa. Enderleinellus hondurensis Werneck 1948. Enderleinellus hondurensis Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 45:286; figures 7-9. 108 HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION . type from Sciurus boot hi ae 1‘rom San Pedro Sula, Honduras. Also from Sciurus melanin at Boquerou, Colombia, and from Sciurus uar iegatoides (as gohimarii) from the state of Chiapas, Mexico. NOTES. This species, with the above records, was included by Ferris in Under l e Ine l l us kelloggl. Eriderleineilus insularis Weraeck 1948. Enderleinellus Insularis Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 4?: 293; fibres 25-27. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION, type from Sciurus nesaeus from Margarita Is¬ land, Venezuela. NOTES. This species was included by Ferris under Enderleinel lus extremus. Enderleinellus kelloggi Ferris 1916. Enderleinellus kelloggi Ferris, Psyche 23:10^. 1919. Enderleinellus kelloggi Ferris, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:22; figure 11. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Sciurus griseus, Stanford University, California. NOTES. Specimens erroneously recorded as kelloggi are here placed under hondurensis. Enderleinellus larisci Ferris 1919. Enderleinellus larisci Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:17; figures 7, 8. 1929. Euenderleinellus larisci (Ferris), Ewing, A Manual of External Para¬ sites, page 197. . - HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Lariscus insignis (as diversus) , from Lanchut, southwest Borneo. NOTES. This species was designated as type of the genus Euenderleinellus Ewing. Enderleinellus longiceps Kellogg and Ferris 1915. Enderleinellus longiceps Kellogg and Ferris, Anoplura and Mallophaga of North American Mammals, Stanford University Publications, Uni¬ versity Series (no volume number), page 44; Plate 2, figure 5> Plate 4, figure 12; Plate 6, figure 2. 1919. Enderleinellus longiceps Kellogg and Ferris, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:19; figures 9, 10. 1948. Enderleinellus ^longiceps Kellogg and Ferris, Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 4^:284; figures 1—3* HOSTS .AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Sciurus niger or Sciurus carolinensis , at Lincoln, Nebraska. Recorded from Sciurus niger at Valentine, Nebraska, and Waterloo, Indiana; from Sciurus carolinensis at Bayou Saint Louis, Mississippi; from Sciurus kaibabensis from the Kaibab National Forest, Arizona* from Sciurus aberti at Estes Park, Colorado; from Sciurus alleni, Co Ionia’ Garcia, Chihuahua, Mexico; from Sciurus oculatus, state of Vera Cruz, Mexico. . .... , NOTES- The records given above are those of Ferns, which have been ac cepted by Werneck. Specimens from Sciurus apache- in Chihuahua, Mexico, re¬ ferred by Ferris to longiceps have been placed by Werneck in Enderleinellus arizonensis as have specimens from Sciurus arizonensis in Arizona and from Sciurus nayaritensis, state of Zacatecas, Mexico. 109 Enderleinellus malaysianus Perris 1919. Enderleinellus malaysianus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:12; figures 3> 4. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Callosciurus caniceps (as Sciurus lucas) from Saint Lukes Island, Mergui Archipelago, Malaysia. Also record¬ ed from the same host (as Sciurus bentinckanus) from Bentinck Island in the same archipelago, (as Sciurus domelensis) from Domel Island in the same archipelago, (as Sciurus lancavensis) from Pulo Teratau, and (as Sciurus davisoni) from Trong, lower Siam; and from Callosciurus prevosti (as Sciurus borneoensis) at Pulo Kanchut, Borneo. Enderleinellus marmotae Ferris 1919. Enderleinellus marmotae Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:47; figure 30. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Marmota monax from Grafton, South Dakota; also recorded from the same host at Elk River, Minnesota, and Marble Cave, Missouri, at Sandy Springs, Maryland, and Washington, District of Columbia. Enderleinellus menetensis Ferris 1919. Enderleinellus menetensis Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:14; figures 5> 6. HOSTS’ AND DISTRIBUTION. From Menetes berdnorei, Roh Rut Island, south¬ east Siam. Enderleinellus mexicanus Werneck 1947. Enderleinellus mexicanus Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 45:289; figures 16-18. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Sciurus truei at Chacala, Mexico. Also recorded from Sciurus nelsoni from the state of Morelos, and from Sciurus colliae, state of Nayarit, Mexico. NOTES. The specimens recorded above were recorded by Ferris under Ender¬ leinellus extremus. Enderleinellus microsciuri Werneck 1947. Enderleinellus microsciuri Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 45:287; figures 10-12. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Microsciurus mimulus from unspecified lo¬ cality in Colombia. NOTES. The specimens upon which this species was based were previously recorded by Ferris as Enderleinellus kelloggi. Enderleinellus nannosciuri Ferris 1919. Enderleinellus nannosciuri Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:30; figure 17. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Nannosciurus melanotis from Batavia, Java. Enderleinellus nitzschi Fahrenholz Figures 48, 49 1818. Pediculus sphaerocephalus Nitzsch, Gennar's und Zincken' s Magazin fur die Entomologie 3:305- (Not Pediculus sphaerocephalus von Olfers) 110 Enderleinellus nitzschi Fahrenholz Figure 48 1912. Enderleinellus sphaerocephalus (Nitzsch), Fahrenholz, Jahresbericht des niedersachsischen Zoologischen Vereins zu Hannover 2-4: 52; text figures 22, 23; Plate 2, figures 5-7. . 1916. Enderleinellus nitzschi Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, Ab- teilung A, 81:29. . . 1919. Enderleinellus nitzschi Fahrenholz, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:8; figures 1, 2. HOSTS .AND DISTRIBUTION. Originally described from Sciurus vulgaris in Europe and recorded numerous times from this host. Recorded also from Sciurus anomalus (as syriacus) from Syria; from Sciurus huds on icus from Alaska; from Sciurus douglasii from western United States; from Sciurus frenonti from Colorado. , , , , NOTES. Wemeck, who examined all the material recorded above, has agreed that no specific differences exist among the specimens from the different hosts . Ill head. antenna ------ female genitalia Enderleinellus nitzschi Fahrenholz, details 3rd claw male genitalia Figure 49 112 Enderleinellus osborui Kellogg and Perris 1915* Enderleinellus osborni Kellogg ,uid Ferris, Anoplura and Mallophaga of North American Mammals, Stanford University Publications, Uni versity Series (no volume number), page 43; text iigure 15; Plate 4; figure 11; Plate 6, figure 6. 1919. Enderleinellus osborni Kellogg and Ferris, Ferris, Contributions Tow;ird a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:46; figure 29. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION . Type from Citellus beecheyi (as douilasi) at Covelo, Mendocino County, California, and recorded from this host species at various localities in California. Also from Citellus varieiatus (as buckleyi) in Texas and (as g rammurus ) in Arizona. From Citellus (as Xerospernophi lus) teret icaudus, Imperial County, California. Enderleinellus platyspicatus Ferris 1919. Enderleinellus platyspicatus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:26; figures 14. 15. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION . From Funambulus palmarum (as tristriatus) in Ceylon. Enderleinellus replicatus Redikorzev 1937. Enderleinellus replicatus Redikorzev, Parasitology 29:4; figure. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Set uropterus volans, Tartar Republic, with¬ out closer indication of locality. NOTES- Members of this genus very commonly in dying contract in such a manner that the head is drawn back over the body as the result of opisthot¬ onos, and iu preparing specimens for study they must be unfolded. Unlortu- nately , in describing this species its author made his illustrations from a specimen that was thus contracted and consequently his illustration is en¬ tirely useless. It is impossible to determine what the species is actually like and to include it in the key. Enderleinellus sciurotamiasis Ferris 1919. Enderleinellus sciurotamiasis Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:45; figures 20, 21. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Sciurotamias davldianus, Shensi Province, China. Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn) 1891- 1915. 1916. 1919. 1929. Eaematopinus suturalis Osborn, United States Department of Agricul¬ ture, Division of Entomology, Bulletin (old series) 7:27; tig. 15- Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn), Kellogg and Ferris, Anoplura and Mallophaga of North American Mammals, Stanford University Publica¬ tions, University Series (no volume number), page 40; Plate 4, fiiru re 9* Enderleinellus suturalis occidentalis Kellogg and terns, Anoplura and Mallophaga of North .American Mammals, Stanford University Pub¬ lications, University Series (no volume number), page 42; Plate 2, fiim re 3; Plate 4, figure 10; Plate 5, figure 17. Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:42; figures 26, 27, 28. Cyclophthlrus suturalis (Osborn), Ewing, A Manual ot External Para¬ sites, page 196. HOSTS .AND DISTRIBUTION. Originally described as from Citellus tndecim- 113 lineatus and Citellus franklini (as Spermophilus) at Ames, Iowa. The first of these has been designated by Kellogg and Ferris as the type host. Ferris has recorded the species from a long series of species of Citellus as fol¬ lows: eversmanni, Altai, Siberia; mongolicus , Kansu, China; beldingi, California; elegans, Colorado; franklini, North Dakota; mollis, Nevada; osgoodi, near Circle, Alaska; townsendi , state of Washington; tridecimline- atus, Kansas and Oklahoma; madrensis (as Callopsermophi lus) , Chihuahua, Mexico; nelsoni (as Ammospermophi lus) , California; Cynomys gunnisoni, Colorado; Cynomys leucurus, Colorado and Wyoming. NOTES. In the rather extensive material at hand there is a quite wide range of variation in various details, but a study of the material by Dr. Edwin Cook has shown no clear basis for recognizing more than one species. The two species, osborni and marmotae, which have in the past been separ¬ ated from suturalis are the only ones in which the situation seems reason¬ ably clear. Studies are continuing with an accompanying attempt to secure additional material and it is hoped eventually to publish a detailed report upon the group. Enderleinellus tamiasis Fahrenholz 1916. Enderleinellus tamiasis Fahrenholz, Archiv fiir Naturgeschichte, Ab- teilung A, 81:11:27; text figure 22. 1919. Enderleinellus tamiasis Fahrenholz, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:288; figure 176. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known only from the original record from Tanias striatus in the Berlin Zoological Garden. NOTES- It is entirely possible that Tamias striatus, which is a native of eastern and central United States, is not the normal host of this spe¬ cies, no species of Enderleinellus having yet been recovered from this host under natural conditions. Enderleinellus urosciuri Werneck 1937. Enderleinellus urosciuri Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 32:400; figure 12. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded from Sciurus (as Urosciurus) ignivent- ris from Acajutuba, Rio Negro, state of Amazonas, Brasil. Enderleinellus venezuelae Ferris 1919. Enderleinellus venezuelae Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:25; figure 13. 1948. Enderleinellus venezuelae Ferris, Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Os¬ waldo Cruz 45:292; figures 22-24. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Sciurus griseogena from Macuto, Vene¬ zuela. Also recorded from the same host (as meridensis) from Merida, Vene¬ zuela, and from Sciurus gerrardi (as versicolor) from Rio Aurare, Venezuela. Enderleinellus zonatus Ferris 1919. Enderleinellus zonatus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:32; figures 18, 19. (In part) 1948. Enderleinellus zonatus Ferris, Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 45:295; figure 28. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. type from Paraxerus ochraceus (as jacksoni) , Kijabe, British East Africa. NOTES. Werneck has pointed out that two distinct species were included in the material recorded by Ferris. 114 Genus MICROPHTHIRUS Ferris 1914. Microphthirus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:49. GEKBRIC TYPE, Enderleinellus unclnatus Ferris. CHARACTERS. Enderleinellinae iu which the pair ol 1 ittie, scleroti zed plates on the venter ol the second abdominal segment is lack ing . Paratergal plates of se>jments 3"6 each continuous with the corresponding sternal plate, being connected with it by a narrow, scleroti zed bridge. Paratergal plates not free from the body at any point. Antennae with the proximal, postaxial angle of segments 2-3 produced into a scleroti zed hook. NOTES. As known at present this genus contains but a single species. This is a very pecuLiar form, known only from North American flying squir¬ rels of the genus Glaucomys. The assignment of the genus to the Enderleiu- ellae is based entirely upon the character of the legs, since there is lit¬ tle else to connect it with any other group of the Anoplura. The host as¬ sociation supports this assignment and iu this particular case has been taken into consideration iu placing the genus. Microphthirus uncinatus (Ferris) Figures 50, 51 1916. Enderleinellus unclnatus Ferris, Psyche 23:108; figures 6, 7. 1919. Microphthirus uncinatus (Ferris), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 1:49; figures 31-32. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known only from the original record from Glauc¬ omys sabrinus at Yosemite National Park, California. The host is a member of the rodent family Sciuridae. NOTES. This is one of the very' smallest of all sucking lice, the male attaining a Length of only about .35 mm. The insects are so small that as seen upon their° host they are very likely to be mistaken for }oung of one of the other species which occur on these squirrels. Genus WERNECKIA Ferris, new genus GENERIC TYPE- Enderleinellus minutus Werneck. One other species, Ender¬ leinellus paraxeri Werneck, is here included. CHARACTERS. Enderleinellinae in which the paired sclerotizations 01 the second abdominal sternum are lacking. Differing from Microphthirus in which this also is true, in not having the paratergal plates connected with the sternites by sclerotizations. Occurring on African squirrels of the genus Paraxerus. NOTES. Since each of the two included species is known from but a single male very little can be said about the group. It is by no means certain that these two species should be placed in the same genus, since thej dil- fer materially in various respects and it appears possible that they are independent derivatives from species of Enderleinellus that also occur on their hosts. Key to Species of WEFJsECKIA Genitalia of the male with all parts of the terminal complex slender - ... . PARAXERI Genitalia ’of ’the' male’ with the parts of the terminal complex short the parameres broadened . . 115 Microphthirus uncinatus (Ferris) female genitalia male genitalia Microphthirus uncinatus (Ferris), details Figure 51 117 Werneckia minuta (Werneck) Figure 52 Werneckia minuta (Werneck) Figure 52 1947. Enderleinellus minutus Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 45:296; figure 30- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known from but a single male, from Paraxerus jacksont i=ochraceus) , from Kijabe, British East Africa. NOTES. The single male representing this species was discovered by Wer¬ neck among the type material of Enderleinellus zonatus Ferris and described by Werneck who, however, did not note the absence of the paired ventral plates of the second abdominal segment. Werneckia paraxeri (Werneck) 1947. Enderleinellus paraxeri Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 45:295; figure 29. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known from but a single female, from Paraxerus palliatus, from British East Africa. NOTES. The circumstances surrounding this species are the same as those connected with minuta. 118 Subfamily HOPLOPLEUKINAE Ferris, new subfamily DESCRIPTION OE THE SUUFAMILY . Hoplopleuridae in which there is no evi¬ dence of eyes. Paratergal plates reaching an extreme degree ol development, those of abdominal segments 4-6 enclosing the sides of the abdomen and each to some extent overlapping that of the segment next succeeding. Sternal plates of abdominal segment two prolonged laterally on each side to articu¬ late with the corresponding paratergal plate and at times divided mesaliy by a membranous area into two plates which may' be much expanded. Anterior legs always small, with slender claw, the middle legs larger with stouter claw, the posterior legs still larger, generally flattened and with very- broad claw. Antennae 4—6 segmented, never sexually dimorphic. NOTES. In its basic pattern this group is quite homogeneous, although some of its species present some extraordinary' specializations. The group is as a whole probably the most specialized ol the AnopLura. The five included genera may be separated by the following key. 1. 2. 3. 4. Key to the Genera of HOPLOPLEUKINAE Antennae clearly 5-se^ment'etl . \ Antennae 4-segmented . .4 Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 2 each prolonged into a Made- like process which projects from the tody wall . PTER0PHT1URUS Not so . - 3 Sternal plate of abdominal segment 2 divided longitudinally into Z much expanded plates . SCHIZDPHTHIRUS Not g0 . . . ....HOPLOPLEURA Posterior le fs with a membranous, bladder-like expansion on the coxa Not so . ANCISTROPLAX Genus ANCISTROPLAX Waterston 1929* Ancistroplax Waterston, Parasitology' 21:161. 1932. Ancistroplax , Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:38. GENERIC TYPE. Ancistroplax crocidurae Waterston. CHARACTERS. Moplop leurinae in which the antennae are 1 our-segmented . Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3-7 each having the appearance of bein'1, divided into two equal parts by a longitudinal line of weak scleroti- zation. Terml and sternal plates of the abdomen strongly developed in both sexes, the female having three plates and three rows of setae, both dorsally and ventrally, on segments 3-6; the male having but one plate, either dorsallv or ventrally, on any segment, but this on segments 4 , both dorsally and ventrally having two rows of setae and presenting an ap¬ pearance which suggests that it is composed of two transverse plates which have partially fused. Tergal plate of segment six of the male having its posterior angles each produced into a free process which is bent apically toward the mid-line of the body. Posterior legs strongly expanded and flat¬ tened, with broad claw. Sternal plate of abdominal segment two divided Ion kritudinally into two expanded plates. First sternal plate of segment three not produced laterally to articulate with the corresponding paratergites. NOTFS The affinities of this genus seem to be most closely with Schiz ophthirus. It seems also to be more or less closely related to the genus Baemtopinoides. 119 Ancistroplax crocidurae Waterston Figures 53 > 54 1929. Ancistroplax crocidurae Waterston, Parasitology 21:161; figures. 1932. Ancistroplax crocidurae Waterston, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5 : 308 ; figures 188, 189- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. There is but a single record of this species which attributes it to a shrew, Crocidura horsfieldi, in Ceylon. Genus HAEMATOPINOIDES Osborn 1891. Haematopinoides Osborn, United States Department of Agriculture, Division of Entomology, Bulletin (old series) 7:28. 1896. Euhaematop inus Osborn, United States Department of Agriculture, Division of Entomology, Bulletin (new series) 5:186. 1929. Haematopinoides, Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, page 140. 1932. Haematopinoides, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:289- GENERIC TYPE. Haematopinoides squamosus Osborn. The genus Euhaemato- pinus Osborn, with Euhaematop inus abnormis Osborn as type, is synonymous, its type species being synonymous with squamosus. CHARACTERS. Hoplopleurinae in which the antennae are 4-segmented. Pos¬ terior legs with a membranous, bladder-like expansion arising from the an¬ terior margin of the coxae and a similar structure on the anterior wall of the tibia. Apart from the usual sclerotizations of the terminal and geni- talic segments, tergal plates are developed only on segments 1-3 and ster¬ nal. plates on segments 2-3 in the female, while they are present on all segments except the first in the male. Female with two rows of setae both dorsally and ventrally on most of the abdominal segments, the male with but one. Sternite of the second abdominal segment divided longitudinally into two expanded plates each of which articulates by a lateral extension with the corresponding paratergal plate. First plate of abdominal segment three not produced laterally. NOTES. This genus (as Euhaematop inus) was employed by Enderlein in 1904 as type of the subfamily Euhaematop ininae of the family Haematopinidae and in 1929 this was elevated to the rank of a family, under the name Haemato- pinoididae, by Ewing. Actually, the genus is very closely related to Hoplopleura. The membranous expansions on the posterior legs are unique structures but do not in any way justify the assignment of the genus to an isolated position. Haematopinoides squamosus (Osborn) Figures 55> 56 1891- Haematopinoides squamosus Osborn, United States Department of Agri¬ culture, Division of Entomology, Bulletin (old series) 7:28; fig¬ ure 16. 1896. Euhaematop inus abnormis Osborn, United States Department of Agricul¬ ture, Division of Entomology (new series) 5:18?; figure. 1922. Euhaematop inus abnormis Osborn, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 3: 150 > figures 98, 99- 1929. Haematopinoides squamosus Osborn, Ewing, A Manual of External Para¬ sites, page 140. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. First recorded, undoubtedly quite erroneously, from a rodent of the family Geomyidae in Iowa. Later described again as a new genus and species from its true host, a mole, Scalopus aquaticus, at Ames, Iowa, United States. It has since been recorded from this host from localities in Kansas, Illinois, and New York. Also specimens are at hand 120 Ancistroplax crocidurae VVaterston Figure 53 121 Figure 54 Ancistroplax crocidurae Waterston, details 123 thoracic sternal plate male genitalia Haematopinoides squamosus Osborn, details female genitalia Figure 56 3rd leg head antenna 124 from another mole, Parascalops brewer l, from eastern United States. NOTES. Ewiug has recorded finding the types ol Haematopinoides squano: ti¬ lts, which had presumably been lost, and has confirmed the suspicion, previ ously expressed by Ferris, to the effect that Euhaematopi nus abnormis is the same species. Apparently Osboni was misled into naming two genera sim¬ ply by differences in the nature of the preparations then at hand. Genus HOPLOPLEURA Euderlein 1904. Hoplopleura Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28:221. 1921. Hoplopleura, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck¬ ing Lice, Part 2 : 59 - 1929. Ctenura Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, page 199 - 1929. Euhoplopleura Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, page 198. 1929. Ctenopleura Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, page 199 • 1929. Ferrisella Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, page 199. GENERIC TYPE. Pediculus acanthopus Burmeisler. GENERIC SYNONYMS. Ctenopleura Ewing, type Hoplopleura crypt lea Ferris; Ctenura Ewing, type Hoplopleura pectinate Cummings; Euhoplopleura Ewing, type Hoplopleura trisp inosa Kellogg and Ferris; Ferrisella Ewing, type Hoplopleura ochotonae Ferris. CHARACTERS, tloplopleurinae in which the sternal plate of abdominal seg¬ ment two is always, and the first sternal plate is usually, extended later¬ ally to articulate with the corresponding paratergites, these two plates always being narrowly transverse. First sternal plate ot segment three usually with° two or three enlarged, stout setae in two groups, rarely these not developed. Paratergites of the abdominal segments never showing any indication of a partial longitudinal division into dorsal and ventral parts. Antennae clearly five-segmented. Posterior legs with no bladder-like, mem¬ branous expansions. Paratergites of abdominal segment two not produced in¬ to a long, blade-like extension. NOTES. This genus, as here understood, forms a very homogeneous group. In two or three species the first sternal plate of abdominal segment 3 does not attain the paratergal plate of the segment but any attempt to separate these species into a different genus on this basis seems to gain nothing and would result only in the formation of an evidently unnatural grouping. The four genera named by Ewing and listed above do not, in the opinion here held, merit recognition, but the genus Pterophthirus, named by Ewing, is here accepted. Key to Species of Hoplopleura 1. First sternal plate of abdominal segment 3 extended laterally to ap¬ proximate or articulate with the corresponding paratergal plates....? First sternal plate of abdominal segment 3 not extended laterally . 2 2 (1). Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 4-6 in the female and ot at least segment 4 in the male with a pair ot short, stout, apically flattened and truncate setae; known from Octodontomys in Bolivia. . DISGREGA Not so, all setae of the paratergal plates apically acute. ....... .3 3 (2). Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 6 with the dorsal apical an¬ gle prolonged into a thumb-like process, the ventral angle round¬ ed; known from Octodon in Chile . CHILENSIS Otherwise. #••••••••••••••••••• . • • • . . . • * 4 (3) . Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 4-6 with the posterior mar¬ gin almost straight, the posterior angles each forming but a slight tooth; known from the squirrel genus Sciurotamias in China * . EMARGINATA 125 Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 4-5 with the posterior mar¬ gin presenting a deep, median emargination between the two broad lateral lobes; known from Hydromys in Australia . BIDENTATA 5 (1). Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 8 in both sexes with each posterior angle prolonged into a tapering apically acute lobe.. 6 Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 8 never with more than one apical lobe or process, usually with none . 7 6 (5)- Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 2 with each posterior angle prolonged into a tapering, apically acute point; known from unde¬ termined rodent in Brasil . BRASILIENSIS Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 2 with the posterior margin truncate, the angles not at all prolonged into points; female with the apex of the abdomen bearing a comb of stout setae; known from Rattus surifer in the Malayan region . PECTINATA 7 (5) • First sternal plate of abdominal segment 3 with two groups of def¬ initely enlarged setae . 8 First sternal plate of abdominal segment 3 without such pairs of enlarged setae; occurring on Ochotona in Asia . 0CH0T0NAE 8 (7). Enlarged setae of the first sternal plate of abdominal segment 3 arranged in two groups of 3 setae each . 9 Enlarged setae of this plate arranged in two groups of 2 setae each . . 11 9 (8) . Paratergal plates of abdominal segments $-6 each with the posterior border bearing 4 prominent, almost equal points or processes. .. 10 Paratergal plates of these segments with merely the apical angles prolonged into points; occurring on North American flying squir¬ rels of the genus Glaucomys . TRISPINOSA 10 (9). Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 2-6 each borne upon a dis¬ tinct prominence; tergal and sternal setae of the abdomen ex¬ tremely numerous and heavy; known from Tatera liodon in Africa.. . CRYPTICA Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 2-6 not thus borne upon prominences; setae of abdominal tergites and sternites slender and of normal number; known from Tatera boehmi in Africa . . . VEPRECULA 11 (8) . Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 8 with 1 apical angle pro¬ duced into an elongated, apically free process . 12 Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 8 entirely devoid of any apical process or with only a very slight lobe . 14 Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3~6 each with the poste¬ rior margin divided into 4 slender processes of which the dor¬ sal process is longer than the plate itself; probably normal to Lemniscomys in Africa . PELOMYDIS Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3~6, if divided into lobes, having the dorsal lobe no longer than the others . 13 Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 7 with the posterior mar¬ gin divided into 2 equal major lobes, each of which is divided into 2 equal minor lobes; known from Arvicanthis in Africa . . LATICEPS Paratergal plates of segment 7 with the posterior margin divided into 2 lobes of which one is apically acute and the other apic¬ ally truncate or slightly emarginate; known from various hosts in Africa . INTERMEDIA Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 7 with at least one of the apical angles produced into a lobe which is in some instances as long as the body of the plate . 15 Paratergal plates of segment 7 with neither of its apical angles thus produced . 27 12 (11). 13 (12). 14 (11). 126 15 (14). 16 (15). 17 (16). 18 (16). 19 (18). 20 (18). 21 (20). 22 (21). 23 (15). 24 ( 23). 25 (24). Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 7 with but one of its ap * , + s ical angles produced into a lobe or poiut . lo Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 7 with each of its apical angles produced into a lobe or point . 23 Paratergal plates of segments 3~5 each with the posterior mai-gin divided into 4 slender lobes or processes which equal at least half the length of the body of the plate . 17 Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3_5 with the posterior margin divided into 2 major lobes, each of which may be apical- Lv more or less emarginate or deeply divided into 2 minor lobes 7. . 7 . is Dorsal apical process of the paratergal plates of abdominal seg¬ ments 3-7 very long, longer than the body of the plate; known from Lemniscomys in Africa . ENORMIS Dorsal apical process on no paratergal plate longer than the body of the plhte or longer than the other processes . NEUMANNI Ventral lobe of paratergal plates of abdominal segment 3 divided into 2 apically rounded, equal lobes; from species ol Oryzomys in the New World . ;19 Ventral lobe of pai*atergal plates of abdominal segment 3 otherwise . 20 Ventral lobe of abdominal segment 6 divided into 2 equal lobules; known from Oryzomys in southeastern United States. .. .ORYZ0MY D1S Ventral lobe of abdominal segment 6 forming a single, acute point; known from species of Oryzomys in South America. . .NES0RYZ01YDIS Ventral lobe of paratergal plates of abdominal segment 3 acute... . ; . 7 . AFFINIS Ventral lobe of paratergal plates of abdominal segment 3 broadly truncate or apically emarginate . 21 Ventral lobe of paratergal plates of abdominal segment 6 acute; known from the genus Apomys in the Philippine Islands. . APOMYDIS Ventral lobe of paratergal plates of segment 6 truncate or emar¬ ginate . ^ Ventral lobe of paratergal plates of abdominal segment 6 deeply emarginate; known from Dasymys yelukus in Africa . SOMERENI Ventral lobe of paratergal plates ol abdominal segment 6 truncate, known from various rodents in South America . TRAVASSOSI Both dorsal and ventral apical lobes ol paratergal plates ol ab¬ dominal segment 7 apically acute . ......24 At least one of the lobes of the paratergal plates of abdominal segment 7 apically acute . . . Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3— ^ with the postenoi margin divided into 4 nearly equal, apically rounded lobes, oc¬ curring on the iTenera Nectomys and Oryzomys in South America... . 77 . 7 . QUADRIDENTATA Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3_6 with the posterior margin divided into 2 apically truncate or slightly emarginate 1 b& • 2 1 Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 4-6 with the setae ol the posterior margin extremely minute; occurring characteristically on members of the New World genera Peromyscus and Onychomys, but recorded also from Hus musculus in North America and Eurasia . . HESPEROMYDIS Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 4-6 with the setae of their posterior margin almost equaling in length the depth ol the median emargination in which they are placed; occurring as far as known on the genus Cricetulus in China . CKloMlLi 127 26 (23). 27 (14). 28 (27). 29 (28). 30 (28). 31 (30). 32 (30). 33 (32). 34 (33). 35 (34). 36 (33). 37 (36). Dorsal lobe of the paratergal plates of abdominal segment 7 defi¬ nitely truncate, the ventral lobe acute; from members of the New World genus Reithrodontomys . REITHRODONTOMYDIS Both dorsal and ventral apical lobes of the paratergites of ab¬ dominal segment 7 narrowly rounded apically; known from Mus triton in Africa . .RUKENYAE Female with 3 rows of setae dorsally and ventrally on most of the abdominal segments . 28 Female with but 2 rows of setae both dorsally and ventrally on most of the abdominal segments; probably normal to species of Tatera in Africa . BISERIATA Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 6 with the posterior angles not produced into points . 29 Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 6 with at least one of the posterior angles produced into a definite point or lobe 30 Sternal plate of the thorax broadly triangular, occurring on the North American squirrel genus Talhlas . ERRATICA Sternal plate of the thorax narrowly produced posteriorly; known from the Asiatic genus Phaiomys . PHAIOMYDIS Both dorsal and ventral basal angles of the paratergal plates of abdominal segments 4-5 with a process which projects toward the mid-line of the body . SI Basal angles of these paratergal plates without such processes. 32 Outer seta of the pairs of enlarged setae on the first sternite of abdominal segment 3 longer than the other and distinctly bent; known from the squirrel genus Callosciurus in China . . DISTORTA Outer seta of these pairs not longer than the other and not bent; known from the squirrel genus Callosciurus in the Malayan area. . ERISMATA Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 6 with 4 almost equal, slender processes on its posterior border; known from Mylomys cuninghamei in Africa . MYLOMYDIS Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 6 without such processes.. . . 33 Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 4-6 without setae, even of the most minute size . 34 Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 4-6 definitely with setae, even if small, on the posterior margin . 36 Both dorsal and ventral lobes of the paratergal plates of abdom¬ inal segment 3 broadly truncate; occurring on Micromys in Europe . LONGULA Both dorsal and ventral lobes of the paratergal plates of abdom¬ inal segment 3 apically acute . 35 Dorsal apical lobe of the paratergal plates of abdominal segments 4— 5 apically broad and emarginate; known from Oxymycterus judex in South America . FONSECAI Ventral apical lobe of the paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3-6 acute; from Oxymycterus in Peru . OXYMYCTERI Apical lobes of paratergal plates of abdominal segment 6 both a- cute . 37 Apical lobes of paratergal plates of abdominal segment 6 other¬ wise . 42 Apical lobes of the paratergal plates of abdominal segment 3 with the dorsal lobe apically acute, the ventral lobe broad and slightly emarginate; occurring on various members of the sub¬ family Microtinae of the Muridae in Europe, North America, and certainly Asia . ACANTHOPUS 128 38 (37). 39 (33). 40 (39). 41 (40). 42 ( 36). 43 (42). 44 (43). 45 (44). 46 (43). Apical lobes ot‘ the paratergal plates of abdominal segment 3 otb erwise . 38 Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 4—5 withadeep, rectangu¬ lar, median emargination in the posterior border, this dividing the plate into two broad, apical lobes; known from Reithrodon in Argentina . ARGENTINA Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 4->5 without such emargina- tion ol the posterior border . 39 With but 1 or occasionally 2 setae between the ends ol the tergal and sternal plates of the abdomen and the corresponding para- teraal plates; known from the squirrel genus Kunambulus in Asia . . MANICULATA With not less than 2 and usually more setae between the ends ol the tergal and sternal plates of the abdomen and the correspond- ing paratergal plates . . . . 40 Paratergal plates o f abdominal segments 4-6 with the apical angles strongly produced and acute, the posterior border of the plate arcuately and quite deeply emarginate . . . . . . Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 4-6 with the margin be¬ tween the toothed apical angles almost straight, not at all e— martrinate; occurring on the genus Siimodon in North America.... . . . . . . 7 . HIRSUTA Parameres of the male apically notched; occurring on the genus Neotamias (better known as Sutamias ) in North America . . ARB0R1C0LA Parameres of the male apically entire; known from the genus Sciurus in North America . . SCIURICOLA Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 6 with the dorsal apical angle forming a slight tooth, the ventral angle without a tooth, known from Phyllotis in South America . ....REDUCT A Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 6 with both apical angles produced into points or lobes . . . 43 Ventral apical lobe of paratergal plates of abdominal segment b acute, the dorsal lobe more or less truncate . .*44 Dorsal and ventral apical lobes ol paratergal plates ol abdominal segment 6 essentially similar, truncate or apically serrate or emarginate . ••***, . . . . . Paratergal plates of segments 3~5 each with 1 very minute and 1 longer seta on the posterior margin; known from various hosts, including domestic rats, in various parts of the world - ..... ° 0EN0MYDIS Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3—5 each with 2 setae which Tire as long as or longer than the depth of thd emargina- tion in which they are placed . /“o'c ' Ventral apical lobe of the paratergal plates ol segments j-h a- cutelv pointed; known from the genus Chrotonys in the Philippine Islands. . ! . ...CHR0T0MYDIS Ventral apical lobe of paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3_5 narrowly rounded or truncate apically; known trom nottu s sabanus in the Malayan area . . . . MALAYSIAN A Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 4-6 each with 1 very min ute seta and 1 seta which is about as long as the depth ol the emargination in which it is placed; known from Rhipidonys in South America. . . . * V - - ' ‘ *V *2 Parateral plates of abdominal segments 4-6 each with 2 setae ol nearly equal length, these as long as or longer than the depth of the emargination in which they are placed ; known fro™ in China . MERIONIDIS 129 Hoplopleura acanthopus (Burmeister) Figures 57, 58 1839- Pediculus acanthopus Burmeister, Genera Insectorum, Rhynchota, Num¬ ber 5; Plate 1, figure 2. 1842. Haematopinus acanthopus (Burmeister), Denny, Monographia Anoplurorum Britanniae, page 25; Plate 24, figure 3- 1880. Haematopinus acanthopus (Burmeister), Piaget, Les Pediculines, page 638; Plate 52, figure 4. 1904. Polyplax acanthopus (Burmeist;cr) , Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28:142. 1904. Hoplopleura acanthopus (Burmeister) , Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28:221; figures 1, 2. 1915* Hoplopleura acanthopus, variety americanus Kellogg and Ferris, Ano- plura and Mallophaga of North American Mammals, Stanford University Publications, University Series (no volume number), page 16 ; text figure 3; Plate 4, figure 2; Plate 5, figure 8. 1916. Hoplopleura acanthopus, variety aequidentis Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, Abteilung A, 81:26; figure 21b. 1921. Hoplopleura acanthopus (Burmeister), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:63; figures 34, 35 • HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. First described from Microtus (as Arvicola ) arvalts, somewhere in Europe. It has since been recorded from Microtus airestis and Microtus nival is in Europe ; from Microtus constr ictus, Microtus californicus, Microtus intermedius, and Microtus ochroiaster in various parts of the United States; from Lemmus alaskensis in Alaska; from Synapto- mys borealis at Athabasca Landing in Canada; from Pitymys pinetorum in eas¬ tern United States. It has also been recorded from Mus musculus in Rumania and Mus spicileQus in Sweden, these records very probably being due to con¬ tamination or straggling. NOTES. An examination of the abundant material at hand offers no excuse for the naming of the supposed variety americanus. Furthermore, on the basis of such evidence els was given by its describer there is no apparent reason for the supposed variety aequidentis. Hoplopleura affinis (Burmeister) 1839- Pediculus affinis Burmeister, Genera Insectorum, Rhynchota, No. 10. 1842. Haematopinus affinis (Burmeister), Denny, Monographia Anoplurorum Britanniae, page 36. 1904. Polyplax affinis (Burmeister), Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28: 142. 1921. Hoplopleura affinis (Burmeister), Ferris, Contributions Toward aMon- ograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:75; figures 42, 43* HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. First recorded from Apodemus a£rarius and Apo- demus sylvat icus in Europe. Later recorded by Ferris from both these hosts, from agrarius in Germany and from sylvatlcus in Manchuria and Siberia. In addition, Ferris has recorded the species from a number of South American mammals, including Akodon mollis in Peru; Akodon arviculoides in Paraguay; Akodon amnicola in Argentina; Phyllotis pictus (as Euneomys sp.) in Peru; Phyllotls micropus in Argentina. Certain other records by Ferris from South American mammals are here transferred to other species as will be noted below. NOTES. Specimens from Cricetuls incanus from China, previously referred to affinis are here described as Hoplopleura cricetuli new species, and specimens from Heithrodon hatcheri from Patagonia, axe referred to Hoplo¬ pleura argentine Werneck. The records ol affinis from other South American hosts appear to be ut- 130 Hoplopleura acanthopus (Burmeister) Figure 57 131 132 terly unreasonable, but a re-examination of the material at hand offers no basis for their separation. It would seem very probable that biologically more than one species is involved, but nothing morphological appears that will justify a separation. Hoplopleura angu^Lata Ferris 1921. Hoplopleura angulata Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:73; figures 40, 41. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Rhipidomys uenezuelae, somewhere in Venezuela. Also recorded by Ferris from Rhipidomys sp. (ascertained by Hopkins to be Rhipidomys leucodactylus) , from the Rio San Miguel, Peru; from Rhipidomys venustus, Merida, Venezuela; and from Thomasomys cinereus, Balsas, Peru. Hoplopleura apomydis Ferris 1921. Hoplopleura apomydis Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:84; figures 49, 50. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described as from Apomys bardus, which is Apomys insiinis, from Malingdang Peak, Mindanao, Philippine Islands. Hoplopleura arboricola Kellogg and Ferris 1915. Hoplopleura arboricola Kellogg and Ferris, Anoplura and Mallophaga of North American Mammals, Stanford University Publications, Uni¬ versity Series (no volume number), page 19; text figures 0, 7; Plate 4, figure 8. (Part) . 1921. Hoplopleura erratica arboricola Kellogg and Ferris, Ferris, Contri¬ butions Toward a Monograph ol the Sucking Lice, Part ^.10,. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. This species occurs on members of the genus Neotamias, which has usually been referred to in North American literature as Eutamias, under which generic name the host records have in the past been placed. type from Neotamias hindsi, Inverness, Mann County, Califor¬ nia. Recorded from various other species of this genus in California. 1921. 1837. Hoplopleura argentina Werneck Hoplopleura af finis (Burmeister) , Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mon¬ ograph. of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:75- (Part; misidentification) Hoplopleura affinis argentina Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION, type from Reithrodon sp. from the Republic of Ar 'entina. Specimens recorded by Ferris from Reithrodon hatcheri from Cor dilleras, Patagonia, as Hoplopleura affinis, seem definitely to be this. NOTES. The differences between this form and Hoplopleura affini s are very slight, as indicated in the key to species, but in accord with the practice ’here adopted of not recognizing any form below the species, it is here regarded as a species. Hoplopleura bidentata (Neumann) 1909. Haematopinus (Polyplax) bidentata Neumann, Archives de Parasitologie 1916. ,o$$llroblZ*faio (Neumann) , Ferris Contributions Toward a Non- ograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:129; figures 86 87. uh^tc; DISTRIBUTION. Originally described as from Rattus rattus at Lakfl^s, Sal™ this undoubted an error in host attrrbutron. It 133 has since been recorded from what seems undoubtedly to be its normal host, Eydromys chrysogaster, from Sydney and an undetermined locality in New South Wales, Australia. Hoplopleura biseriata Ferris 1921. Hoplopleura biseriata Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:103; fi 76. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Sigmodon hispidus, Raleigh, North Carolina. There are various records from this host throughout southern United States, as far west as Yuma, Arizona. Ferris has recorded it from Sl^nodon ocrognathus from the state of Chihuahua, and from Sigmodon peru- anus from Peru. Two records by Ferris, each ol a single specimen, 1 rom skins of Rhipldomys venustus in Venezuela and Xenomys nelsoni in Mexico, are most probably due to contamination. Hoplopleura hispida (Grube) 1851. Pedlculus hispidus Grube, In Middendorf f ' s Reise, Parasiten, page 497; Plate 2, figure 2. . 1921. Hoplopleura hispida (Grube), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:67- . „ HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded as from Lemnus obensis "am Taimyrsee, in Siberia. . . , . NOTES. On the basis of the illustration accompanying the original de¬ scription this species seems to be a Hoplopleura and should be identi liable if taken from the type host. 1915. 1921. Hoplopleura intermedia Kellogg and Ferris Hoplopleura Intermedia Kellogg and Ferris, Annals ol the Durban Mus¬ eum 1:153; Plate 16, figures 5, 5a-d. ...... Hoplopleura intermedia Kellogg and Ferris, Ferris, Contributions Tb ward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:90; tigures S4, _.B* from Rattus coucha, Mfongosi, Zululand, Rattus tullberii and Rattus (as Zelotomys) and from Dendromus insignis from British C, 56B. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type South Africa. Also recorded from hildeiardae, British East Africa II l i Lit; 5li» tiUC f LJ * A VAOU ** , • i • East Africa, this last record probably due to contamination Hoplopleura laticeps Ferris 1921. Hoplopleura laticeps Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:92; figures 55A, 56A. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known only from the original record irom Hybomys (as Arvicanthis) unlvittatus from Benito River, West Africa. 157 Hoplopleura longula (Neumann) 1909. Haematopinus (Polyplax) longula Neumann, Archives de Parasitologie 13:513; figures 15, 17- 1910. Hoplopleura lineata Fahrenholz, Zoologischer Anzeiger 35:715- 1921. Hoplopleura longula (Neumann), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:68; figures 36, 37. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described by Neumann from Micromys minutus at Colchester, Essex, England, and by Fahrenholz from the same host, presumab¬ ly from Germany. Hoplopleura maniculata (Neumann) 1909. Haematopinus (Polyplax ) maniculatus Neumann, Archives de Parasito¬ logie 13 : 521 ; figures 21, 22. 1921. Hoplopleura maniculata (Neumann), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:112; figures 71, 72A, D, G. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from Funambulus (as Sciurus) palmarum, Rajkote, Rajkote, India, and at the same time erroneously attributed to a bat. Later recorded by Ferris from the type host from Navapour, India, and from Ceylon. Hoplopleura malaysiana Ferris 1921. Hoplopleura malaysiana Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:79; figures 44, 45. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded as from Rattus vociferans lancauensis, which is apparently Rattus sabanusj from Lankavi Island, Malay Straits. Hoplopleura merionidis Ferris 1921. Hoplopleura merionidis Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:98; figure 60. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded from Meriones psammophilus from Shansi, China, this apparently being identical with Meriones meridianus. Hoplopleura mylomydis Ferris 1921. Hoplopleura enormis mylomydis Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:97; figure 59C. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known only from the original description from Mylomys roosevelti, which is apparently a synonym of Hylonys cuninghamei , British East Africa. Hoplopleura nesoryzomydis Ferris 1921. Hoplopleura nesoryzomydis Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:90; figure 53A. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded as from Hesoryzomys narboroughi and Mesoryzomys defessus in the Galapagos Islands. According to Ellender, Nesoryzomys is merely a subgenus of Oryzomys and evidently defessus is an error for indefessus. Hoplopleura neumanni Fahrenholz 1901. 1902. Haematopinus praecitus Neumann, Archives (In part: error for praectsus) Haematopinus praeclsus Neumann, Archives de part) 138 de Parasitologie 5:600. Parasitologie 6:144. (In 1919- Boplopleura neumannt Pahreuholz, Jahresbericht des niedersachsischen Zoologischeu Vereins zu Hanuover 2-4 : 26. 1921. Hoplopleura neunuinnt Pahreuholz, Perris, Contributions Toward a Mon¬ ograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:101; figure 63. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION . Based upon specimens recorded merely as "gros rats," from Abyssinia. Perris lias recorded the species lrom Tatera ni£ri- cauci a from British past Africa. Hopkins has noted that this species occurs iu Abyssinia and it is probable that it was the type host. HopLopleura ochotonae Ferris 1922. Hoplopleura ochotonae Perris, Contributions Toward a Monograph ot the Sucking Lice, Part 3:142; figure 92. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described as from Ochotona cansus, which is a synonym of Ochotona thibetana, from Taochao, China. Recorded also from Ochotona danur ica, Tabool, Mongolia, and trom Ochotona roylei without iudi cation of locality. Hoplopleura oenomydis Ferris Figures 59, 60 1921. Hoplopleura oenomydis Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:82; figures 47, 48. 1924. Hoplopleura pac if tea Ewing, Bishop Museum Bulletin 14:9; figure lb, e . 1932. Hoplopleura oenomydis Ferris, Ferris, Bishop Museum Bulletin 98:121; figures 38a_k, 39- 1947. Hoplopleura oenomydis Ferris, Pritchard, The Journal of Parasitology 35:374. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Oenomys hypoxanthus at Molo, British East Africa. Also recorded from Dasymys incomtus and Grammomys (as Tham- nomys) surdaster from British East Africa; from Rattus exulans (as calc l s) and Rattus mearnsl from the Philippine Islands. Described by Ewing as Hop¬ lopleura pacifica from Rattus exulans (as hawaiiensis) trom the Hawaiian Islands and recorded from this same host from the Marquesas Islands. It has recently been shown to be the most common louse on Rattus norveiicus in southeastern United States. . NOTES. Hopkins has recently expressed doubt concerning the synonymy in dicated above, considering it to be "extremely improbable that all the published records can refer to Hoplopleura oenomydis. _ A re-exam mat ion ol all the available material reveals no reason for altering the opinions pre viously expressed by Ferris in regard to the matter, whatever the iraproba bilities" may be. Hoplopleura oryzomydis Pratt and Lane 1951. Hoplopleura oryzomydis Pratt and Lane, Journal ol Parasitology 3< • HOSTS AND’ DISTRIBUTION. Type from Oryzomys palustris, Oatland Island, Chatham County, Georgia, and other specimens from the same host species in Delaware, South Carolina, and Florida, United States. Hoplopleura oxymycteri Ferris 1921 Hoplopleura oxymycteri Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph ol the Sucking Lice, Part 2:122; figures 79, 80. HOSTS .AND DISTRIBUTION. From Oxymycterus par omens is at Occabamba Pass, Peru. 139 Hoplopleura oenomydis Ferris Figure 59 140 v fed r\ para tergal plates thoracic sternal plate female genitalia Hoplopleura oenomydis Ferris, details male U genitalia Figure 60 141 Hoplopleura pectinata Cummings 1913* Hoplopleura pectinata Cummings, Bulletin of Entomological Research 4:35- 1921. Hoplopleura pectinata Cummings, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice. Part 2:99; figures 61, 62. 1929. Ctenura pectinata (Cummings), Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, page 199. 1932. Hoplopleura pectinata Cummings, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:282. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from Rattus (as Epimys) surifer at Biserat, Jalor, Malay Peninsula, and later recorded from the same host from Trong, lower Siam. NOTES. This species has been designated as type of the genus Ctenura, a genus which is here rejected. Hoplopleura pelomydis Ferris 1921. Hoplopleura enormis pelomydis Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:96; figures 58A, 59 A. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described as from Pelomys fallax,* Summit Sagalla, British East Africa. Also recorded from Lemniscomys striatus (in part as pulchellus) from the Cameroons and from British East Africa. It is probable that the species of Lemniscomys are th£ true hosts. Hoplopleura phaiomydis Ferris 1921. Hoplopleura phaiomydis Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:120; figures 77, HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded as from an undetermined species of Phaiomys from East Ladak, Kashmir. Hopkins has ascertained that the host species was Phaiomys blythi, which Ellender considers to be a synonym of Phaiomys leucurus. Hoplopleura quadridentata (Neumann) 1909. Haematopinus ( Polyplax ) quadridentatus (Neumann), Archives de Para^- sitologie 13:5:3-15; figures 13-14. 1921. Hoplopleura quadridentata (Neumann), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:87; figures 52, 53B, C, E. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded by Neumann from Holochilus squamipes, which apparently is Nectomys squamipes, from Haut Peru. Later recorded by Ferris from this same host at Sapucay , Paraguay, and from Nectomys palmipes, which is perhaps the same as squamipes, from the island of Trinidad; from Orizomys fulvescens from Orizaba, Mexico; and from Oryzomys rostratus from Alta Mira, Tamaulipas, Mexico. hoplopleura reducta Ferris 1921. Hoplopleura reducta Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:124; figure 81. 1935- Hoplopleura reducta Ferris, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 8:615. HOSTS AND Dl STRI 11! TION . Described as from phyllotis micropus from Todos Santos, Guatemala. Later recorded from an undetermined host from unspeci¬ fied locality in South Anerica. 142 Hoplopleura reithrodontomydis Ferris, new species HOSTS AND DISTRIUJTION . Type from a female Reithrodontonys dorsalis, Todos Santos, Guatemala, U.S.N.M. skin number 76917. ParaLypes from Heith- rodontomys australis, Volcan de Irazu, Costa Rica, U.S.N.M. skin number 116623, and Reithrodontomys chrysopsis, Ajusco, near Mexico City, Mexico. CHARACTERS. Female in all respects identical with Hoplopleura hesper omydis, except for the shape of the paratergites of abdominal segment seven, which in hesperomydis have both dorsal and ventral lobes definitely acute apically, while in reithrodontomydis the dorsal lobe is broad and apicaily truncate or slightly emarginate. All of the rather numerous specimens at hand from the three host species and three localities agree very closely. An extended description and illustrations of the species will be presented elsewhere. Hoplopleura rukenyae Ferris 1921. Hoplopleura sukenyae Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:86; figure 51* (Misspelling) HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known from a single male from Hus triton, Mount Rukenya, British East Africa. NOTES. Mr. G. h. E. Hopkins has called attention to the fact that the type locality of this species is more commonly, and perhaps more correctly, spelled Rukenya rather than Sukenya. It is probable that an error in read¬ ing a label was committed and under these circumstances it seems justifi¬ able to change the spelling of the specific name to rukenyae. Hoplopleura sciuricola Ferris 1921. Hoplopleura sciuricola Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:110; figures 69, 70. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Sciurus carollnensis at Bayou St. Louis, Mississippi. Also recorded from other species of Sciurus as follows: hudsonicus iu Alaska, douglasi in California, ignitus in Peru, nesaeus in Venezuela, variabllts in Colombia, and undetermined species in Bolivia and Peru. Hoplopleura somereni Waterston 1923. Hoplopleura somereni Waterston, Bulletin of Entomological Research 14:99; figure lb, c, d; figure 2c, d. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Dasymys helukus atWamia, Okedi Camp, Kenya. Hoplopleura travassosi Werneck 1932. Hoplopleura travassosi Werneck, Revista Medico-Cirurgica do Brasil, anno 40:345; figure. 1934. Hoplopleura travassosi Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Oswalno uruz 27:409; figures 1-6. D . HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION, type from Oryzomys flavescens at Angra dos Keis, state of Rio de Janeiro, Brasil. Also recorded from Kannabateomys amblyonyx and Oxymycterus judex at the same locality. Hoplopleura trispinosa Kellogg and Ferris 191^. Hoplopleura trispinosa Kellogg and Ferris, Anoplura and Mailophaga of North American Mammals, Stanford University Publications, Uni¬ versity Series (no volume number), page 22; text figure 8; Plate 4. figure 3. ^ 1921. Hoplopleura trispinosa Kellogg and Ferris, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:115; figures 73> 74. 1929. Euhoplopleura trispinosa (Kellogg and Ferris), Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, pages 135> 199* HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. T>pe from Glaucomys sabrinus, Brownsville, Ore¬ gon. Also recorded from the same host at Yosemite National Park, Califor¬ nia, and from Glaucomys volans from Maryland. NOTES. This species has been designated as type of the genus Euhoplo¬ pleura, which is here rejected. Hoplopleura veprecula Ferris 1921. Hoplopleura veprecula Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:105; figures 64B, 66A, C, F. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Tatera boehmi at South Guaso Nyiro, Brit¬ ish East Africa. Genus PTEROPHTHIRUS Ewing 1923* Pterophthirus Ewing, Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 13:147. 1932. Pterophthirus, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck¬ ing Lice, Part 5:280. GENERIC TYPE. Hoplopleura alata Ferris. Three other species are here referred to the genus. CHARACTERS. Hoplopleurinae with f ive-segmenced antennae. Paratergal plates of abdominal segment two produced into a long, tapering, blade-like process which projects from the body. First sternal plate of abdominal segment three not produced laterally to articulate with the corresponding paratergal plates. Otherwise essentially as in Hoplopleura. NOTES. This genus is very' close to Hoplopleura, differing from the lat¬ ter only in the form of the paratergal plates of abdominal segment two. Even here it appears from the illustrations presented in connection with the description of Pterophthirus imitans Werneck that this species is some¬ what of an intermediate between the two genera. As known at present the genus is confined to South American rodents. The four known species may be separated by the following key. Key to Species of PTEROPHTHIRUS 1. Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3-4 each with the ventral, api¬ cal angle produced into an acute point . 2 Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3~4 with the ventral apical an¬ gle not at all produced . ’ . 3 2. Paratergal plates of segments 3-5 with both dorsal and ventral, apical angles produced into an acute point . IMITANS Paratergal plates of segments 3^5 with the ventral, apical angle pro¬ duced into an acute point, the dorsal angle broadly truncate .WERNECK1 3. Paratergal plates of segments 3~4 with the dorsal, apical angle pro¬ duced into a point . ALATA Paratergal plates of segments 3-4 with the dorsal, apical lobe broadly truncate . AUDAX Pterophthirus alata (Ferris) Figures 61, 62 1921. Hoplopleura alata Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:127; figures 84, 85- 144 Pterophthirus alata (Ferris) Figure 61 145 146 1923- Pterophthirus alata (Ferris), Ewing, Journal of the Washington Acad emy of Sciences 13:147. 1942. Pterophthirus alata (Ferris), Werneck, Kevista Brasil iera di Bio- logia 2(3): 317. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded by Ferris l'rom Hicrocavia (as Kero Ion) australis from the Upper Rio Chico, Patagonia, Argentina, and later record¬ ed by Werneck from the same host (as Cauiella) from the provinces ol Jujuy and Catamarca, in Argentina. Pterophthirus andax (Ferris) 1921. Hoplopleura audax Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 2:125; figures 82, 83. I923. Pterophthirus audax (Ferris) , Ewing, Journal of the Washington Acad¬ emy of Sciences 13:148. 1923. Pterophthirus audax (Ferris), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice. Pttrt 5 - 281 * < 1942. Pterophthirus audax (Ferris) , Werneck, Revista Brasiliera di Biolog- ia 2(3):317. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Types from Proechimys semispinosus and other specimens from Proechimys (as Nelomys) mincae at San Javier, North Ecuador. Recorded by Werneck from Proechimys oris at Abiete, Para, Brasil. Pterophthirus imitans Werneck 1942. Pterophthirus imitans Werueck, Revista Brasiliera di Biologia 2(3): 317; figures. , HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Cavia aperea, Santo Amaro, state ol Sao Paulo, Brasil. Pterophthirus wernecki GuimarSLes 1950. Pterophthirus wernecki GuimarS.es, Papeis Avulsos do Departamento de Zoologia, Secretaria da . Agricultura, SSo Paulo, Brasil 9:8:83; figures. . f HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Proechimys iherinti at Boraceia, state 01 SSo Paulo, Brasil. Genus SCHIZOPHTHIRUS Ferris 1922. S chizophthirus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck ing Lice, Part 3:143. 1932. Hasellus Jancke, Zeitschrift tiir Paras itenkunde 4: 33^. . GENERIC TYPE. Pediculus pleurophaeus Burmeister, by original designa¬ tion. One other species is included in the genus. GENERIC SYNONY’M. Hasellus Jancke, by community of type. CHARACTERS. Hoplopleurinae with five-segmented antennae. Abdominal segments , exclusive of the usual terminal and genital segments, without tergal or sternal plates in the female except for plates belonging appar¬ ently to segments one to three. Male with such plates on all segments. Female with three rows of setae on most of the segments both dorsalh .a < ventrallv, the male with one row on each segment both dor sally and ventral^ lv. Sternal plate of segment two divided longitudinally into two much ex nanded Dlates, each of which articulates by means of a process with the corresponding paratergal plate and each of which bears on its posterior border 2-3 stout, thorn-like setae. f -i aiiridae The members of this genus occur on rodents ot the lamily Giindae. 147 Key to Species of SCHIZOPHTHIRUS Dorsal and ventral lobes of the paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3~6 deeply divided into 2 very unequal lobes, the dorsal lobe being much nar¬ rower than the ventral lobe; known from the European genera Muscardinus and Eliomys... . PLEUROPHAEUS Paratergal plates of these abdominal segments not thus deeply divided, and with the lobes equal; known from the genus Graphiurus in Africa. GRAPHIURI Schizophthirus graphiuri Ferris 1922. Schizophthirus graphiuri Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 3:147; figures 93A, 96, 97. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Graphiurus murinus from British East Africa and recorded also as from Graphiurus murinus (as raptor) from the same region; from Graphiurus nanus from Natal, South Africa; from Graphiurus alticola, locality not specified in available reference. Schizophthirus pleurophaeus (Burmeister) Figures 63, 64 1839- Pediculus pleurophaeus Burmeister, Genera Insectorum, Rhynchota, Number 7. 1922. Schizophthirus pleurophaeus (Burmeister), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 3:145; figures 94, 95- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Dryomys nitedula (as Myoxys nitella) from somewhere in Europe. Also recorded from Eliomys quercinus (as pall idus) from Italy and from Muscardinus avellanar ius from Germany. Subfamily HYBOPHTHIRINAE Ferris, new subfamily DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBFAMILY. Hoplopleuridae in which there is no ex¬ ternal indication of eyes. The most distinctive character is the presence of a short, claw-like structure which arises beside the true claw on the anterior legs. Paratergal plates present on abdominal segments 2-8 or 3-8, with at least one of the posterior apical angles forming a lobe or point which is free from the body wall. Abdomen with but a single row of setae on any segment, both dorsally and ventrally, in either sex and without sclerotized tergal and sternal plates other than those normally present on the terminal and genitalic segments, except at times in the male. Antennae five-segmented, sexually dimorphic only to the extent that the male may bear a single enlarged seta near its apex. Occurring on African mammals of the rodent family Echimyidae, subfamilies Thryonomyinae and Petromyinae, and the family Orycteropodidae of the Order Tubulidentata. NOTES. A considerable amount of doubt is felt concerning the validity of this subfamily. The presence of the peculiar claw-like structure along¬ side the true claw on the front tarsi seems to link the included species and there are no other characters which specifically deny such an association. Webb referred the two included genera to the Haematopinidae, but the present writer is quite unable to agree with this assignment. Key to the Genera of HYBOPHTHIRINAE Hindhead almost triangular, the lateral margins strongly convergent; occur¬ ring on the genus Orycteropus of the Order Tubulidentata . HYBOPHTHIRUS Hindhead with the lateral margins approximately parallel; occurring on rod¬ ents of the family Echiiqyidae . SCIPIO 148 Schizophthirus pleurophaeus (Burmeister) Figure 63 149 2nd stcrnite 3rd claw paratergal pl figures 114, 115, 116. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Originally described from Thryonomys sp., Zulu- land, and later recorded by Bedford from Thryonomys swinderianus variegatus. The hosts are members of the rodent family Echimyidae. Scipio longiceps Ewing 1937- Scipio longiceps Ewing, Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington, page 81; figure 29. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Thryonomys gregor pus Ulus from Majiya- cgumvi , British East Africa. The host is a member of the rodent family Echimyidae. NOTES. The description and very inadequate accompanying illustration, 154 female genitalia male genitalia Scipio aulacodi (Neumann), details Figure 68 166 both based upon the male alone, offer no convincing evidence that this species is distinct from Scipio aulacodi. Scipio tripedatus Ferris 1932. Scipio tripedatus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:285; figures 173-175* 1936* Bedfordia tripedata (Ferris), Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Parasiten- kunde 9:55* HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION* Type from a "rock rat," one of the species of the genus Petromus {-Petromys ) without locality other than South Africa and also recorded from Petromus typicus tropicalis , Windhoek, South Africa, and from Petromus sp . at Khan River, Southwest Africa. The hosts are members of the rodent family Echimyidae. NOTES. This species has been designated as type of the genus Bedfordia Fahrenholz, but this genus is here rejected. Subfamily PEDICININAE Enderlein 1904. Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28:136, 138. DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBFAMILY. Hoplopleuridae in which distinct eyes are present as external lenses accompanied in life by pigment spots. Antennae five-segmented, the last three segments at times more or less fused togeth¬ er; sexually dimorphic, the males having a small, stout seta on the dorsal side of each of the last three segments. Paratergal plates present on ab¬ dominal segments 4-6 or 5-6 in the form of distinct plates of which at least one of the apical angles is free from the body. Abdomen otherwise membranous except for the usual terminal and genitalic plates. Spiracles present on abdominal segments 3-8. Legs variable in form, either all more or less similar and relatively slender or the first pair slender and the others larger and stouter. Gonopods of segment eight of the female always obsolete, their position represented only by a row of setae. Gonopods of segment nine likewise represented merely by a row of setae, the apex of the body never with lobes or processes. Genitalia of the male always with par- ameres which are fused basally to the base of the aedeagus. Occurring on Old World monkeys of the superfamily Cercopithecoidea. NOTES. The removal of the genus Pedicinus from the family Pediculidae, with which it has long been associated, has been decided upon only after much doubt. The morphological community with the Pediculidae has lain only in the presence of distinct eyes, but it is now known that the eyes are present in various forms and they presumably mean nothing more than the re¬ tention of a primitive character which was once common to all the lice. In the remainder of its morphology Pedicinus departs as widely from Pediculus as do most of the other genera. Even the spiracles, which have been in¬ sisted upon by Webb as indices to relationship, have not been claimed by him to have any special resemblance to those of the Pediculidae. In other respects the members of the genus approach quite closely various forms of the Hoplopleuridae and, considering the morphological evidence, there have been but two alternatives apparent. One of these is to mime a new family for the genus Pedicinus . The other is to regard this genus as constituting a subfamily of the Hoplopleuridae. The second alternative has been chosen. The removal of Pedicinus from the Pediculidae and its assignment to the Hoplopleuridae will doubtless be viewed with horror by those whose ideas of the relationship of the various genera of lice are at least colored — if not determined — by the relationships of the hosts. The genus Pedicinus, being from a Primate, ought to be related to Pediculus, but the morphological ev¬ idence does not support such a relationship. Possibly future workers will see some other solution of the difficulty. 156 Genus PEDICINUS Gervais 1844. Pedlclnus Gervais, In Walckenaer's Histoire naturelle des insectes up teres 3 * 30 1 - 1912. Phthirpedicinus Fahrenholz, Zoologischer Anzeiger 39:64. 1916. Neopedictrius Fahrenholz, Archiv ftir Naturgeschichte, Abteilung A, 81:11:7. 1934. Pedicinus , Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Fart 7 :5U2. GENERIC TYPE. The question of just what name the type of this genus shouLd bear is open to a difference of opinion, the genus having been based upon a niisidenti f ied species. The genus was based by Gervais upon speci¬ mens which he identified as being the Pediculus euryiaster of Burmeister, but which on the basis of his description and illustrations was clearly misideutified. The opinion is here held that the generic name belongs with the species which he actually had before him and upon which he based his generic concept, not with the species which belongs with the name that he mistakenly employed. The questiou then remains as to what species Gervais actually had. Ferris has maintained that in all probability it was the species later described by Piaget as Pedicinus loniiceps. Hopkins, however, has main¬ tained the opinion that longiceps should be regarded as a synonym of the earlier name Haematopinus obtusus Rudow. This opinion is here reluctantly accepted and the type of the genus Pedicinus thus may be given as Haemato¬ pinus obtusus Rudow. GENERIC SYNONYMS. Neopedicinus Fahrenholz, type Heopediclnus patas Fah¬ renholz; Phthirpedicinus Fahrenholz, type Phthirpedicinus micropilosus Fah¬ renholz, which is here considered to be a synonym of Pedicinus euryiaster (Burmeister) . CHARACTERS. With the same characters as the subfamily, of which it is the only included genus. NOTES. In the opinion of the writer there is no justification for the two genera named by Fahrenholz, although the names are available should future workers desire to employ them. 3- 4. 5- 6. Key to Species of PEDICINUS With but 2 pairs of paratergal plates on the abdomen . EURYGASTER With 3 pairs of free paratergal plates on the abdomen . 2 All legs of essentially the same size and form . . . 3 Secondhand third pairs of legs definitely stouter and with heavier claw than the first pair . * . . . |p,rc verv Ion ^ and slender; penis of the male apically acutelj pointed. “ . HAMADRYAS Le'rs not thus long and slender . . . . . ;4 Female with the genital plate trapezoidal and with the posterior margin deeply emarginate ; male with the penis apically flattened and pro¬ duced into two slight points . . . .ALBIDUS Female with the genital plate transversely narrow; male with the penis merely slightly swollen at the apex . OBTUSUS With small paratergal sclerotization on segments t-S, in addition to the 3 pairs of paratergal plates in both male and female. ..... .PICTI 5 Without such sclerotizations in addition to the three pairs ol parater¬ gal plates . . . Penis of the male with a tooth on each side just anterior to the apex.. . . ANCORATUS Penis of the male without such preapical teeth . PATAS Pedicinus albidus (Rudow) 1869- Haematopinus albidus Rudow, Zeitschrift fur die gesamten Naturwis- senschaften 34:168. 1934. Pedicinus albidus (Rudow), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 7:511; figure 296. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from the "barbary ape," Macaca s’jlvanus. Ferris has recorded the species from the same host from Morocco and in the London Zoological Garden. Pedicinus ancoratus Ferris 1934. Pedicinus ancoratus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 7:518; figures 299, 300A, F, H, I. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Presbytis pullata, Pulo Sebang, East Sumatra. Also recorded from Presbytis cristata and Presbytis germaini from the Malayan region, from Presbytis schistacea from Kashmir, from Presbytis rubicunda from Borneo, doubtfully from Pygathrix priamus from Ceylon. Pedicinus eurygaster (Burmeister) 1838. Pediculus eurygaster Burmeister, Genera Insectorum, Rhynchota, Spe¬ cies 21. 1864. Pediculus microps Nitzsch, Giebel, Zeitschrift fiir die gesamten Na- turwissenschaften 23:32. 1880. Pedicinus eurygaster (Burmeister), Piaget, Les Pediculines, page 630. (In part) 1880. Pedicinus longiceps Piaget, Les Pediculines, page 632. (In part) 1880. Pedicinus breviceps Piaget, Les Pediculines, page 632. (In part) 1881. Pedicinus piageti Stroebelt, -Jahresbericht der zoologischen Sektion des Westfalischen provincial-Vereins fiir Wissenschaft und Kunst 9:82; Plate 1, figure 3* 1912. Phthirpedicinus micropilosus Fahrenholz, Zoologischer Anzeiger 39 : 55. 1932. Phthirpedicinus microps (Nitzsch) , Werneck, Annales da Academia Brasiliera de Sciencias 4:163; figures 1-5- 1934. Pedicinus eurygaster (Burmeister), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 7:521; figures 303— 30 5 * HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded by Burmeister from Innuus sinicus, without locality data, presumably from a captive animal. Recorded by Piaget under three specific names from Macacus cynomolgus, Cercopithecus cynomol- cus, and Cercopithecus mona ; by Stroebelt from Macacus erythraeus; by Mj oberg from Macacus silenus ; by Fahrenholz from Macacus rhesus and silenus and from Cercopithecus sp.; and by Ferris from a long series of hosts of the genera Macacus, Pithecus, and Rhinopithecus; from skins of wild animals from Kashmir, the Malayan area, and the Philippine Islands. The full list will be found in the "Host List" at the end of this volume. NOTES. The original description given by Burmeister fortunately men¬ tions specifically the distinguishing character of this species, which is the presence of but two pairs of abdominal paratergal plates. Since in the long series of specimens examined by Ferris no other species having this character appears, and since the one species that does appear is frequently encountered on captive monkeys, the identification may be accepted as prac¬ tically certain. Ferris was able to examine the specimens of the three species — eurygaster, breviceps, and longiceps — recorded by Piaget and found all of these to be compounded of eurygaster and obtusus. It is probable that viirious published records under the name of eurygaster are erroneous, as was the identification employed by Gervais when he founded the genus Pedicinus. 158 This species has been designated as type of the genus Phthirpedlc inus, which is not here accepted. Pedicinus hamadryas Mjbberg 1910. Pedicinus hamadryas Mjbberg, Arkiv for Zoologi 6:13:172; figs. 86-87- 1939. Pedicinus hamadryas Mjoberg, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 7:613; figures 86, 87- HOSTS .‘AND DISTRIBUTION- Type recorded as from Hamadryas sp. from the ZooLogical Garden at Hamburg, Germany. Ferris recorded the species- from a single specimen from "monkey," bearing no indication of place of origin. Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Figures 69, 70 1844. Pedicinus eurygaster ( Burmeister) , Gervais, In Walckenaer1 s Histoire naturelle des insectes apteres 3:301; Plate 48, figures 1, lb. (Mis identification) 1869- Haematopinus obtusus Rudow, Zeitschrift fur die gesamten Naturwis- senschaften 34:169- 1880. Pedicinus eurygaster (Burmeister), Piaget, Les Pediculines, page 6 30 - (Part; misidenti f ication) 1880. Pedicinus longiceps Piaget, Les Pediculines, page 632. (In part) 1880. Pedicinus breviceps Piaget, Les Pediculines, page 632. (In part) 1886- Pedicinus graciliceps Piaget, Les Pediculines, Supplement, page 141. 1910. Pedicinus paralleliceps Mjoberg, Arkiv for Zoologi 6:13:174; fig. 88. 1912. Pedicinus rhesi Fahrenholz, Zoologischer Anzeiger 39:54. 1916. Pedicinus vulgaris Fahrenholz, Archiv far Naturgeschichte, Abteilung A, 81:11:32- 1917. Pedicinus parallel iceps , variety colobi Fahrenholz, -Jahrbuch der Hamburgischen wissenschaftlichen Anstalten 34:2:3, 8. 1934. Pedicinus long iceps Piaget, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 7:506; figures 293-296D. 1946. Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow), Hopkins, Annals and Magazine of Natural History (Series 11) 12:564. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. The types of Haematopinus obtusus Rudow were said to be from Semnopithecus maurus, without indication of locality. The lectotype selected from among the material of Piaget is from Semnopithecus pruinosus. The types of Pedicinus graciliceps Piaget were recorded merely as from monkey. The types of Pedicinus paralleliceps Mjoberg were said to be from Hacacus rhesus. Pedicinus vulgaris Fahrenholz was named, on the basis of the literature only, for the specimens recorded by Piaget from Innuus nemestrinus, these here being considered actually to represent Piaget's Pedicinus longiceps, and therefore being obtusus. All of the specimens noted above were apparently taken from captive animals. The list of hosts, other than as recorded above, is very long and is .’iven in full with all available corrections in the host list at the end of this volume. Some ol these records are of specimens taken from captive an¬ imals, but others are from wild animals or their skins, and the indications are that the species may occur on almost any Cercopithecoid monkey. It is apparently the species which is most likely to be found on captive animals. NOTES." Ferris was able to examine the types of the four supposed spe¬ cies recorded by Piaget, of which three were described by Piaget as new. He reports (1934) that there were but two actual species recorded under four names and that in some of the preparations both were included on the same slides. He selected the lectotypes for longiceps as indicated above. In the same work Ferris placed Haematopinus obtusus Rudow as unrecognizr- able other than supposedly as a species of Pedicinus, although he recorded 159 Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Figure B9 the examination of specimens from the Hamburg Museum which might conceiv¬ ably contain Rudow' s types. Hopkins (1946) has adopted a different point of view, advocating that a neotype be selected from among the specimens in the Hamburg Museum. By doing so no name would be left as belonging to an unrecognizable species and as obtusus antedates lonHceps the latter would become a synonym. We need not go into all the arguments concerning this matter. In prin¬ ciple the writer is opposed to the replacement of any name, the application of which is certain, by any name which is at all uncertain or clouded. Nor is the opinion here held that every name which has been proposed and of which the type is lost or apparently lost should have a neotype named for it. To adopt such a procedure is to open endless vistas for abuse and nomenclator ial instability. In this particular case, however, there is some legitimate argument for following the suggestion made by Hopkins and for selecting a neotype from among the specimens in the Hamburg Museum, thus getting rid of an unattached name that has been cluttering the litera¬ ture for more than seventy-five years. The point is here somewhat reluc¬ tantly conceded and the mime obtusus is employed. 160 Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow), details Figure 70 161 Pedicinus patas (Fahrenholz) 1916. Neopedicinus patas Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, Abteilung A, 81:11:6; Plate f, figure 2; text figure 7. 1934. Pedicinus patas (Fahrenholz), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 7:615; figure 300G. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type recorded as from Cercopithecus patas with¬ out indication of locality. Recorded by Ferris from Erythrocebus whitei, Lasiopyia kolbi, and Lasiopyia albogularis from East Africa. Pedicinus pictus Ferris 1934. Pedicinus pictus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 7:518; figures 301> 302. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Colobus caudatus from Mount Kenya, British East Africa. Also recorded from Pygathrix entellus from the London Zoological Garden. Subfamily P0LYPLAC1NAE Ferris, new subfamily DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBFAMILY. Hoplopleuridae in which the antennae are always five-segmented (with the exception of one poorly described species in which they are said to be three-segmented) and are very commonly sexual¬ ly dimorphic, the male having the apical, preaxial angle of segment three more or less prolonged and terminating in a sclerotized point or bearing one or two short, stout, retrorse setae dorsally. Anterior legs (except in one species) small and with slender claw; middle legs larger than the first and with stouter claw; third legs (with the exception of a few species ) distinctly larger than the second and with stouter claw, but not flattened. Paratergal plates always present on at least one abdominal segment (with the exception of one species in which they are entirely lacking) and always with at least one of the posterior angles forming a point which is free from the body; never forming the apices of spiracle-bearing abdominal tuber¬ cles; never overlapping. Abdomen most commonly with well-developed tergal and sternal plates; although in a few cases without such plates other than on the terminal and genitalic segments. Sternal plate of segment two never extended laterally to articulate with the corresponding paratergites. Tho¬ racic sternal plate well developed, except in a few species in which it is lacking. NOTES. This subfamily is a bit difficult to define definitely because of the existence of a few species which in one respect or another depart from the normal form. Thus the genus Lemurphthirus, with one included species, has paratergal plates only on the second abdominal segment, al¬ though in other respects it is a typical member of the group. One species assigned to the genus Haemodipsus entirely lacks paratergites and other ab¬ dominal plates, although an apparently closely related species has parater¬ gal plates, even though they are very small. In a few species the sternal plate of the thorax is lacking, although in most species it is well devel¬ oped. These departures from the normal form, however, are limited to a few species and do not disturb the general homogeneity of the group. The hosts of the subfami ly are found among various groups of the rodents, although a few occur on insectivores and the Lagomorpha, and one doubtful member of the group occurs even upon an ungulate. Sixteen genera are here recognized as belonging to the subfamily. 162 Key to the Genera of POLYPLACINAE 2. 4. 1. Antennae described as 3- se^rmen t ed ; ascribed to a lemur in Borneo . . HAM0PHTU1R1 S Antennae definitely 5-segmented . 2 With no trace of paratergal plates on any abdominal segment; from Euro¬ pean hare; one species of the genus . HAEM0D1PSUS With paratergal plates definitely present on at least one segment of the abdomen . 3 Paratergal plates present only on the second abdominal segment; as¬ cribed to a lemuroid in Africa . LEMURPHTHI RUS Paratergal plates present on more than the second abdominal segment... 4 With the paratergal plates present only on abdominal segments 4-6; as¬ cribed to donkey and zebra from Africa . RATO1IA Paratergal plates present on at least four abdominal segments . 5 Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 2-7 consisting merely of narrow, longitudinal, sclerotized strips; ascribed to a South American rodent . GALE0PHTH1KUS Paratergal plates otherwise . 6 Paratergal plates of the abdominal segments very small, consisting of a single point which projects from a slight base; ascribed to hares and rabbits in Europe, Africa, and North America . HAEM0D1PSUS Otherwise . 7 Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3~6 each with the basal, ventral angle produced, the angle bearing 2 slender setae; ascribed to a lemur in Madagascar . PHTHIRPEDICULUS Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3~6 otherwise . 8 Both sexes with one of the transverse rows of setae on the abdominal tergites and sternites with setae which are flattened and leaf-like or cuneiform; ascribed to a South American rodent . CTENOPHTHIRUS Setae of the abdomen otherwise . •••••9 Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 2 definitely divided longitudi- nallyinto 2 plates, one of which lies on the dorsum and one on the venter, the ventral portion with a flat, raised, apically free point; occurring on the New World rodent family Heteromyidae . . . .FAHRENHOLZIA Paratergal plates of segment 2 of the abdomen with at the most slight evidence of being thus divided, the ventral part never independent of the dorsal part . . . Abdominal segments with not more than 2 median setae and a single seta on each side near the lateral margin on any segment, either dorsally or ventrally ; occurring on the South American genus Lagidium . . LAGIODIOPHTHIRUS Abdominal segments with more numerous setae . 11 Antennae with both basal and distal anterior angles of the basal seg¬ ment proloncred into a distant hook; known from Anathema in India.... . . . 7 . DOCOPHTHIRUS Antennae not thus . • . . . 12 Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 2 with evidence of a distinct longitudinal division into 2 plates . . . . . . . • 13 Paratergal plates of abdominal segment 2 with no evidence ol such lon¬ gitudinal division . I4 Abdomen in both sexes with distinct transverse tergal and sternal plates . POLYPLAX Abdomen in both sexes without such transverse plates, there being merely a small, tubercle-like, sclerotized area about the base of each seta: occurring on African rodents of the genus Cricetomys . . . . . 7T . proenderleinellus 14. Paratergal plates present on a variable number of abdominal segments 8. 9- 10. 11. 12. 13. 163 but never on segments 7-8 . EULINOGNATHUS Paratergal plates present on abdominal segments 2-8 . 15 15. Second plate of the second abdominal tergite in the male always at least slightly modified, having its posterior border emarginate and with a group of setae set in an aster-like fashion at each end of this emargination; if the tergite is not sclerotized some modifica¬ tion of the row of setae still appears; occurring chiefly on the rodent family Sciuridae . NEOHAEMATOPINUS Second plate of the second abdominal tergite in the male not thus mod¬ ified; occurring on the Murid genus Acomys in Africa . SYMOCA Genus CTENOPHTHIRUS Ferris 1922. Ctenophthirus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck¬ ing Lice, Part 3: 153- GENERIC TYPE. Ctenophthirus cercomydis Ferris, at present the only known species. CHARACTERS. Hoplopleuridae of the subfamily Polyplacinae in which the antennae are five-segmented and not sexually dimorphic. Paratergal plates present on abdominal segments 2-8; those of segment two very small; those of segments 3-6 narrow and with each posterior angle produced into a pro¬ nounced point. Female with a distinct tergal plate on abdominal segment one, two tergal plates which are more or less fused together on segment two and two tergal plates on segment eight, the remaining segments with three tergal plates. The posteriormost plate on segments 3~8 bears a single row of flattened, almost foliate setae. On the ventral side the arrangement of the sternal plates is similar except that segment three bears three plates which are fused together. Male with two tergal plates on segment three, these more or less fused, and two sternal plates on segments 3-7, the pos¬ teriormost plate with a row of mingled, simple, and flattened setae. Spir¬ acles present on segments 3-8. Sternal plate of the thorax present. Ctenophthirus cercotqydis Ferris Figures 71, 72 1922. Ctenophthirus cercomydis Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 3:153; figures 100-101. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known only from the original record, from Cer- comys cunicularis (recorded as fosteri) from Sapucay, Paraguay. The host belongs to the rodent family Echimyidae. Genus DOCOPHTHIRUS Waterston 1923- Docophthirus Waterston, Bulletin of Entomological Research 14:101. 1932. Docophthirus, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck¬ ing Lice, Part 5:303- GENERIC TYPE. Docophthirus acinetus Waterston, the only known species. CHARACTERS. Polyplacinae with five-segmented antennae which are not sexually dimorphic; with the first segment having the anterior margin pro¬ duced basally and ventrally into sclerotized hooks. Second and third legs both enlarged and practically equal in size. Paratergal plates of the ab¬ domen present on at least segments 2-6, those of segment three not longitu¬ dinally divided, those of all the segments with each posterior angle pro¬ duced into a distinct point. Abdomen of the female with two rows of tergal setae on segments 3-7, and one row on segments one and eight, with a small tergal plate present in connection with the anteriormost row of setae on segments 2-7; with two rows of setae on the sternites of segments 2-7, but with a distinct plate present only on segment two. Male with a single row 164 Ctenophthirus cercomydis Ferris Figure 71 of tergal setae on all tergites except segment two, which has two rows, with one row and one plate on segments one and 4-7 and two plates on seg¬ ment two; ventral ly with but one plate and one row of setae on segment two and with but one row of setae on any other segment and no plates except on segments seven and eight. Spiracles present on segments 2-8. Thoracic sternal plate not developed. . . . , .... . -Klr NOTES. None of the known material is in very good condition and possibly the above description will require some modification. 165 Ctenophthirus cercomydis Ferris, details Figure 72 1()6 167 Docophthirus acinetus VVaterston , details Figure 74 Docophthirus acinetus Waterston Figures 73, 74 1923. Docophthirus acinetus Waterston, Bulletin of Entomological Research 14:101; figures 21a and 21b. 1932. Docophthirus acinetus Waterston, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mon¬ ograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:304; figures 185, 186. HOSTIS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known only from the original record in which it was ascribed to Anathana ellloti, which belongs to the family Tupaiidae the tree shrews. 168 Genus KULINOGNATHUS Cummings 1916. Eul Inognathua Cummings, Annals and Magazine of Natural History (ser ies 8) 17:90. 1929. Bathyergicola Bedford, Annual Report of the Director of Veterinary Services, Union of South Africa 15:5^5* 1932. Bathyergicola, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck¬ ing Lice, Part 5:311* 1932. Eul inognathus, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck¬ ing Lice, Part 5:318. SYNONYM. Bathyergicola Bedford. GENERIC TYPE. Eul inognathus dent iculatus Cummings, by original designa¬ tion. The type of Bathyergicola is Bathyergicola hilli Bedford, b^ original designation. CHARACTERS. Polyrplaciuae with five-segmented antennae which are not sexually dimorphic. Anterior legs small, with slender claw. Middle legs larger than the first, with stouter claw and at times as large as the post¬ erior legs. Paratergal plates present on abdominal segments 2-6 at least, except that they are lacking on segment two in one species. Abdomen always membranous throughout except for the ninth tergite and the usual genital plates. Abdominal segments with either one or two transverse rows of setae on most of the segments, both dorsally and veutrally, in the female and al¬ ways with but one row in the male. Spiracles present on segments 3 -7 or 3-8. NOTES. A most unsatisfactory situation exists in regard to this genus. Ferris (1932) recognized Eul inognathus and Bathyergicola as distinct genera, although it was indicated that neither of these genera was entirely homo¬ geneous or sharply defined. A re-study of the question in connection with the present work does not support the separation there accepted. In 1932, it was indicated that the two genera could be separated by the number of abdominal spiracles, Eul inognathus having spiracles only on segments 3-7 while Bathyergicola has them also on segment eight. But this seems to sep¬ arate species which are actually more or less alike on the basis of other characters. A separation on the basis of the rows of setae on the abdominal segments of the female will not permit a separation of the males. A separa¬ tion of one species called Bathyergicola laii’rensis Bedford, on the basis of the absence of paratergal plates on segment two of the abdomen would remove this species from association with others which resemble it in other re¬ spects. A separation of the species which have tubercles on the head brings together certain forms which seem to be connected by host aissociations, but is^not supported by other characters. A separation on the basis of the presence or absence" of the thoracic sternal plate leads to an evidently ar¬ tificial grouping. Any arrangement that may be made seems to receive no support from host or geographical distribution, yet all the species seem to share a general similarity. The soLution of naming several genera suggests itself but seems to offer no especially sensible arrangement, although this mav be the eventual solution. "This solution is in part here accepted by recognizing the two genera Lagidiophthirus and Galeophthirus which have previously been named for species referred to Eul i nognat hus. Key to Species of EULINOGNATHUS 1. Head with at least 1-2 stout, sclerotized, hook-like processes or tuber¬ cles on the ventral side near the bases of the antennae . 2 Head without such hooks or tubercles . 4 2. Head with both dorsal and ventral hooks or tubercles . DENTICULAT1 S Head with hooks or tubercles only on the ventral side . •••••• *3 3. Ventral side of first antennal segment with hooks . ACuLEATi 'S 169 Ventral side of first antennal segment without such hooks . RmNCAlUS 4. Paratergal plates present only on segments 3-6 . LAWRENSIS Paratergal plates present on at least segments 2-6 . 5 5- Abdominal segment 7 with distinct, apically free paratergal plates . . LOPHIOMYDIS Abdominal segment 7 without distinct, apically free paratergal plates 6 6. Sternal plate of thorax well developed . AMERICANUS Sternal plate of thorax not at all developed . HILLI Eulinognathus aculeatus (Neumann) 1912. Haematopinus aculeatus Neumann, Bulletin de la Societe Zoologique de France 37:143; figures 5> 6. 1916. Eulinognathus aculeatus (Neumann), Ferris, Proceedings of the Cali¬ fornia Academy of Sciences (Series 4) 6:168. 1932. Eulinognathus aculeatus (Neumann), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:321; figures 196, 197- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Originally recorded from " Dipus sp. , " at Dj erha, Tunis. According to Ellerman's list this is probably a species of Jaculus. Recorded by Ferris from Allactaga mongolica which, according to Ellerman, is Allactaga siberica. These hosts are members of the family Dipodidae. NOTES. There is a possibility of a misidentification in the record by Ferris, since the types of the species were not seen. Eulinognathus americanus Ewing 1923. Eulinognathus americanus Ewing, Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 13:148. 1932. Eulinognathus americanus Ewing, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:325; figure 200. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Ctenomys brasiliensis on the Salade River, Paraguay. Recorded by Ferris from Ctenomys serlcus from the Upper Rio Chico, Paraguay. The hosts belong to the family Echimyidae. NOTES. The curiously modified setae on the paratergal plates of seg¬ ments 5-5 offer a basis for the generic separation of this species if this should prove desirable. It is at present known only from the female. Eulinognathus biuncatus Ferris 1932. Eulinognathus biuncatus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:324; figures 198, 199. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Dipodipus sowerbyi in Shensi, China. Ac¬ cording to Ellender this is Dipus sagitta. Eulinognathus denticulatus Cummings Figures 75. 76 1916. Eulinognathus denticulatus Cummings, Annals and Magazine of Natural History (Series 8) 17:90; figure. 1932. Eulinognathus denticulatus Cummings, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:3 19 ; figures 194-195- 1940. Eulinognathus denticulatus surdasteri Werneck, Revista de Entomologia 11:724; figure. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded by Cummings from Pedetes coffer with¬ out indication of locality, and by Bedford from the same host in South Africa. Ferris has recorded it from Pedetes larvalis and Pedetes sp. at Nairobi and Machakos, British East Africa, and from Mastomys coucha and Rattus rattus at Nairobi. Werneck has described the supposed subspecies or 170 Eulinognathus denticuiatus Cummings Figure 75 171 head female genitalia Eulinognathus denticulatus Cummings, details Figure 76 variety surdasteri from Pedetes surdaster larvalis at Nairobi, basing it upon slight differences in the form of the pseudopenis of the male. Males at hand from the type host at Nairobi show definitely that the supposed difference depends merely upon whether or not the pseudopenis happens to be turned upward. The subspecies surdasteri is consequently rejected. Ac¬ cording to Ellerman's list there are but two species of Pedetes, these be¬ ing caffer and surdaster , larvalis being a subspecies of the latter. The hosts belong to the rodent family Pedetidae. Eulinognathus hilli (Bedford) 1929. Bathyeriiicola hilli Bedford, Report of the Director of Veterinary Services, Union of South Africa, 1^:506; figures 6, 7, 7a, 8. 1932. Bathyerticola hilli Bedford, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:312; figures 190, 191. 1932. Proenderleinellus hilli (Bedford), Bedford, Report of the Director of Veterinary Services and Animal Industry, Union of South Africa, 18:401. 172 HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from Georhychus hottentotus at Pieter¬ maritzburg, Natal, South Africa, and recorded only from this host and lo¬ cality. According to Ellender the generic name of the host is Cryptonys. It belongs to the liunily Dathyergidae. Eulinognathus lawi-ensis (Bedford) 1929. Bathyer£icola lawrensis Bedford, Annual Report of the Director of Veterinary Services, Unionof South Africa, 15: 5U6 ; ligs. 7b, 9. ID. 1932. Bathyergicola lawrensis Bedford, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mon¬ ograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:314; figure 192. 1932. Proemierleinellus lawrensis (Bedford), Bedford, Annual Report of the Director of Veterinary Services and Animal Industry, Union ol South Africa, 18:401. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from Bathyerius suillus ( =maritimus ) from unspecified locality in Cape Colony, South Alrica. The host belongs to the family Bathy ergi dae . Eulinognathus lophiomydis (Ferris) 1932. Bathyergicola lophiomydis Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:315; figure 193 • 1940. Bathyerticola lophiomydis Ferris, Werneck, Revista de Entomologia 11:728; figures. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type, the female, described as from Lophiomys thomasi from Mount Garguez, and recorded also from Lophiomys ibeanus at Nakroru, British East Africa. The male was described by Werneck from Lophiomys sp., "probably testudo," from Kenya, British East Alrica. Ac¬ cording to Ellender all these names represent subspecies of Lophiomys tmhausi. The host genus belongs to the family Lophiomyidae. Genus FAHRENHOLZIA Kellogg and Ferris 1915. Fahrenholzia Kellogg and Ferris, Anoplura and Mallophaga of North American Mammals, Stanford University Publications, University Series (no volume number), page 32- 1922. Fahrenholzia, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck¬ ing Lice, Part 3:158. GENERIC TYPE. Fahrenholzia pinnata Kellogg and Ferris. CHARACTERS. Polyplacinae with five-segmented antennae which are not sexually dimorphic. Anterior legs small, with slender claw. Middle and posterior legs equal in size, with very large tibiotarsus and stout claw, the tarsus with a sclerotized, retrorse point at the outer basal angle. Parater'ral plates of the abdomen present on a variable number ot segments, alwaysAowever, with at least three pairs present. The paratergal plates of what is apparently segment two consist each of two plates, one lying on the dorsum, the other on the venter, distinctly separated from each other, the ventral piece provided with a flat, apically free process which arises somewhat anterior to the apex of the plate. It is possible thai we have to do with the paratergal plates of segments one and two, one or the other/,t which has been somewhat displaced posteriorly. Following these plates there are always plates on segments three and tour, these having the apical an rles free from the body. Plates which do not have the apex thus free may occur as far posteriorly as segment eight. Abdomen entire 1> membranous ex cept for the usual dorsal and ventral plates of the terminal and genital segments, each segment with but a single row of setae, both d ^or sally and vent rally, these setae strikingly stout. Spiracles present on segments j-S. Thoracic" sternal plate strongly developed. 173 The members of this genus occur exclusively on members of the rodent fam¬ ily Heteromyidae, which occurs in North America and northern South America. NOTES. The status of some of the species included in this genus is not clear. The author has in the past named certain "subspecies, " a practice which he would not now approve, for some of these forms. These are here considered as species. It is probable that a considerable number of forms remain still to be discovered and until more is known about the group it is hopeless to talk about subspecies. Key to Species of FAHRENHOLZIA 1. Para tergal plates present only on abdominal segments 2-4 . 2 Paratergal plates present on more than these segments . 4 2. Paratergal plates of segment 3 with both apical lobes acute . 3 Paratergal plates of segment 3 with the dorsal lobe apically broad and truncate or slightly emarginate . MICROCEPHALA 3. Paratergal plates very small and slight; male with free, elongated par- ameres and with a distinct pseudopenis . REDUCTA Paratergal plates well developed; parameres of the male broadly expand¬ ed; with no distinct pseudopenis . PINNATA 4. Paratergal plates of segment 3 with but a single lobe . TRIBULOSA Paratergal plates of segment 3 bilobed . ZACATECAE Fahrenholzia microcephala Ferris 1922. Fahrenholzia microcephala Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 3:161; figures 106, 107. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Holotype recorded as from Heteromys pictus at San Carlos, Vera Cruz, Mexico, which, according to Ellender, belongs to the genus Liomys. Also recorded from Heteromys goldmani at Achotal, state of Vera Cruz, Mexico, and from Liomys irroratus in Texas and Mexico. Fahrenholzia pinnata Kellogg and Ferris Figures 77, 78 1916. Fahrenholzia pinnata Kellogg and Ferris, Anoplura and Mallophaga of North American Mammals, Stanford University Publications, Univer¬ sity Series (no volume number), page 32; text figure 13; Plate 3, figure 2; Plate 5, figure 5; Plate 6, figure 10. 1922. Fahrenholzia pinnata Kellogg and Ferris, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 3:159; figures 104, 106. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Dipodomys cali fornicus at Covelo, Mendocino County, California. Recorded also from Dipodomys merriami at Independence, California, and Dipodomys desert i at Mecca, California; from Dipodomys ornatus at Valparaiso, state of Zacatecas, and Dipodomys phillipsii at Amecameca, Mexico; from Perodipus sp . at Coulterville , California; from Perognathus parvus in the Pine Forest Mountains, Nevada. Fahrenholzia reducta Ferris 1922. Fahrenholzia tribulosa reducta Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 3:165; figure 109B. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded only from Perognathus formosus at Vic¬ torville, California. Fahrenholzia tribulosa Ferris 1922. Fahrenholzia tribulosa tribulosa Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mon- 174 o^raph of the Sucking Lice, Part 3:163, figures 108, 109 A, D. E. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known only from Perofnathus californicus at Pleasant Valley, Merced County, California. t Fahrenholzia zacatecae Ferris 1922. Fahrenholzia tribulosa zacatecae Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mon¬ ograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 3:166; figure 109 C. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type trora Perofnathus hispidus at Valparaiso, state of Zacatecas, Mexico. Specimens are at hand from the same host species in Savala County and at Somerset, Atasco County, Texas. 175 i=^ male genitalia thoracic sternal plate Fahrenholzia pinnata Kellogg and Ferris, details Figure 78 176 Genus GALEDPHTULRUS Eichler 1950. Galeophthirus Eichler, Bolletino della Societa Entomolo rica Italiaua 79: 12. G 01 ERIC TYPE- Hul i nognat hus caulae Werueck, the only included species. CHARACTERS. Antennae t'i ve-seguieuted , not sexually dimorphic. First legs small and weak, with slender claw. Second and third legs about equal to each other, large and stout, with stout claw. Paratergal plates present ou abdominal segments 3~7, each consisting of an elongated, narrow, sclero- tized area which bears two long setae at the apex, the apex not free from the boify wall. Abdomen membranous throughout in both sexes except for the usual sclerotizations of the terminal and genital segments. Female with two rows or partial rows of setae ou each of most of the segments, the male with but oue row. Abdominal spiracles present ou segments "1-8. Thoracic sternal plate present. NOTES. About the only basis for recognizing this genus appears in the form of the paratergal plates. The writer is somewhat dubious concerning it, but it is here accepted. Galeophthirus caviae Werueck Figure 79 1934. Eulinognathus caviae Werueck, Meinorias do lustituto Oswaldo Cruz 29: 183; figures 6-11. 19^0. Galeophthirus caviae (Werueck). Eichler, Bolletino della Societa En- tomologica Italiana 79:12. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known only from the original record, from Galea leucoblephara, which, according to Ellender, is a subspecies of Galea musteloides at Jujuy, Republic of Argentina. The host belongs to the family Caviidae. Genus HAEMODIPSUS Enderlein 1904. Haemodipsus Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28:139, 143- 1932. Haemodipsus, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck¬ ing Lice, Part 5 : 59 - GENERIC TYPE. Pediculus lyriocephalus Burmeister. Two other species are included in this genus. CHARACTERS. Anoplura referable to the Polyplacinae . Antennae five- segmented, not sexually dimorphic. First pair of legs small and with slen¬ der claw; second and third legs moderately stout and with stout claw, about equal to each other. Type species with the abdomen membranous throughout and without trace of paratergal plates; in other species of the genus with small paratergal plates on segments 3-6, these being merely a slight, scle- rotized point which projects from the body wall and is supported by a slight, expanded sclerotization at the base. Abdominal segments in both sexes with a single row of setae on each, both dorsallv and ventrally . Thoracic sternal opiate present, but very weakly developed and at no point free from the body. Spiracles present on abdominal segments 3-8. The members of this genus occur on hares and rabbits of the family Leporidae of the Order Lagomorpha. NOTES. The situation concerning this genus is very unsatisfactory • The type species is unfortunately but little known and the information concern¬ ing it quite incomplete. It is possible that the other species which are referred to this genus are so placed chiefly because of their hosts. As based upon the type species the genus can scarcely be referred to the Hop- lopleuridae, but the other species seem to belong to this family and to the subfamily Polyplacinae. A thorough redescription oi both sexes of the type species is much needed. ! p^r- f ( Galeophthirus caviae (Werneck) Figure 79 178 Key to Species oi HAfMODI PSUS 1. Paratergul plates of the abdomen entirely lacking . LYRIOCEPH ALLIS Paratergal plates present on the abdomen . 2 2. Head slender . AFRICANUS Head strongly widened posterior to the antennae . 3 3. Sternal plate of the thorax forming a rather narrow, transverse bar.... Sternal plate of the thorax filling the space among the coxae and more or less hexagonal . SETONI Haemodipsus africanus Bedford 1934. Haemodipsus africanus Bedford, Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Science and Animal Industry 2:48; figure 10. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION . Recorded from Lepus zuluensis at Jericho, Trans¬ vaal, South Africa. Haemodipsus lyriocephalus (Burmeister) Figure 80 • 1839 - Pediculus lyriocephalus Burmeister, Genera lnsectorum, Rhynchota, Species 11. 1842. Haematopinus lyriocephalus (Burmeister), Denny, Monograph i a Anoplur- orum Britanniae, page 27; Plate 24, figure 4. 1904. Haemodipsus lyriocephalus (Burmeister), Enderlein, Zoologischer An- zeiger 28:143. 1932. Haemodipsus lyriocephalus (Burmeister), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:330; figures 202, 203. 1935- Haemodipsus lyriocephalus (Burmeister), Freund, Die Tierwelt Mitte- leuropas, Band 4, Lieferung 3 : 20 ; figures 87-89- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from Lepus timidus in Europe. Ferris has recorded it from Lepus ilacialis without further data. Hopkins records it from Lepus europaeus in Europe. Haemodipsus setoni Ewing 1924. Haemodipsus setoni Ewing, American Journal of Tropical Medicine 3: 548. 1932. Haemodipsus setoni Ewing, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:335; figures 205B, E. HOSTS .AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from Lepus californicus at Wichita, Kansas, and recorded from the same host at San Diego, California. Recorded by Kellogg and Ferris from the same host in California and Arizona. Speci¬ mens from an undetermined species of "cotton tail rabbit," presumably a species of Sylvilaius , are at hand from the state of Montana. Haemodipsus ventricosus (Denny) Figures 81, 82 1842. Haematopinus ventricosus Denny, Monographia Anoplurorum Britanniae, paj/e 30 ; Plate 25, figure 6. 1904. Haemodipsus ventricosus (Denny), Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28: 143- 1932. Haemodipsus ventricosus (Denny), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mon¬ ograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:332; figures 204, 205. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from the European rabbit, Oryctolaius (- Lepus ) cuniculus, from England and many times recorded from this host and from domestic rabbits which are supposed to have been derived from this species in many parts of the world. 179 180 Haemodipsus ventricosus Figure 81 181 Haemodipsus ventricosus (Denny), details Figure 82 182 Geuus HAMOPHTHIRUS MjOberg 192S. Hamophthirus Mjoberg, Psyche 32:283. 1932. Hamoph tht rus, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck¬ ing Lice, Part 5:3%. G 01 ERIC TYPE. Hamophthirus galeopi thee i Mjoberg, the only included species. CHARACTERS. Unfortunately this genus is known oni) from the original, veiy inadequate description and the accompanying crude figures. The fol¬ lowing abstract of the important characters which can be gained from these is given. Polyplacinae with three-segmented antenuae, the basal segment much en¬ larged and with an apical hook at the anterior distal angle. Head very broad, its posterior angles produced each into a prominent point. Parater- gal plates present on abdominal segments 3-7* Legs said to be "fairly equally developed." There is in this description and the accompanying fibres a suggestion that this genus is rather closely related to Docophtht rus , although the three-se gnented antenuae would immediately suffice to separate it from all the other members of the subfamily. Hamophthirus gadeopitheci Mjoberg 192*1. Hamophthirus £aleopitheci Mjoberg, Psyche 32:283: figure. 1932. Hamophthirus galeopitheci Mjoberg, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:3^7; figure 187. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From a Dermopteran, Galeopithecus sp., at Fes- seltan, British North Borneo. This is a Cynocephalus variegatus. NOTES. In spite of the inadequate description and poor illustrations it should be possible to recognize this species if it is recovered. Ferris (1932) merely reproduces the description and figures given by Mjoberg. Genus LAGIDIOPH'ffllRUS Eichler 1950. La^idlophthirus Eichler, bolletino della Societa Entomologica Itali- ana 79:12. GENERIC TYPE- Haemodipsus parvus Kellogg and Ferris, the only included species. CHARACTERS. Polyplacinae with five-segmented antennae, which are not sexually dimorphic. Anterior legs small and weak; second and third legs large and stout, about equal to each other. Paratergal plates of the ab¬ domen present on segments 2-6, these quite small and with each posterior angle produced into a strong point. Abdomen otherwise membranous except for the usual plates of the terminal and genitalic segments. Body setae very few, there being a single row, both dorsally and ventrally, on each abdominal segment, each row having a median group of 2-4 setae and there being a single seta, both dorsally and ventrally, close to the lateral mar¬ gin. Spiracles present only on abdominal segments 3 • Prothoracic ster¬ nal plate well developed. . . NOTES. Recognizing a new genus for the single species included in this renus is the only way of escaping from the problems which it presents in regard to its generic assignment, in spite of the weakness of the charac¬ ters on which the genus is based. Lacidiophthirus parvus (Kellogg and Ferris) Figure 83 1915. Haemodipsus parvus Kellogg and Ferris, Anoplura and Mallophaga ol 183 Lagidiophthirus parvus (Kellogg and Ferris) Figure 83 North American Mammals, Stanford University Publications, Univer¬ sity Series (no volume number), page 30; text figure 12; Plate 2, figure 4; Plate 4, figure 6. 1932. Eulinognathus parvus (Kellogg and Ferris), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:327; figure 201. 1940. Eulinognathus parvus (Kellogg and Ferris), Werneck, Revista de En- tomologia 11;726; figure. 1950. Lagidiophthirus parvus (Kellogg and Ferris) , Eichler, Bo lletino della Societa Entomologica Italiana 79:12. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Lagidium peruanum from an unspecified locality in Peru. Werneck has recorded the species from Lagidium inca — which, according to Ellender, is the same as peruanum — from the Cordilheira Songo, Province of Murillo, Department of La Paz, Bolivia. NOTES. This species was originally described from the female alone but Werneck has described the male. It is possible here to illustrate only the female. 184 Genus LhMIlkPWTHIKIJS Bedford 1927. Lemurphthirus Bedford, Parasitology 19:263- 1932. Lemurphthirus, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck¬ ing Lice, Part 5:299- GENERIC TYPE. L> murphthirus galut*us Bedford. CHARACTERS. Polyplaciuae with f i ve-segmented antennae which ai‘£ sexual¬ ly dimorphic, the male having the distal, preaxial angle of the third seg¬ ment strongly produced and curved posteriorly and bearing two short, stout setae. Anterior legs small and weak, with weak claw; middle and posterior legs definitely larger, but not greatly so, about equal to each other. Paratergal plates present only on the second abdominal segment, consisting of a simple, flat, somewhat cuniefoim, sclerotized piece, the extreme apex of which is free from the body. Abdomen, in both sexes, with a single plate and a single row of hairs on each segment, both dorsally and ventral- ly, except that the female appears to have two plates and two rows ol setae on segment two. Thorax unusually elongate, with a very large, marginally free, sternal plate. Spiracles present on abdominal segments 3~8- NOTES. The head and thorax of the species of this genus might very well belong to a species of Neohaematopinus, hut the abdomen is quite diffei*ent. The genus contains two known species. Key to Species of LfcMl’RPHTHI KUS Sternal plate of the thorax with a slender, median, anterior prolongation.. . VERRUCULOSUS Sternal plate of the thorax without such anterior prolongation . GALAGUS Lemurphthi rus galagus Bedford Figures 84, 85 1927. Lemirphthirus galagus Bedford, Parasitology 19:263; figures. 1932. Lemurphthirus galagus Bedford, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 6;30U; figures 183, 184. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. type from Galagus moholi (which, according to Hopkins, is senegalensis) , a Lemuroid, from Onderstepoort, Transvaal, South Africa and recorded at the same time from Southwest Africa. Ferris has re¬ corded the species from the same host, without data, in the British Museum. Hopkins records it without locality from Galago demidovil . Lemurphthirus verruculosus Ward 1951- Lemurphthirus verruculosus Ward, Entomological News 62:190; figures. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known only from "mouse lemur" from Bemangidy, Fort Dauphin District, Tulear Province, Madagascar. Presumably this refers to some species of the genus Cheirogaleus. Genus NEOHAEMATOPINUS Mjoberg 1910. Neohaematopinus Mjdberg, Arkiv for Zoologi 6:13; 160. 1910. Acanthopinus Mjoberg, Arkiv for Zoologi tv. 13; 160. 1914. Linognathoides Cummings, Bulletin of Entomological Research 3:393- 1916. Lutegus Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte , Abteilung A, 81: 11: 31- 1923. Neohaematopinus, Ferris, Contributions loward a Monograph ol the Sucking Lice, Part 4:237- , 1929. Ahaematopinus Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, page 19(- 1949. Petauristophthirus Eichler, Bolletino della Societa Entomologica Italiana 79: 12. Lemurphthirus galagus Bedford Figure 84 186 thoracic dorsum thoracic sternal plate female genitalia Lemurphthirus galagus Bedford, details male genitalia Figure 85 antenna 2nd or 3rd claw 187 GENERIC TYPE. Haematopinus sciuropteri Osborn. GENERIC SYNONYMS. Acanthopinus Mjoberg, type Haematopinus antennatus Osborn; this specific name being preoccupied was later changed to Acantho¬ pinus sciurinus Mjoberg. Linognathoides Cummings, type Linognatho ides citelli Cummings. Lutegus Fahrenholz, type Haematopinus ( Polyplax ) pectin- ifer Neumann. Ahaematopinus Ewing, type Heohaematopinus inornatus Kellogg and Ferris. Petauristophthirus Eichler, type Heohaematopinus petauristae Ferris. CHARACTERS. Polyplacinae in which the antennae are usually at least slightly sexually dimorphic, the third segment in the male having the dis¬ tal preaxial angle slightly prolonged and bearing dorsally 1-2 small, stout, recurved setae. Head usually abruptly broadened posterior to the antennae. Legs with the first pair small and with slender claw; second and third pairs larger and with stout claw, usually almost equal but the third pair at times larger than the second, although never flattened and expanded. Thoracic sternal plate usually well developed, although lacking in one species. Abdomen always with paratergal plates on segments 3-8> and occa¬ sionally with a vestige of such plates on segment one, the plates of seg¬ ment two never divided longitudinally. Abdomen always with some develop¬ ment of tergal plates in the male and usually so in the female, but in some species with the plates very' weakly developed or present only on segment two or 2-3- Female normally with two transverse rows of setae on segments 2-7 dorsally and segments 3-6 ventrally, but in a few species with three rows on these segments. Male normally with but one row of setae on any segment dorsally, except that segment two has two rows; normally with two rows of setae on segments 2-6 ventrally. In all known species the row of dorsal setae which is probably the second row of segment two is associated with an at least slightly developed tergal plate which is posteriorly emargi- nate, with some of the setae at the lateral ends of the plate somewhat dif¬ ferentiated in size or form from the others and more or less radiately ar¬ ranged. In some species this character is weakly developed but in all it is to some degree indicated. NOTES. In spite of some departures by certain species from the charac¬ teristic pattern of the genus this group, as here understood, seems to be quite natural and relatively homogeneous. The group of species for which the name Linognathoides might be employed departs most widely from the typ¬ ical form, especially in its type species, but it would be very difficult to advance any very cogent reason for its separation. The genus Lutegus would, in any event, be a synonym of Linognathoides. The genus Ahaemato¬ pinus is utterly without justification and there is no satisfactory reason for the naming of the genus Petauristophthirus. The genus Heohaematopinus is characteristically associated with members of the rodent family Sciuridae, but two species occur on North American species of the genus Heotoma and perhaps some other closely related genera, these being members of the Murid subfamily Cricetinae. One species record¬ ed from a South American rodent of the family Octodontidae probably does not belong to Heohaematopinus. Key to Species of NEOHAEMATOPINUS 1. Sternal plate of the thorax entirely lacking; known from Spermophilus leptodactylus in the Caspian Sea area in Asia . CITELLI Sternal plate of the thorax present and sclerotized . 2 2 (1). Thoracic sternal plate always with the posterior angles each pro¬ duced into a distinct point . 3 Thoracic sternal plate not with its posterior angles thus produced. . 13 3 (2). Paratergites of abdominal segments 4-6 with not more than 2 setae 188 4 (3). 5 (4). 6 (4). 7 (6). 8 (7). 9 (3). 10 (9). 11 (9). 12 (11) 13 (2). 14 (13) 15 (14) on the posterior border . 4 Paratergal plates ot‘ segments 4-6 each with 3 or more setae . 9 With an enlarged thorn-like seta at the extreme apex of the postax- ial angle of the first antennal segment . 5 Without suchaseta, or if an enlarged, thorn-like seta is developed it is not at the apex of the postaxial distal angle, being more or less removed therefrom . 6 Abdomen of the female with a definitely developed tergal plate as¬ sociated with the anterior row of setae on segments 3— 7 ; attribu¬ ted to many species of squirrels . SQUR1NUS Abdomen of the female with no tergal plate on segments 3— 7 ; known only from Sciurus griseus in western United States. .. .GRISEIOOLUS Head very broad, definitely broader than long; known from North American flying squirrels of the genus Glauconys . SClliRUPTERI Head definitely longer than broad . 7 Known from Sciurus vulgaris in Europe (see notes under species).... . SCIURJ Known from New World Cricetinae of the genus Neotoma and closely related genera . 8 Female with no trace of abdominal tergal and sternal plates other than those normally present on the teimiiual and genital segments and extremely small tergal, plates on abdominal segment 2; known from Neotoma cinerea in western United States . INORNATIJS Female with definitely developed tergal and sternal plates associ¬ ated with the first row of setae on each abdominal segment; known from Neotoma albigula, Neotoma fuscipes, and Neotoma micropus in southwestern United States and Hodomys alleni in Mexico . .NED TOMAE Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3-6 each with 3 setae on the posterior margin . 10 Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3“6 each with 5-6 setae on the posterior margin . 11 First antennal segment with a stout, thorn-like seta borne at the apex of the distal postaxial angle; known from members of the genus Neotamias in North America . PACIFICUS First antennal segment with no trace of such a seta; known trom Citellus tereticaudus in southwestern Unuted States. . .Cl TELLINUS Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3-6 each with 6 setae on the posterior border, these arranged in 2 groups of 3 setae each; known from Sciurus anomalus in §yria . SYRIACUS Paratergal plates with the setae otherwise arranged. ...... . 12 . Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3_6 each with 5 setae which are arranged with a single seta near the ventral angle and a group of 4 near the dorsal angle; known from Funambulus in Ceylon . . • • • •CEY1DNICUS Paratergal. plates of abdominal segments 4-5 each with their setae arranged in 2 groups, the dorsal group with 4 and the ventral^ group "with 3; known from Funambulus palmarum in India ECHINATUS Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3~6 each with one or both of their posterior angles produced into a short, slender, some¬ what finger-like process; known from Abrocoma cinerea (a Crice- tine) in Peru . . Paratergal plates not so . . • • . . •••••>•* * . Female with 3 rows of tergal setae on abdominal segments J-b...lb Female with 2 rows of setae on these segments . 18 . Abdomen of the female with sclerotized tergal and sternal plates present only on the terminal and genital segments; male with the pseudopenis joined to the apices of the parameres. known from Atlantoxerus getulus in Africa . PECTINIFER 189 16 (15). 17 (16). 18 (14). 19 (18). 20 (18). 21 (20). 22 (21). 23 (22). Abdomen of the female with well developed tergal and sternal plates in both sexes; male with the pseudopenis enclosed be¬ tween the parameres; a group of species from African squirrels of the genera Heliosciurus and Paraxerus . 16 Antennae with the distal postaxial angle somewhat produced and bearing a stout, apically blunt seta at its extreme apex . . HELIOSCIURI Antennae with the distal postaxial angle not at all produced and if it bears a seta this is small and apically acute . 17 Genitalia of the male with the parameres having their lateral margin strongly arcuate . SUAHELICUS Genitalia of the male with the outer margin almost straight . . EENYAE Thoracic sternal plate in the shape of a 7-sided polygon, all the sides of which are almost straight . 19 Thoracic sternal plate otherwise shaped . 20 Tergal and sternal plates in both sexes entirely lacking except for those present on the terminal and genital segments; para- tergal plates extremely small; known from Petaurista petaurista in the Malayan area . BATUANAE Tergal and sternal plates definitely developed on all abdominal segments in both sexes; paratergal plates strongly developed; known from Petaurista inornatus in Kashmir . PETAURISTAE Thoracic sternal plate longer than wide, relatively narrow, some¬ what irregular in shape; known from Xerus inauris in Africa.... . FAUREI Thoracic sternal plate as wide as long or wider, usually more or less transversely oval; a group of forms occurring on the Mar- mota section of the Sciuridae (see notes under laeviusculus ) .21 Thoracic spiracles notably large, their diameter equaling about one-half the length of the second coxae; known from Marmota and perhaps occurring on some species of Citellus in North America. . MARMOTAE Thoracic spiracles smaller, scarcely exceeding one-fourth the length of the second coxae and usually smaller . 22 Rows of tergal and sternal setae on the abdomen continuous across each segment,, not interrupted by bare areas . 23 Rows of tergal and sternal setae across the abdomen interrupted by bare areas which divide them into lateral and median groups . MATHESONI Setae of the ventral rows of segments all noticeably stout (ac¬ cording to the original description) ; described as occurring on Citellus adocetus in Mexico . TRAUBI Setae of all the ventral rows slender; 2 described species of which one, PATIKI, is probably a synonym of . LAEVIUSCULUS Neohaematopinus batuanae Ferris 1923. Neohaematopinus batuanae Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:261; figure 167B. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Petaurista batuana from the Batu Islands, Malaysia. Neohaematopinus ceylonicus Ferris, new species 1922. Neohaematopinus echinatus (Neumann) , Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:250; figure 161. (Misiden- ti fication) 190 HOSTS AND DISTR1 Lil'T ION . Type a male, upon which the illustration cited was based, from Funambulus palmar m at Colombo, Ceylon. Allotype and para- types from the s;une species at Kandesanturai , Ceylon, received through the kindness of Mr. Gordon 15. Thompson. ChARACTERS. Male as described and illustrated in the reference cited. Female about ihiun . Ion . As in the male the paratergites of abdominal seg¬ ments each bear four stout setae of varying length on the dorsal half and a single seta on the ventral half, this being well separated from the others. NOTES. It was indicated by Ferris that the single specimen upon which his description was based did not agree entirely with the description given by Neumann and it is now clear that it does not represent Neumann's species, since specimens of the latter are now available which agree with the types. It is undoubtedly close to the true echinatus. Neohaematopinus citelli (Cummings) 1914. Linoftnathoides spermophili Cummings, bulletin of Entomological Re¬ search 5:160; figure 3* (Specific name preoccupied) 1916. L ino£nathoides citelli Cummings, Annals and Magazine of Natural His¬ tory (Series 8) 17:107. 1923. Neohaematopinus citelli (Cummings) , Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:261; figures 168, 169 • HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION . Originally recorded from Citellus leptodactylus and from Cr icetulus phaeus from Transcaspia. The record from Cr icetulus is almost certainly an error and can probably safely be disregarded. The probable true host is now known as Spermophilopsis leptodactylus. Neohaematopinus citellinus Ferris 1942. Neohaematopinus citellinus Ferris, Microentomology 7:85; figure 41. HOSTS .AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Citellus tereticaudus at Tucson, Arizona, and other specimens attributed to Ammospermophilus harrissi from the Santa Rita Mountains, Arizona, United States. Neohaematopinus echinatus (Neumann) 1909. Raematopinus (Polyplax) echinatus Neumann, Archives de Parasitologie 13:517; figures 19, 20. 1912. Neohaematopinus echinatus (Neumann), Cummings, Bulletin of Entomo¬ logical Research 3:393- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded from Funambulus palmarum from Rajkote, India, this being some other species of the genus. Specimens are at hand from the same host genus at Agra, India, which agree with the original de¬ scription, these received through the kindness of Mr. Gordon B. Thompson. NOTES. The specimens at hand from Agra indicate clearly that this species was misidentif ied by Ferris. The species attributed by him to echinatus is here described as Neohaematopinus ceylonicus . Neohaematopinus faurei (Bedford) 1920 LlnoQnatholdes faurei Bedford, Report of the Director of Veterinary' Research, Union of South Africa 7-9:710; Plate 1, figure 2; Plate 7, figure 3- . _ 1932. Neohaematopinus faurei (Bedford), Ferris, Contra but 10ns Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:292; figures 1<8, 179 - HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded by Bedford from Geosc iurus capensis, which is now known as Xerus inauris, Bloemfontein, Orange Free State. It 191 was later recorded by Bedford from this host in other localities in South Africa, and from Tatera and Rattus coucha. Specimens at hand received from Bedford are indicated as being from Mongoose. It is practically certain that the true host is the species of Xerus. NOTES. This is an extreme member of the genus, even of the section to which the name Li nognat ho ides has been applied. The male has no sclero- tized tergites and the characteristic form of tergite two, with its associ¬ ated grouping of setae, is here represented only by a slight irregularity. Neohaematopinus griseicolus Ferris 1923. Neohaematopinus sciurinus griseicolus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:248. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Sciurus griseus at Inverness, Marin County, California, U. S. A. Also recorded from the same host at other lo¬ calities in California. NOTES. It is perhaps inconsistent to recognize this form as a species, in view of the wide range of forms retained in sciurinus, but all the spec¬ imens at hand agree in the almost complete absence of abdominal tergal and sternal plates in the female, while in all other specimens included in sciurinus no such departure occurs. Neohaematopinus heliosciuri Cummings 1913* Neohaematopinus heliosciuri Cummings, Bulletin of Entomological Re¬ search 3:393; figure 1. 1923. Neohaematopinus heliosciuri Cummings, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:255; figures 164, 16 5A, C, E, H. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Paraxerus (as Heliosciurus) palliatus from Uchweni Forest, Witu, British East Africa. Also recorded from Paraxer¬ us ochraceus (as Paraxerus jacksoni and as Parasc iurus animosus) from vari¬ ous localities in British East Africa. Neohaematopinus inornatus (Kellogg and Ferris) 19 15 - Linognathoides inornatus Kellogg and Ferris, Anoplura and Mallophaga of North American Mammals, Stanford University Publications, Uni¬ versity Series (no volume number), page 25; text figure 10; Plate 4, figure 7; Plate 5> figure 5; Plate 6, figure 3* 1923. Neohaematopinus inornatus (Kellogg and Ferris), Ferris, Contribu¬ tions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:252; figures 162, 163- 1929. Ahaematopinus inornatus (Kellogg and Ferris), Ewing, A Manual of Ex¬ ternal Parasites, page 198. 1942. Neohaematopinus inornatus (Kellogg and Ferris), Ferris, Microento¬ mology 7:84; figure 39* HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Neotoma cinerea, South Yolla Bolly Mountain, Tehama County, California. Recorded also from the same host from Yosemite Valley, California, and from "mountain rat," which was almost cer¬ tainly the same host, from Colorado. NOTES. This species has been designated as type of the genus Ahaemato- pinus tVing, a genus for which there is, in the opinion here held, no ex¬ cuse whatsoever. Neohaematopinus kenyae Ferris 1923. Neohaematopinus kenyae Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of 192 the Sucking Lice, Part 4:258; figures 16 f)IJ , F, G. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From He l lose iurus gambtanus (as keniae) , Mount Kenya, British East Africa. Neohaematop iuus laeviuscuius (Grube) 1851. Perticulus laeviuscuius Grube, In M iddendorff ' s Reise 2:498; PLate 32, figure 7. (Figure labelled s permophili) 1896. Haematopinus montanus Osborn, United States Department of Agricul¬ ture, Division of Entomolor^y , Bulletin (new series) 5:184; lig. 107. 1900. Haematopinus columbianus Osborn, Canadian Entomologist 32:215- 1904. Polyplax laeviuscula (Grube) , Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28: 142. 1923. Neohaematopinus laeviuscuius (Grube), Ferris, Contri hut ions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, part 4:264; tigs. 170, 171A, L, D, G. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from Cite llu s (as Spermophi lus) eversmanni, .Jakutsk, Siberia. Later recorded from this host 1 rom Altai, Siberia, and from a long list of other species ol Cite l lus 1 1 om North America ranging from Point Barrow through westeni United States into Mexico, and from Cynomys leucurus from Colorado in the United States. NOTES. A re-examination of all the available material shows no satis¬ factory basis for breaking this species up, although a considerable degree of variation exists. Rubin has named three species of this group, which will here be listed as distinct although the opinion is held that they can¬ not be definitely recognized. Even the species marmotae , which is probably the most definitely differentiated form in the group, presents no very pre¬ cise limits turd some specimens have been seen which are dubiously referable either to this or to laeviuscuius. The prayer may be voiced that future students will attempt to learn some- thing about the group before engaging in the indiscriminate naming of new species. Neohaematopinus longus Werneck 1948. neohaematopinus longus Werneck, Revista brasiliera de Biologia (8)2: 175; figure. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded from Abrocoma cinerea at Caccachara near Llave, Peru. The host is a member of the subfamily Abrocominae of the family Echimyidae. . , , ... „ . , . NOTES This species is known from but a single female which was evident ly very imperfectly prepared for study. It is highly probable that it does not belong to this genus. Neohaematopinus marmotae Ferris 192S Neohaematopinus marmotae Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:268; figures 171C, E, F. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Ha rmot a flaviventns, iosemite Nation al Park, California. Recorded also from M armota species at Florence, Montana! Specimens which agree very closely with the type are at hand 1 rom unspecified Harmota at Bannock, Idaho, and from La Manga Pass, Colorado. Fe??is has previously doubtfully referred a specimen from Harmota aurea from Pamir, Asia, to this species. . 11 + NOTES. While in its typical form this species seems clearly to be sep arable from laeviuscuius, specimens have been examined from Armota and from species of Cttellus which raise some question as to the validity ol Ke species, or at Least as to its Limits and definition. The study ol more material will be required lor any satisfactory solution ol the problem. 193 Neohaematopinus mathesoni Rubin 1946. Aeohaematopinus mathesoni Rubin, Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 48:121; figure 1. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from "citellus v. couchi , " which is presumably Citellus uar iegatus couchi from the state of Nuevo Leon, Mexico. NOTES. A specimen from the type lot of this and other specimens from the same host species (as subspecies grammurus) are at hand from Arizona. It is very doubtful that the species can be distinguished from laev iusculus. Neohaematopinus neotomae Ferris 1942. Neohaematopinus neotomae Ferris, Microentomology 7:84; figure 40. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. T^pe from Neotoma albigula at Tucson, Arizona, and other specimens from the same host near Tucson. Also recorded from Neotoma streatori from the Hastings Reservation near Monterey, California, and from Hodomys alleni from Manzanillo, Mexico. Specimens from Neotoma micropus from White Sands, New Mexico, have been somewhat doubtfully re¬ ferred to the species. Neohaematopinus pacificus Kellogg and Ferris 1915. Neohaematopinus pacificus Kellogg and Ferris, Anoplura and Mallophaga of North American Mammals, Stanford University Publications, Uni¬ versity Series (no volume number), page 28; text figure 14C, D; Plate 5, figures 3, 7a, b. 1923. Neohaematopinus pacificus Kellogg and Ferris, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:249; figure 160A-D. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. TyPe from Neotamias townsendii at Freestone, Sonoma County, California. Recorded also from Neotamias hindsi, merriami, alpinus, and speciosus (as Eutamias) from various localities in California, U. S. A. Neohaematopinus patiki Rubin 1946. Neohaematopinus patiki Rubin, Proceedings of the Entomological Soci¬ ety of Washington 48:121; figures 2, 5. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded as from an undetermined species of the subgenus Ammospermophilus of the genus Citellus at Delta, Utah. NOTES. Unfortunately no material from any species of Ammospermophilus is available and consequently it is not possible to offer any observations in regard to this supposed species of Neohaematopinus, other than to ex¬ press extreme doubt that it can be recognized. Neohaematopinus pectinifer (Neumann) 1885- Haematopinus setosus Piaget, Les Pediculines, Supplement, page 143; Plate 15, figure 6 (preoccupied) . 1909. Haematopinus ( Polyplax ) pectinifer Neumann, Archives de Parasitologie 15:528; figures 28 , 29. 1914. Ltnognathoides pectinifer (Neumann), Cummings, Bulletin of Entomo¬ logical Research 5:160. 1916. Luteius pectinifer (Neumann), Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte. Abteilung A, 81:11: 31 - 1923. Neohaematopinus pectinifer (Neumann), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:268; figure 172. (Descrip¬ tion of male) 1932. Neohaematopinus pectinifer (Neumann), Ferris, Contributions Toward a 194 Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:291; figure 177. (Descrip¬ tion of female) HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded from Xerus tetulus (Now referred to Atlantoxerus) in South Africa. Neohaematopinus petauristae Kerris 1923. Neohaematopinus petauristae Kerris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:258; figures 166, 167A, C, E. 1949. Petaur istophthirus petauristae (Kerris) , Eichler, Boiletino della So- cieta Entomologica Italiana 79:12. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Petaurista inornate in Kashmir. NOTES. This species has been designated as type of the genus Petaur is¬ tophthirus Eichler, a genus for which no very cogent reason can be offered. Neohaematopinus sciuri Jancke 1931. Neohaematopinus sciuri .Jancke, Zeitschrift fur Paras i ten kunde 4:241; figures. HOSTS .AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from Sciurus vulgaris in Germany and later recorded from the same host in that country. North American and Asiatic material that might be referred to this species is as follows: from Sciurus aberti in Arizona, Sciurus carolinensis from Mississippi, Sciurus poliopus from Oaxaca, Mexico — all these Irom North America; 1 rom Malayan squirrel" in the Zoological Gardens of London, from Callosciurus finlaysoni, caniceps, and procerus in the Malayan area. Other specimens approach the condition seen in these with various degrees of closeness. See notes under Neohaematopinus sciurinus. Neohaematopinus sciurinus Mjoberg 1891. Raematopinus antennatus Osborn, United States Department of Agricul¬ ture, Division of Entomology, Bulletin (old series) 7:25; figure 13. (Not Raematopinus antennatus Piaget) 1910. Acanthopinus antennatus (Osborn), Mjoberg, Arkiv for Zoologi 6:161. 1910. Acanthopinus sciurinus Mjoberg, Arkiv for Zoologi 6:161. 1915. Neohaematopinus antennatus (Osborn), Kellogg and Ferris, Anoplura and Mallophaga of North American Mammals, Stanford University Pub¬ lications, University Series (no volume number) , page 36; text figure 14A, B; Plate 5, figure 10; Plate 6, figure 5. 1916. Neohaematopinus antennatus semifasciatus Ferns, Psyche 23:1UU. 1919. Neohaematopinus macrospinosus Fahrenholz, Jahresbericht des nieder- sachsischen zoologischen Vereins zu Hannover 5~ 10. 24.^ 1923. Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjoberg), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono Taph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:243; figures 155> l-®> ^59- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. The types of Osborn's Raematopinus antennatus were from Sciurus niter rufiventer at Ames, Iowa. The types of Mjoberg s Acanthopinus sciurinus were recorded as from Sciurus vulpinus, which is a synonym of niter, in the Hamburg Zoological Garden, Germany. Later record¬ ed by Ferris from a long list of species of Sciurus and related genera from North .America, Central America and South America and from the Malayan Region. The list will not here be repeated, since it will be necessary for future workers to reconsider the entire situation in any case before the problem of the extent of the species can be settled. This is considered in theN0TESOW1Tbenven’ considerable amount of material at hand has been care¬ fully renewed in connection with this work, with results but little more satisfactory than those recorded by Ferris in 1922. Within this material 195 the only character that seems to offer any basis for a separation into species is that of the enlarged seta on the first antennal segment. In typical sciurinus this seta is quite large and is borne upon a prolongation 0 t the posterior apical angle of the segment, the whole structure forming a pronounced hook. Every degree of variation in this structure is present in the material at hand, down to specimens in which the seta is scarcely pres¬ ent at all. Attempts at arranging this material in groups according to hosts and according to geography have revealed no logical pattern. Thus, specimens from squirrels of the genus Callosciurus in the Malayan area are practically identical with specimens from Sciurus aberti from Arizona in the United States. Certain of the material at hand would apparently be referable to Neo¬ haematopinus sciuri Jancke, described from the European Sciurus vulgaris, on the basis of the development of this seta on the first antennal segment. But if we attempt to group specimens on this basis, again no logical pat¬ tern appears. While the species sciuri is here listed, this is done solely in order not to prejudice any development of later studies and for the present all other material of this type is referred to sciurinus. The problem must be left to future workers who may be able to accumulate a great mass of material from a long series of squirrel species. Neohaematopinus sciuropteri (Osborn) Figures 86, 87 1891. Haematopinus sciuropteri Osborn, United States Department of Agri¬ culture, Division of Entomology', Bulletin (old series) 7:23; fig¬ ure 12. 1910. Neohaematopinus sciuropteri (Osborn), Miobers, Arkiv for Zoolo^i 6* 160; figure 79. 1923. Neohaematopinus sciuropteri (Osborn), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:241; figures 156, 157. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described as from Sciuropterus volucella, which is a synonym of Glaucomys volans, at Ames, Iowa. Later recorded from Glaucomys sabrinus at Yosemite National Park, California. Neohaematopinus suahelicus Ferris 1923. Neohaematopinus suahelicus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:258; figures 165B, F, G. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described as from Paraxerus palliatus from British East Africa, and recorded from Paraxerus ochraceus (as jacksoni and as Parasciurus animosus) from the same area. Neohaematopinus syriacus Ferris 1923. Neohaematopinus syriacus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:250; figure 160E. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION . From Sciurus anomalus (as syriacus) from Sjyria. Neohaematopinus traubi Rubin 1946. Neohaematopinus traubi Rubin, Proceedings of the Entomological Soci¬ ety of Washington 48:120; figures 3. 4. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described as from Citellus adocetus from the state of Michaocan, Mexico. NOTES. This species is supposed to be separable from laeviusculus and other members of that group by having the abdomen with three rows of setae on each "typical segment." However, the accompanying illustration does not 196 iuropteri (Osborn) Figure 86 197 female genitalia male genitalia Neohaematopinus sciuropteri (Osborn), details Figure 87 198 agree with the description. It provides only fourteen rows of setae to be distributed among six segments, this allowing but two rows per segment with two left over, which does not indicate that a "typical segment" can have three rows. The discrepancy is probably due to an error in counting and the surmise may be hazarded that the species is not distinguished as its author supposed. However, according to the illustration given, the stout ness of the ventral setae may possibly afford a basis for its recognition. Genus PHTHIRPEDICULUS Ewing 1922. Phthirpediculus Ewing, Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 13:148. 1932. Phthtrpedtculus, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph ol the Sucking Lice, Part 5:295. GENERIC TYPE. Phthtrpedtculus propithect Ewing, the only included spe¬ cies. CHARACTERS. Polyplacinae with five-segmented antennae which are sexual¬ ly dimorphic, the male having the distal, preaxial angle of the third seg¬ ment produced and bearing dorsally two, stout, retrorse setae. Anterior legs small, with weak claw; middle and posterior legs about equal to each other, enlarged and stout, with stout claw. Paratergal plates present on abdominal segments 3-6, distinctly developed and with free apical angles; marked by having the basal, inesal angle produced into a distinct sclerotiza- tion which extends somewhat toward the mid-line ol the body and bears two slender setae. Otherwise the abdomen in both sexes is membranous except for the usual terminal and genitalic plates. Each abdominal segment, both dorsally and ventrally, with one row ot setae except that in the female the dorsum of segment two apparently has two rows. Abdominal spiracles present on segments 3-8. Prothoracic sternal plate distinctly developed, of a pecaliar type, being divided longitudinally into two plates, each ol which bears a pair of slender setae at its posterior end. Phthirpediculus propitheci Ewing Figures 88, 89 1922. Phthirpediculus propitheci Ewing, Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 13: 149 • A T . 1932. phthirpediculus propitheci Ewing, Ferris, Contributions lowara a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:296; figures 180, 181. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Propithecus edwardsii, a lemur, from Mada¬ gascar. Genus POLYPLAX Enderlein 1904. 1907. 1909. 1923. 1929. 1935- 1935- 1838. 1938. >olyp lax Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28:142, 223. Iremophthirius Glinkiewicz, Sitzungsberichte der mathematischnatur- w is sensch aft lichen Class der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissen- schaften zu Wien 116:381. • * 1 • 19. £90 laematopinus {Polyplax) , Neumann, Archives de Parasitologie 13: >"• 'olyplax, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:184. ^olyplax, Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, page 1J/. n olyplax , Ewing, Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington Irem'ophthirius, Ewing, Proceedings of the Biological Society of Wash- 30 iyp i ax , ^Fahrenho lz , Zeitschrift fur Parasitenkunde 10 : 239 - Iremophthirius, Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Parasitenkunde 10:„4Z. 199 c; K' Figure 88 k i \ mf I-tiir. female genitalia Phthirpediculus propitheci Ewing 201 GENERIC TYPE. Pediculus spinulosus Burmeister. GENERIC SYNONYM. Eremophthirius Glinkiewicz, of which the type by mono- typy is Eremophthirius werneri Glinkiewicz. CHARACTERS. Polyplacidae with five- segmented antennae which are usually at least slightly dimorphic, the males commonly having the distal, preaxial angle of the third segment somewhat produced and bearing at its apex a re- curved spine or short recurved, stout seta. Head usually abruptly widened behind the antennae, but not always so. Thorax usually with a well devel¬ oped sternal plate which around its margins is free from the body wall. Anterior legs small and weak, with slender claw. Middle leers definitely somewhat larger, with stouter claw. Posterior legs similar to the second but still larger, with stouter claw, but never strongly flattened or ex- panded. Abdomen with paratergal plates always developed on segments 2-8 the plates rarely if ever overlapping each other in an expanded specimen the plates of segment two having the appearance of being divided longitudi- + ir +y+i-t°/WO Ple?es> one of which lies upon the dorsum. It is possible that this dorsal piece actually represents the paratergite of segment one although occasionally the plates of segment three are similarly divided’ Paratergites of segments 4-6 usually with each posterior angle produced in- to a siight point, or occasionally into a slender process^ the posterior margm between these points being entire; at times with only the ventral angle produced. Tergal and sternal plates always developed and sclerotized, the female having two plates and two rows of setae on segments 4-7 dorsallv and on sepients ventrally; the male with not more than one plate and one row of setae on any segment dorsally and with either one or two plates on the abdominal segments ventrally. The ventral plates on segments 2-2 are never produced laterally to articulate with or approximate the parater¬ gal plates of these segments. v NOTES. The opinion previously expressed by Ferris that Eremophthirius should not be separated from Polyplax is here still maintained. Fahrenholz has attempted to revive Eremophthirius on the basis of the presence in the male of but one ventral plate on any abdominal segment, but any such divi- sion results merely m quite meaningless groupings of the species. The members of the genus Polyplax occur almost exclusively upon members ,'ly althouSh at leasl ■>"<= species seems to occur normal upon members of the msectivore family Soricidae. Key to Species of POLYPLAX in AVS fn^deraUe ' °f difficulty has been eucouutered ip prepar- JS ™ y fpecles °flh;S genus' The characters separating some of the species are clear enough when specimens are compared directly, but are y treno.hant to be “f •“=" use in a key, or are of such a nature that they cannot be expressed with the conciseness which is desir¬ able in a key. Furthermore, of some species only one sex is known In some other instances the male only may present especially distinctive char¬ acters. Because of these facts the presentation of separate kevs to the sexes is no more practicable than it is to include both in the same key. This introduces serious difficulties, but at the present time there seems to be no way to avoid them. It should be remembered, also, that some of the species are known from but very few specimens and consequently the possible range of variation is unknown Jnder these circumstances the key must be used with caution. Ihe following species, known only from their original descriotions arp (Bilmeiste^r. lhC ^ dentattc0rnts Ewin*r> eriopepll (Ewing ), spini£era 202 1. Posterior legs with a distinct, sclerotized, retrorse tooth at the oub- er basal angle of the tibia; known from Rattus sabanus iu the Malayan . INSULSA dl Uli* . . . . ^ Posterior legs without such a tooth . • . . . " 2 (1). head with a long seta at or close to the apex of the lateral, pos¬ terior angle . •••••**' . ,*.*.* * 'i* v head with this seta borne on a small, apically free, ear- like lobe which is somewhat removed from the apex of the posterior lateral angle; occurring on New World species of the genera Peromjscus, Onychomys, and Retthrodontomys . AUK1CULAR1S 3 (2). Abdomen with tergal and sternal plates undeveloped in the feuutle, except for those associated with the genital segments and one or two very small tergal plates at the base of the abdomen; known from various hosts in India . •• . ASIATIC A Abdomen of the female always with distinct, even it attenuated, tei - tral and sternal plates on all segments . ...4 4 (3). Thoracic sternal plate with a distinct, narrow, hanlle-like proton .ration extending forward between the anterior coxa, this prolon¬ gation being one-fourth as long as the plate itselt or longer...*) Thoracic sternal plate at the most with nothing more than a slight median, anterior point . . . -***::* - - •••]“ 5 (4). With a pair of long setae on each abdominal paratergite, these se ae longer than the plate which bears them . . . '.V *.*’.***,' . b With not more than 1 seta on any paratergal plate which is longer than the plate which bears it, and such setae not present at all 6 (5). Lateral margins of the hindhead in the femaie short and almost semi- circularly convex (known only from the female); from undetermined rodents from Abyssinia . . . . . . .PKj^J.lbA Lateral margins of the hindhead straight and almost parallel in both sexes; known from Tatera indica in India . oihrnhNol 7 (f)). Male with a row of very short, almost thorn-like, setae on the ter cral plates of segments 4-7, in addition to the usuai slender setae; known from Tatera bohwi in Africa . . . . .ttlbhKl A1A Male with only the usual row of slender setae on any abdominal ter^ 8 (7) Setae on paratergites of segments 3~6 almost or quite equaling in 8 (,)’ "length the plate that bea^rs them except for one longer seta on se.ment 3; known from Tatera vicina in Africa. . ......... • • 1 AILKAh Se2? on paratergites of segments 3-6 shorter than the plate which "bears them except for 1 long seta on segment 3 or se^nnents 3 • 9 9 (8). Paratergal plates of segment 3 only with 1 long seta which^is^much longer than the plate that bears it . . . . . Paratergal plates of segments 3-4 each with 1 long seta which is much longer than the plate that bears it. . • . . 10 (0) Ventral apical angle of paratergites ol abdominal segments J-b 10 (9). Ventra^ ^ that .g about twice as wlde at its base and twice as long as the tooth at the dorsal angle; known iron Ger- billus pyramidum in Egypt. . ........ .WXBILLi Ventral apical angle of paratergites of segments 3-6 forming mere ly a slight tooth which is not larger than that of the doi sa ^ 11 (10) Lateral margins* oV "the "hindhead" in "the male (female unsown) 11 (10). La^tr* Convergent ; occurring on Pachyuromys in Lateral margins of the hindhead in the male ivergen 0 P n),llv parallel ; from Meriones auceps m China . 19 (4) ferater^'i teso f abdominal segments 2-6 with both posterior angles 12 (4K produced into a slender, apically acute process which is heset 203 13 (12) 14 (13). 15 (13). 16 (15). 17 (15). 18 (17). 19 (18). 20 (18). with minute squamations . WATERSTONI Paratergites not so . \\\ w . Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 3-6 posteriorly emargi- nate, the setae borne close to the apices of the points formed by this emargination . . Paratergal plates of these segments not so . 15 , Paratergites of abdominal segments 3~6 only shallowly emarginate; tergal plates of abdominal segments 3-6 occupying scarcely more than half the width of their respective segments; occurring on Arvicanthis in Africa . 1 . ABYSSINICA Paratergites of segments 3-6 deeply emarginate; tergal plates of segments 3-6 occupying at least three- fourths of the width of their respective segments; occurring on Arvicanthis in Africa.. Tergal plates of abdominal segments 3-6 each with the ventral pos¬ terior angle only forming a tooth and each with a pair of setae which are about as long as the plate which bears them . 16 Tergal plates of abdominal segments 3-6 not presenting this com¬ bination of characters; if the setae are as long as the plates each angle forms a tooth, if one angle does not form a tooth Head truncate anteriorly immediately 'in 'front* of’ the’ antennae ; occurring on Lophuromys in Africa . PHTHISICA Head acutely pointed in front of the antennae; . OXYRRHYNCHUS Genitalia of the male with the pseudopenis entirely enclosed with¬ in the apices of the parameres; tergal plates in the female all ot almost uniform length in the longitudinal axis of the body- occurring on Saccostomus in Africa . JONESI Genitalia of the male with the pseudopenis art icuiating to the apices of the parameres; anterior tergal plate of abdominal segments 4-/ in the female distinctly longer in the longitudi¬ nal axis of the body than the posterior plate of tho same seg¬ ment . Paratergites of abdominal segments 4-6 each with 1 seta which is as long as or longer than the plate which bears it, the other seta somewhat variable but never so short as to appear thorn- ^1* Finmark, Norway. This host is Clethrionomys NOTES. It is here accepted that borealis is a synonym of alaskensis. Polyplax arvicanthis Bedford 1919. 1923. Polyplax arvicanthis Bedford, Report of the Division of Veterinary Research, Department of Agriculture, Union of South Africa 5-6 • 716 • Plate 1, figures. ' Polyplax arvicanthis Bedford, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:227: fi/nires 148 14Q HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described as from Arvicanthis pumilio at Onder- stepoort, Pretoria, South Africa, and later recorded from a subspecies of this host from Mount Kenya, British East Africa. The correct name for this host is Rhabdomys pumilio. Polyplax asiatica Ferris 1923. Polyplax asiatica Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:233; figure lfi2D. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Crocidura caerulea (a shrew) from Rangoon, Burma. Also recorded from Nesokia hardwickii from Quetta, Baluch- istan. Material not previously recorded is at hand from Bandicota bental- mvvt Akivb’ aD>d fr0in Rattus ooncolor at Bellaiy, Madras, India. NOTES. The additional material now at hand tends to substantiate the suspicion, previously expressed by Ferris and by Hopkins, that this species is normal to a rodent and not to shrews. Polyplax auricularis Kellogg and Ferris 1915. 1923. 1933. 1938. Polyp\lx aurlculaiMis Kellogg and Ferris, Anoplura and Mallopha HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Peromyscus maniculatus at Inverness Marin County California, and recorded from the same host at Yosemite FoirestirPT^l4ndCalAV°r|IliaV AiSo° rehcorded froir Peromyscus sitchensis from Forrester Island, Alaska, from Onychomys torridus at Victorville, Califor- nwirV' m zhomy^lT°taSUr at Colorado Springs, Colorado, and at Liberal, Kansas. All these records are from within the United States. Al¬ so recorded from Reithrodontomys mexicanus at "Tehontepec, Chiapas " which liiioobCity, Mexico!’6'’'0’ *" ^ it came actually from this host there must have been itTnnhp^ Lrood evidence that the members of this family harbor only lice of the genus Fahrenholzla. There is a Peromyscus maniculatus streatori and Hopkins suggests that there may have been an error in reading a label No reason appears for naming the supposed variety. g 1 206 Fahrenheit has aLso named the species Polyplax painet i'rom Peromyscus caltfornicus from San Mateo County, California, but in the light ol the available material there seems to be no reason for recognizing this species. Polyplax biseriata Ferris 1923. Polyplax biseriata Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:199; figures 125A, 126. 1938. Eremophthirius btserlatus (Ferris) , Rahreuholz, Zei tschri ft fur Para- si tenkunde 10:243- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Tatera bohmi at South Guaso Nyiro, British East Africa, and from Tatera lobengulae at Bothaville, Orange li'ee State, South Africa. Polyplax chinensis Ferris 1923. Polyplax chinensis Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:209; figures 132, 133- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. But one record, from Heriones auceps, Shensi, China. According to Ellerman this is listed as a subspecies of Heriones ner id ianus. Polyplax deltoides Fahrenholz 1923. Polyplax reclinata (Nitzsch), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:192; figures 120C, 120G. (Mis- identification?) 1938. Polyplax deltoides Fahrenholz, Zeitschnft fur Paras 1 tenkunde 10:29b; figure 12. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. This species was based by Fahrenholz upon the specimens recorded by Ferris as from Crocidura coerulea at Rangoon, Burma; from Crocidura sp . at Atchebal, Valley of Kashmir; Pachyura luzonensis at Manila, Philippine Islands, and from Scut isorex sp. at "Medjie, this place name being without other data and perhaps being a misspelling. NOTES. Since this species name was based entirely upon the records pub¬ lished by Ferris, the type must be selected from among the material record¬ ed by fterris. The type is therefore designated as a female from Pachyura luzonensis at Manila, Philippine Islands, which is in the Stanford Univer¬ sity collection. , , As far as any evidence given by Fahrenholz is concerned, no good reason appears for regarding this species as anything more than Polyplax reclinata. But since specimens from the type host of the latter are not available the name is here accepted. Polyplax dentaticornis Ewing 1935. Polyplax dentaticornis Ewing, Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 48:20V; figure 2c. . . „ HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded, on the basis ot a single male, irom Cricetulus andersoni, Shensi, China. Polyplax eriopepli Ewing 1936. Eremophthirius eriopepli Ewing, Proceedings of the Biological ety of Washington 48:209. , , HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Eriopeplus incanus Iron Celebes, host is Cricetulus longicaudatus. Soci- This 207 Polyplax gerbilli Ferris 1923. Polyplax gerbilli Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:203; figures 128, 129. 1938. Eremophthirius gerbilli Ferris, Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Para- sitenkunde 10:243. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Gerbillus pyramidum at Khartoum, Egypt. Polyplax gracilis Fahrenholz 1910. Polyplax gracilis Fahrenholz, Jahresbericht des Nieders&chsischen zo- ologischen Vereins zu Hannover 2-4:42; text fi ¥erris’ kimals of the Durban Museum 1: 240, figures 23C, 24. (Misidentification) Polyplax cummingsi Ferris, Annals of the Durban Museum 1-240; fig¬ ures 25, 26A. Polyplax otomydis Cummings, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:211; figures 134, 135. Polyplax cummingsi Ferris, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph oi the Sucking Lice, Part 4:213; figures 136, 137. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described by Cummings from Otomys Irroratus from Mount Kenya, British East Africa. Also recorded from this host from Onderstepoort, Pretoria, and from Mfongosi, Zululand, South Africa. Re¬ corded from Otomys angoniensis from Naivasha, British East Africa, and from Otomys bran t s i without indication of locality, this last host now bein Ferris for the separation of the latter species now appearing to have been quite illusory . Polyplax oxyrrhyuchus Cummings 1915- Polyplax oxyrrhynchus Cummings, Proceedings of the Zoological Soci¬ ety of London, page 251; text figures 4-6, 8, 9, 11. 13- 1923. Polyplax oxyrrhynchus Cummings, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:225; figures 146, 147. 1938. Polyplax oxyrrhynchus, variety hystrellae Fahrenholz, Zeitschnft fQr Paras itenkunde 10:275* HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Acomys cahirinus at Assiut, Egypt. Recorded by Ferris from Acomys hystrella from Numule, Uganda, and irom Acomys perctvalt , British East Africa. . . NOTES. Fahrenholz, apparently without seeing any specimens and working merely from the illustrations accompanying the original description ol this species and the later record by Ferris, assumed to establish the supposed ,lvarietv" hystrellae for the specimens illustrated by Ferris. The type ol this naine will therefore be among these specimens. The differences cited by Fahrenholz for his "variety" are merely such as are inevitable in illus¬ trations made by different persons from specimens which were dillerently prepared and this supposed variety is here reduced to synonymy. Polyplax phthisica Ferris 1923. Polyplax phthisica Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph ol the Sucking Lice, Part 4:223; figures 144, 145. . HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Lophuromys aquilus trora Ngani Narok River and from the same host species (recorded as zena ) from Molo, British East Africa; from Lophuromys sikapusl, Rhino Camp, Uganda; from Lophuromys sp. from Nyasaland. A record from Thamnomys ibeanus, British East Alnca, is probably due to contamination. Polyplax praecisa (Neumann) 1901. Haematopinus praecitus Neumann, Archives de Parasitologie ?-600. (In part; also typographical error for praecisus, later corrected by 1902. Haematopinus praecisus Neumann, Archives de Parasitologie 6:144; fig. 1904. Polyplax praecisa (Neumann), Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger . 3 1919. Polyplax praecisa (Neumann), Fahrenholz, Jahresbericht des Nieder- s&chsischen Zoologischen Yereins zu Hannover 5-lU:Zh. 1923. Polyplax praecisa (Neumann), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:196; figure 123. f f p 1938. Eremophthirius praecisus (Neumann), Fahrenholz, Zeitschnf u HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded as from "gros rats, in Abyssinia. Hop- kins^notes that T^tera nlgri cauda occurs in Abyssinia and assumes the spe- ^^OTES^^ Neumann included two distinct species in his praecisus. This was • ' 1 vv Fahrenholz who in 1919 named one of the two as Hoplopl eura th"Acted the Le to the other , -hic^is a » Fprric; saw the type specimens and confirmed this procedure, r ye praecisa is still known only from the female and without precise host desig nation. 209 Polyplax reclinata (Nitzsch) 1864. Pediculus reclinatus Nitzsch, Zeitschrift fiir den gesamten Naturwis— senschal’ten 25:23. 1874. Haematopinus reclinatus (Nitzsch), Giebel, Insecta Epizoa, page 37. 1904. Polyplax reclinata (Nitzsch), Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28: 142 ■ 1910. Haematopinus ( Polyplax ) reclinatus (Nitzsch), Neumann, Archives de Parasitologie 13:524; text figure 24. 1912. Polyplax rec l inata (Nitzsch) , Fahrenholz, Jahresbericht des nieder- sachsischen zoologischen Vereins zu Hannover 2-4:37; text figures 11, 12; Plate 1, figures 12, 13; Plate 2, figures 2, 4; Plate 3, figure 7. 1923. Polyplax reclinata (Nitzsch), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:192. (In part) 1932. Polyplax reclinata, variety leucodontis Jancke, Zeitschrift fiir Par— asitenkunde 4:525; figure 2. 1938. Polyplax reclinata (Nitzsch), Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fiir Parasiten- kunde 10:254; figures 9, 10, 11. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Originally recorded from the European shrew Sorex araneus, and since recorded a few times from this host. Also record¬ ed, as variety leucodontis, from another European shrew, Crocidura leucodon . NOTES . Ferris has previously referred to this species specimens from various Asiatic shrews, but Fahrenholz has considered these to represent a distinct species to which he has applied the name deltoides. Also -Jancke has recorded material from a European shrew, Crocidura leucodon, as a vari¬ ety of reclinata. In the absence of specimens from the type host it is not here possible to come to any deiinite decision regarding this variety. On the basis of the published notes and descriptions by Jancke and Fahrenholz, the present writer still believes all these to represent a single species for which the name reclinata is correct. The supposed "variety" leucodontis is here placed in synonymy with reclinata, but the species name deltoides is admitted, in the absence of the material which is necessary before it is definitely reduced to synonymy. Polyplax serrata (Burmeister) J§39. Pediculus serratus Burmeister, Genera Insectorum, Rhynchota, No. 6. 1842. Haematopinus serratus (Burmeister), Denny, Monographia Anoplurorum Britanmae, page 36. 1904. Polyplax serrata (Burmeister), Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28: 1912. Polyplax affin is (Burmeister) , Fahrenholz, Jahresbericht des nieder- sachsischen zoologischen Vereins zu Hannover 2-4:39; figures 13-15. (Misidentification) ’ 1923. Polyplax serrata (Burmeister), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:191; figure 120B, E. 1932. Polyplax serrata (Burmeister), Jancke, Zeitschrift fur Parasiten- kunde 4:252. 1938. Polyplax affinis Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift f(ir Paras itenkunde 10-261. (As a new species) HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Originally described from the house mouse, Mus musculus, in Europe. Later recorded as Polyplax affinis (Burmeister) from Apodemus syluaticus in Europe. Ferris has recorded it from this host from Switzerland, Bohemia, and England; from Apodemus airarius from Manchuria and China; from Apodemus speciosus from China; from Nus spicilegus, which is merely a subspecies of musculus, from Spain; and from Nus musculus from Scotland and England. 210 NOTES. The species described as Pediculus af finis by burmeister was at one time placed in Polyplax but is now regarded by both Kali renholz and Perris as be in;' a Hoplopleura. A species of Polyplax which has been misi- dentified as afflnis is considered by Perris to be the same as Polyplax serrata. Fahrenholz (193^), however, has maintained that this species is distinct and has described it as new, giving affints as a new name lor it. Under the revised Rules (bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 4:97-125. 1950) this name is available, since at the time of its proposal (193&) if was a nonconcurrent secondary homonym. In connection with the present work the material at hand lrom Hus muscu- lus and the various species of Apodemus has been carefully re-examined. The opinion is here maintained that there is absolutely nothing in these specimens which will justify a specific separation. Polyplax afflnis Fahrenholz is therefore placed as a synonym of Polyplax serrata (burmeister). Polyplax spinigera (burmeister) 1S39. Pediculus spiniger burmeister. Genera Insectorum, Rhynchota, No. 9- 1909. Haematopinus ( Polyplax ) splniger (burmeister) , Neumann, Archives de Paras i to logie 13:524; figure 24. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from a rodent cited by the older au¬ thors as Hypudaeus amphibius, which is now referred to the genus Arvicola. NOTES. Since its original description only one author, Neumann, has seen specimens from this host and the species cannot be definitely identi¬ fied from his notes and figures. It is apparently distinct from Polyplax spinulosa and the suggestion that it is the same as, and there! ore ante¬ dates, either Polyplax alaskensis Ewing or Polyplax abscisa Fahrenholz will need to be explored when specimens are obtained from its type host. Polyplax spinulosa (Burmeister) Figures 90, 91 1839. Pediculus sptnulosus Burmeister, Genera Insectorum, Rhynchota, No. 8. 1842. Haematopinus spinulosus (Burmeister) , Denny, Monographia Anoplurorum britanniae, page 26; Plate 24, figure 5. 1864. Pediculus denticulatus Nitzsch, Zeitschrift fur den gesamten hatur- wissenschaften 23:24. . 1905. Polyplax spinulosa (Burmeister), Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28:142. 1923. Polyplax spinulosa (Burmeister), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mon¬ ograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:187; figures 119, 120A, D, F, H. 1929 Polyplax praomydis Bedford, Annual Report of the Director ol Veteri¬ nary Services, Union of South Africa 15:503; figure3 2-5- . 1938. Polyplax spinulosa (Burmeister), Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift. fur Para sitenkunde 10:249; figures 1-8, 23c. . . 1945. Polyplax campylopteri Zavaleta, Anales del Instituto de Biologia HOSTS SdXDISTOIBUTION. Originally described from the brown rat, Rattus (=Mus = f!pimi/s) norveiicus, in Europe. Later many times recorded from this host and from Rattus rattus and some of its subspecies in many' parts ol the world. It has been recorded by Ferris from Rattus calc is, which is consid¬ ered to be exulans, in the Philippine Islands and Rattus strtdens\n the Malay Peninsula and from Bandicota (as Gunomys ) benialensis in Burma. De scribed by Bedford as Polyplax praomydis from Praonys (now called .hallomys) namaouensis at Onderstepoort, South Attica. . _ . . Records by Ferris of the occurrence of this species upon various specie- of Hicrotus Synaptomys, and Phenacomys are erroneous and are here trans¬ ferred to Polyplax abscisa Fahrenholz. 211 Polyplax spinulosa (Burmeister) Figure 90 212 Polyplax spinulosa (Burmeister), details Figure 91 213 NOTES. A male from the type lot of Polyplax praomydis Bedford is avail¬ able and is very precisely spinulosa. Polyplax campyloptera Zavaleta, de¬ scribed as from a bird, is, on the basis of illustrations presented by its author, very obviously nothing more than spinulosa. Polyplax stephensi (Christophers and Newstead) 1906. Haematopinus stephensi Christophers and Newstead, Thompson, Yates and Johnston Laboratories Report (new series) 7:3; Plate 1. 1923. Polyplax stephensi (Christophers and Newstead) I, Perris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:206; figures 130, 131 • 1938- Eremophthirius stephensi (Christophers and Newstead), Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Paras itenkunde 10:243. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. First described from Gerbillus (-Tatera) indica from India, without precise indication of locality. Cotype specimens are labeled as from Madras. Later recorded by Ferris from the same host from various localities in India. Polyplax tarsomydis Ewing 1935- Polyplax tarsomydis Ewing, Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 48 : 206 . 1938. Eremophthirius tarsomydis (Ewing), Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Para- si tenkunde 10:243. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION . Described by Ewing as from Tarsomys (a subgenus of Rattus) apoensis from the island of Mindanao, Philippine Islands. = One male taken from a skin in the United States National Museum. Two females which may be considered to belong to this species are at hand frcm the same host, taken from a skin, United States National Museum Number 144616, from the summit of Mount Bliss, on the island of Mindanao. NOTES. This species was described from a single male. It is not prac¬ ticable here to describe the female except as it is included in the key to the species. Polyplax taterae Ferris 1923. Polyplax taterae Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:198; figures 124, 125D. 1936. Polyplax subtaterae Bedford, Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Science and Animal Industry- 7:63; figure 7. 1938. Eremophthirius taterae (Ferris), Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Para- si tenkunde 10:243. 1938. Eremophthirius subtaterae (Bedford), Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Parasitenkunde 10:243. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. TyPe of taterae from Tatera vicina from Mount Rukenya, British East Africa. Type of subtaterae from Tatera liodon at Kampala, Uganda. NOTES. Specimens of subtaterae are at hand, through the kindness of the late G. A. H. Bedford, and it is upon these that the above synonymy is based . Polyplax waterstoni Bedford 1919. Polyplax waterstoni Bedford, Report of the Division of Veterinary Research, Department ot Agriculture, Union of South Africa 6—7* 715: Plate 1, figures 1, 2, 4, 6. 1923. Polyplax waterstoni Bedford, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:193; figures 121, 122. 214 1938. Polyplax emlnatus Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift t’iir Parasiteukunde 1U:266; Figures 16, 17. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTE ON . First described as from "several rats," at On derstepoort, Pretoria, South Africa. Recorded by Ferris from Eptmys pero- myscus, for which the proper name is apparently Rattus tullbergi, at Moio, British East Africa. Described as Polyplax emlnatus by Fahrenholz from "Paderorycte s tadat, " from East Africa. No such host name appears in any available Lists. Hopkins has hazarded the guess that this is a corruption of Tachyorycte s audax, but this is purely a surmise unsupported by any spe¬ cial evidence. NOTES. On the basis of the description and illustrations given by Eah- renholz, there is not the slightest justification for the separation of Polyplax emlnatus from waterstoni . Polyplax werneri (Glinkiewicz) 1907. Eremophthirius werneri Glinkiewicz, Si tzuugsberichte der mathemat- i sch-n atu r wi sse nschaftlichen CLasse der kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Wien 116:381; figures. 1923. Polyplax werneri (Glinkiewicz), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:202; figure 127. 1938. Eremophthirius werneri Glinkiewicz, Fahrenholz, Zeitschrilt liir Par- asitenkunde 10:243* HOSTS .AND DISTRIBUTION . Described from Pachyuromys duprasi. Natron Val¬ ley, Egypt, and recorded by Ferris from the same host and locality. NOTES. This species is the type of the genus Eremophthirius. Genus PROEN DERLEIN ELLUS Ewing 1923. Proenderleinellus Ewing, Journalot the Washington Academy ol Sciences 13* 147. 1938. Vaterstonla Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Parasitenkunde 10:244. (Pre- 1939. Symysadus Fahrenholz, Mitteilungen aus dem entomologischen Verein Bremen (no volume number), page 44. . . GENERIC TYPE. The genus was based upon Proenderleinellus africanus Ewing, which is a synonym of Polyplax calva Waterston. The generic names proposed by Fahrenholz were based upon Polyplax calva Waterston. This is the only included species. . , , . . . CHARACTERS. Polyp lacinae in which the antennae are live segmented, not sexually dimorphic. .Anterior legs moderately large, but with slender claw; middle legs but slightly' larger than the first and with slender claw; third legs much larger than the others and with stout claw. Paratergal plates ol the abdomen present on segments 2-8, those of segment two divided longitu¬ dinally into two pieces. Abdomen entirely membranous in both sexes excep for the usual sclerotizations of the terminal and genitalic segments and even these are much reduced. Abdominal segments ot the female, both dor sally and ventrally, with for the most part two rows ol setae, these setae borne each on a small, sclerotized plate or tubercle which surrounds its base. Abdomen of the male with one row ol such setae on all segment^ or- sally except perhaps the second, which has two, and with two row., on most of the segments ventrally. Sternal plate of the thorax well developed. AM5"0Tb' S ll^'wrYteT',6 Ssuspec t, ing* th\t p"roe nderleinellus .frlcanue Ewing might be a synonym of the earlier Polyplax calva Waterston enlisted the aid of Mr. C. F. W. Muesebeck, who examined the single male type ol the former and agreed. 215 Proenderleinellus calva (Waterston) Figures 92, 93 1917. Polyplax calva Waterston, Parasitology 9: 199; figures. 1923. Polyplax calva Waterston, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:234; figures 153, 154. 1923. Proenderleinellus africanus Ewing, Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 13:147. 1938. Raterstonia calva (Waterston), Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Parasiten- kunde 10:244. 1938. Vaterstonia calva zanzibariensis Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Para- sitenkunde 10:244. 1939. Symysadus calva (Waterston), Fahrenholz, Mitteilungen aus dem ento- mologischen Verein Bremen (no volume number) , page 44. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described by Waterston from Cricetomys iambianus at Accra, French West Africa, and also recorded from Cricetomys sp. from Zanzibar. The supposed subspecies zanzibariensis was based solely upon the illustration given by Waterston of the male, this male having come from Zanzibar. The supposed species africanus of Ewing was based upon a single male which had been taken from a skin of Thryonomys £regorianus which Rad come from British East Africa. There are at hand specimens from the type host at Accra and also from Cricetomys from Zanzibar. NOTES. The specimens at hand deny the slight differences offered by Fahrenholz as a basis for the naming of his supposed form zanzibariensis. Genus RATEMIA Fahrenholz 1916. Ratemia Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, Abteilung A, 81:11:31. 1922. Ratemia, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of°the Sucking Lice, Part 3:156. 1949. Ratemia, Webb, Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 119: 164. GENERIC TYPE. Haematopinus (LinoPnathus) squamulatus Neumann, the only included species. CHARACTERS. Polyplacinae with five-segmented antennae which are not sexually dimorphic. Anterior legs relatively small, with slender claw; middle and posterior legs about equal to each other, larger than the first and with somewhat stouter claw. Paratergal plates of the abdomen occurring on segments 3-6 • Abdomen otherwise membranous in both sexes except for the usual terminal and genital areas. Abdominal segments in both male and female, both dorsally and vent rally, with a single transverse row of setae which along the mid-line of the body becomes merged with a median cluster of two or three rows of setae. Spiracles present on abdominal segments 3-9. Thoracic sternal plate well developed. The type species of the genus apparently occurs normally on hosts of the Perissodactylous family Equidae. NOTES. Because of the hosts of the type species it is difficult to shake off a prejudgment that this genus should not be assigned to the Hop- lopleuridae, which are primarily parasites of the rodents and there is a pressure to find some excuse for placing it in the Haematopinidae or the Linognathidae. However, no morphological reason for eithur of these latter assignments appears and it is here placed in the Hoplopleuridae. Webb (1949) has assumed the genus to be related to Linognathus because of simi¬ larities ol the spiracLes, but the present writer remains unimpressed by this supposed resemblance, especially in the face of other morphological features. 216 Ratemia squamulata (Neumann) Figure 94 1911. 1916. 1922. 1946. j ematopinus (Linot*nathus) squamulatus Neumann, Archives de Para- sitologie 14:401; figures. itemia squamulata (Neumann), Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, Abteilung A, 81:11:31- . T , M itemla squamulata (Neumann), Ferns, Contributions Toward a Mono rrraph of the Sucking Lice. Part 3:167; figure 103- -Hernia squamulata (Neumann), Hopkins, Annals and Magazine oi Natural Historv (Series 11) 12:666. (Dated August, 1946, but available copy bears the notation that it was published in May, 194b) 217 pai atei gal plates female genitalia thoracic sternal plate Proenderleinellus calva (Waterston), details Figure 93 HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Originally described from an undetermined host f> Dl*je_I)a°Va» Abyssinia. Since that time Hopkins has recorded the species from domestic donkey at Liro, Lango District, Uganda, and from Burchell's gZlS ^U.rls) burchell l , taken on the Athi Plains near Nai robi! K,. uh aPPar®n1;ly establishing the normality of the species to members of the Perissodactylous family Equidae. It should, therefore, enter into anj list of the parasites of domestic animals. NOTES. Through the kindness of Mr. Hopkins it has been possible to see IT fr°: b0fVhc hosts recorded by him. In the accompanying illus^ ha nihPh i° temaie 15 lr0m a sPecimen in the original type lot: as a !!an Sr!SHoprHn“s!PeC1"Cn ‘'r°" ^ bur^“1’ ^ ™ received 218 male genitalia female genitalia spiracle • * vl / ii A ^ I* 1 Ratemia squamulata (Neumann) Figure 94 219 Genus SYMOCA Fahrenholz 1938. Symoca Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fiir Parasi tenkunde 10:245. GENERIC TYPE. Polyplax brachyrrhynchus Cummings, the oniy included spe- cies. CHARACTERS. Polyplacidae with five-segmented antennae which are sexual¬ ly dimorphic, those of the malq having the distal, preaxial angle of the third segment slightly prolonged and hearing a stout, recurved seta at its apex. Head with the basal segment of the antennae set very close to the truncate anterior margin. Thorax narrow and somewhat elongate, with no distinct sternal plate. Anterior legs small and weak and°with slender claw, middle legs distinctly larger and with somewhat larger claw; posteri¬ or legs with the tibio-tarsus much enlarged and with a stout, heavy claw. Abdomen with paratergal plates present on segments 2-8, the plates on seg- ment two apparently not divided longitudinally. Female with abdominal seg¬ ments 4r- 1 each with two plates and two transverse rows of setae both dor- sally and ventrally . Male with but one row of setae on any segment both dor sally and ventrally, except for the sternum of segment three which ap¬ parently has two rows. Sternal plates not developed in the male. NOTES. While the relationships ot this genus are certainly with Polyplax and the bases for a generic separation are not especially convincing the genus is here accepted. Symoca brachyrrhyncha (Cummings) Figures 95, 96 1915. Polyplax brachyrrhynchus Cummings, Proceedings of the Zoological So¬ ciety of London, page 246; figures 13, 14. 1923. Polyplax brachyrrhynchus Cummings, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the SuckinS Lice, Part 4:220; figures 142, 143. 1938. Symoca brachyrrhyncha (Cummings), Fahrenholz. Zeitschrift f&r Para— sitenkunde 10:245. 1939. Symoca brachyrrhyncha, variety minor Fahrenholz, Mitteilun.ren aus dem entomologischen Yerein Bremen, page 32. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described as from Acomys cahirinus at Assiut Egypt. Recorded by Ferris from Acomys hystrella in Uganda and from Acomus perctvali in British East Africa. NOTES. Fahrenholz based the supposed variety minor entirely upon a com¬ parison of the description and illustrations given by Cummings with those |Jve° v Ferns, although Ferris had compared his specimens with the types, pie differences cited by Fahrenholz are merely such as may readily appear m work of two individuals, even utilizing the same material. Family LINOGNATHIDAE Webb 1904. Trichaul inae Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28:138. 1905. Linoinathinae Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 29-194. 1946. Linojnathidae Webb, Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 116 : 107 . DESCRIPTION OF THE FAMILY. Anoplura in which external evidence of eyes m.iy or may not be present. Abdomen entirely membranous in both sexes ex¬ cept for plates associated with the terminal and genital segments and rare¬ ly (one species) tergal plates in the male. Abdominal segments each with at least one row of hairs both dorsally and ventrally, usually much haired. Second and third legs almost always equal to each other and much larger than the first pair. Thorax usually without any trace of a sternal pllte but ll present always without the apex free from the body. Spiracles as 220 Symoca brachyrrhyncha (Cummings' Figure 95 far as known, with distinct internal ledges which show externally as rings, or with the ledges forming internal points. The members of the family are restricted to members of the Orders Artio dactvla and Hyracoidea, except for two species from Carnivora. NOTES. To" this family there are here assigned four genera— Lino$nat hus, Microthoraclus, Solenopotes, and Prollnoinathus. A certain ajnoun^ of is felt concerning the genus Microthoraclus since an •argument can be made for its assignment to the Haematopinidae. One other question, that ol t lelns H^mdlpsus, is troublesome. The type of this genus is unfortunately an° imperfec t ly known species and, because of SDecies which are assigned to the genus, it is here placed in the Hoplo nleuridae Taken by itself it might very properly be assigned to the Linognathidae and eventually it may be necessary’ to break j^P^-enus Haemod ipsus, assigning its type species to a position near Linotnathus. 221 & antenna abdominal seta '\ f emale genitalia Symoca brachyrrhyncha (Cummings), details male genitalia Figure 96 Key to the Genera of LINOGNATHIDAE 1. Eyes indicated externally by a definite lens; occurring on Camelidae u . . . . No external trace of eyes . o 2. Abdominal spiracles borne in a slightly sclerotized tubercle which’ pro¬ jects at least slightly from the body; occurring chiefly on Cervidae, but 1 species known from domestic cattle . SOLENOPOTES Spiracles not thus borne in sclerotized tubercles . 3 3. Setae of abdomen greatly reduced in number, there being normally but *2 setae in each median group, both dorsally and ventrally, on any ab¬ dominal segment, these in a single row; spiracles extremely small; occurring as far as known only on members of the Order Hyracoidea _ . . prolinognathus Setae ol abdomen more numerous, usually abundant, and in 2 or more rows on each segment, spiracles not minute; occurring for the most part on members of the Order Artiodactyla, but represented on the family Canidae of the Order Carnivora . LINOGNATHUS 222 (k'lius L1N0GNATHUS Enderlein 1904. Tr Ichaulus Enderlein, ZooLogischer Auzeiger 28:139, 141. (Preoccu¬ pied) 1905. Ltno£nathus Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 29:194. 1909. Ltnotnathus (Haematopinus) , Neumann, Archives de Parasi to logie 13:529. 1932. L tnognathus , Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:336. 1949. Stobbella Kichier, Bolletino della Societa Entomologies Italians 79:13- GENERIC TYPE. Pedlculus plllferus Burmeister, which is considered to be a synonym of Pediculus setosus von Olters. GENERIC SYNONYMS. Stobbella Eichler, type Linoinathodes plthodes Cum- raings . CHARACTERS. Linognathidae in which there is no external evidence ol eyes. Antennae five-segmented, the fourth and fifth segments not lused. Spiracles of the abdomen usually more or less spherical, the internal ledges of the atrium appearing externally as partial rings; never elongated and never borne in a sclerotized tubercle. Thoracic sternal plate lacking, or it' present very weakly developed and divided longitudinally into two small plates. Abdominal segments usually much haired both dorsal ly and ventral- ly, with the hairs in at least two rows. Abdomen terminally with a pair ol ventral lobes, but these never produced into flat processes. Genitalia oi the male always with pararoeres well developed and enclosing the oedeagus. NOTES. This isagenus of considerable size, 26 species now being known. These are confined to the families Bovidae and Giralfidae of the Order Artiodactyla, except for two species which occur on carnivores of the iam- ' Eichler has recently named the genus Stobbella, with Linotnathus plthodes as its type, but this genus is here rejected. Key to Species of LINOGNATHUS 1. Abdomen beset with short, stout, more or less fusiform setae . 2 Abdomen with no such fusiform setae . • . . • " 2 (1). Anterior legs of same form as the others and almost as large, ab¬ domen very thickly and uniformly beset with fusiform setae ; on Gorton taurinus in Africa . . . . . . .bPILATUS Anterior Legs definitely smaller than the others and with slender claw; fusiform setae more or less numerous, but leaving bare are as ..»••••••••••■••••••• •••**"**********#*********************~^ 3 (2). Gonopods of female well separated mesally from each other ; on ope cervicapra in India . _ . ;; . PITHUUEb Gonopods of female very broad and leaf-like, meeting each other 4 (3). Median genital plate of female expanded at its posterior end, on Gaze 1 1 a thomsoni in British East Africa . . . ...LLWlbl Median genital plate of female not broadened at its posterior ex tremity; on Antidorcas marsupialls in South Africa. ..... .BEDFORDI 6 (1). Female with no trace of a sclerotized, median, genital plate . . Female with at least a small, median, genital plate . l‘’n 6 (5). Gonopods of the female apically truncate, emarginate or serrate.../ Gonopods of the female apically rounded or acute . . . -9 7 (6). Gonopods of the female with the posterior border somewhat emargi¬ nate and bearing a sclerotized hook at the mesal angle; torehead elongate and apically acute, hindhead longer than wide, almost rectangular; occurring on domestic cattle throughout the world^ 223 8 (7). 9 (6). 10 (9). 11 (5). 12 (11). 13 (12). 14 (13). 15 (14). 16 (11). 17 (16). Not with this combination of characters . 8 Head long and slender, the forehead acute, the hindhead with the lateral margins slightly convex; gonopods of female with a slight tooth close to the posterior border near the mesal angle; occur¬ ring especially on domestic goats, but also at times on sheep and recorded from the European Capra ibex and Caprella rupicapra . . STENOPSIS Head very small and short, not prolonged in front of the antennae; gonopods of the female with the posterior margin irregularly ser¬ rate; widely distributed on domestic sheep . PED.4LIS Head elongate and slender; dorsum of metathorax with an apically free lobe close to the margin just above the posterior coxal con¬ dyle; occurring on Cervicapra in Africa . FAHRENHOLZI Head short and broad, the anterior margin broadly rounded, the fore¬ head not at all prolonged anteriorly . 10 Abdomen in both sexes with very few elongate setae, there being a median pair and a single seta near the margin, both dorsally and ventrally, in either sex, with a few extremely minute setae be¬ tween the median and lateral setae; occurring on Gorgon taurinus in Africa . '.HOLOGASTRUS Abdomen with numerous slender setae both dorsally and ventrally in both sexes; occurring on Canis brasiliensis in South America.... . : . . . TAENIOTRICHUS Genital plate of the female oval, triangular, or lozenge-shaped, and never with a slender median, stalk-like prolongation con¬ necting with the lip of the vulva . ?, . 12 Genital plate of the female with various configurations, but not as above . 16 Genital plate relatively very large and definitely lozenge-shaped; head unusually elongate and narrow; occurring on "North African antelope " . PETASMATUS Not with this combination of characters . 13 Female with the genital plate transversely oval and with a slight median, posterior point; gonopods elongate, apically somewhat spatulate; male with the terminal sternite produced and with a flattened, sclerotized lobe on each side; occurring on Conno- chaetes and Gorgon in Africa . GNU Not with this combination of characters . 14 Head elongate and slender, anteriorly acute; genital plate of the female forming an almost equilateral triangle; occurring on Hippotragus in Africa . HIPPOTRAGI Head broad throughout, genital plate of the female forming merely a small, slightly elongate, oval area . 7 . 15 Head very short and broad, scarcely longer than wide; occurring on domestic dogs and on foxes; occasionally taken from other carnivores . . SETOSUS Head broad, but fully twice as long as wide; on domestic sheep in various parts of the world . OVILLUS Female with a pair of small, hook-like processes on the lip of the vulva between the gonopods; male with a deeply pigmented, transverse plate just in front of the anus; occurring on Tauro- tragus in Africa . TAUROTRAGUS Not with these characters . . Female with the genital plate definitely spatulate (not merely slightly expanded anteriorly) and with a slender, stalk-like posterior prolongation nearly or quite connecting with the lip of the vulva . . Female with the genital plate not thus spatulate . 21 224 20 (19). 21 (17) 22 (21) 18 (17). Genital plate of the female described as more or less T-shaped, the arms of the T uuite short; occurring on Peleus capreolus in Africa . • . PELEUS Genital plate of the female otherwise . 19 19 (18). Gonopods of the female curved, their apices directed toward the mid-line of the body and with setae extending from the lateral margin around the apex and well up the mesal margin; head rather smoothly fusiform; occurring on Cephalophus maxwelli, an African species . . Gonopods of the female almost straight and parallel, their setae confined to the mesal margin . . . ...20 Gonopods with mesal margin from apex to j unction with body straight, occurring on Aepyceros melampus in Africa....... . AEPYCEKUS Gonopods with mesal margin from apex to j unction with body convex, occurring on giraffe . BREVICORNIS Gonopods of female with setae confined to the apex . 22 Gonopods of female with setae extending well up the mesal margin from the apex . ;:*••••*•* • * * : Gonopods of the female apically convergent; genitalia ol male with definite pseudopenis and with parameres not basally swollen.. 2J Gonopods of female described as parallel; genitalia ol male de¬ scribed as having the parameres basally swollen and as lacking pseudopenis; occurring on Antilope cervtcapra, an Indian spe- . . CERVICAPRAE 22 (22). Gonopods of female extremely small, strongly convergent through¬ out their length; occurring on Antilope euchore and various other species of Ant Hope in Africa . TIBIALIS Gonopods of female with sc lerotization elongate and strongly curved at the extreme apex; occurring on domestic sheep, widely distributed, and perhaps on Oreotragus saltator in Africa . . . AFRICANUS 24 (21). Forehead slender and apically acute; lateral margins of the hind- head smoothly convex; gonopods of the female short and quite broad; genital plate of the female elongate, somewhat expanded anteriorly but scarcely to be described as spatulate; occurring on Tragelaphus sylvatlcus in Africa . FRACTUS Forehead truncate or at the most broadly rounded....... . 25 (24). Gonopods of the female with their mesal margins straight, parallel and only these margins bearing setae; genital plate of the te male shoe sole-shaped, projecting slightly from the vuLva api oally ; known from Tragelaphus gratus in Africa . LIMNUIKAbi Otherwise, occurring especially on species of Cephal°phus Linognathus aepycerus Bedford 1936. Linognathus aepycerus Bedford, Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary' Science and Animal Industry 7:62; figures 5> o. , HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Aepycerus melampus, commonly called impaia, between Pretoria and Johannesburg, South Africa. Linognathus africanus Kellogg and Paine Figures 97, 98 1911. 1916. nognathus africanus Kellogg and Paine, Bulletin of Entomological Rpc;parch 2-146; Plate 4, figures 1, 5* . „ , . nognathus stenopsis (Burmeister) , Ferris Proceedings of the Cali fornia Academy of Sciences (Senes 4) 6:155- (Part, misidentit cation) 22f. Figure 97 female penitalia Linognathus africanus Kellogg and Paine, details Figure 98 1927. Linognathus stenopsts (Burmeister) , Bedford, ReP°rt °f Director •0f Veterinary Education and Research, Union ol South Africa 11 12. 737. (Part; misidentification) A ._ .. - . 1932. Linognathus africanus Kelloggand Paine, Ferris, Contri buti ons Tow a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:83 ; tigures 212B, G, E, 21J. 1932. Linognathus africanus Kellogg and Paine, Bed lord, Report ol the D rector of Veterinary Services and Animal Industry, Inion ol South 1939. Linognathus africanus Kellogg and Paine, Fahrenholz, Mitteilungen aus dem entomologischen Verein, Bremen, page 3.- HOSTS ANT) DISTRIBUTION. Type from "sheep," Abeokuta, southern Nigeria, AfrfS ulr SSriSfr- domestic sheep and domestic goats fr-jmj- localities in South Africa, Abyssinia, India, and the K' nnrded bv Fahrenholz from Ovis longipes from Algeria, North Africa. NOTES There are apparently four species of I inognat hu$ namely, ov 1 1 1 us, Dfidal is stenopsis, and africanus— which may be encountered on domestic sheep and goats. They are quite distinct species and the probability is that here has been some interchange of hosts. 227 Linognathus angulatus (Piaget) 1885* Haematopinus ungulatus Piaget, Les Pediculines, Supplement, page 144; Plate 15, figure 7. (A misprint for angulatus, since that name appears on the plate and on the label of the type specimens.) 1932. Linognathus angulatus (Piaget), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:380; figures 231D, 232G, 233. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Cephalophus nigrifrons without indi¬ cation of locality. NOTES. Since this species was described from the same host genus as was breuiceps, it might be suspected that synonymy is involved, but apparently the two species are distinct. There may have been some mixing of material or some misidentification involved. Actually the species aepycerus ap¬ proaches it very closely. Fahrenholz has maintained that the spelling ungulatus should be pre¬ served, hut it seems clear that this was a typographical error, the spell¬ ing angulatus being used in connection with the plate accompanying the o- riginal description and on the label of the type specimens. Linognathus bedfordi Ferris 1932. Linognathus bedfordi Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:387; figures 236 , 238B, C, 11, I, and 239A, D. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Antidorcas marsupialis at Anderstepoort, Union of South Africa. Linognathus breviceps (Piaget) 1885- 1910. 1910. 1932. Haematopinus breviceps Piaget, Les Pediculines, Supplement, page 142; Plate 15, figure 5* Linognathus gazella Mjoberg, Arkiv f6r Zoologi 6:157; figure 78. Linognathus gilvus Fahrenholz, Jahrbuch der Haraburgischen Wissen- schaftlichen Anstalten 34:2:18; figure 5- Linognathus breviceps (Piaget), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:107; figures 216A, 231B, C, E. F, H; 232A. * ' 1932. Linognathus gazella Mjdberg, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:111; figures ^2B, E, F, 234. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. First described fTom Cephalophus maxwelli with¬ out indication of origin. Described as Linognathus gazella Mjoberg from a gazelle, in the Hamburg Zoological Gardens. Described as Linognathus gilvus Fahrenholz from Cephalophus sp. from the same Gardens, these having been some of the same specimens, apparently, as the lot that Mj5ber<' had. Erroneously recorded by Ferris and by Bedford as Linognathus angulatus (Piaget) from Cephalophus natalensis and Sylviacapra grimmi from Zululand and Transvaal. NOTES. Concerning this species, or perhaps closely related group of species, there is very muoh of a problem. Ferris, in connection with the reference cited above, was able to examine types of all of them and a con¬ siderable range ol this material is still at hand. This material has been examined and re-examined in connection with the present work and no consis¬ tent basis for the separation of these species has appeared. Perhaps even Linognathus l imnotragi cannot definitely be separated. In specimens from the type lot of gazella the forehead is almost rectan¬ gular, but there is some variation in this and the character does not hold. Specimens from Cephalophus grimmi and Cephalophus natalensis — over 36 specimens from the iirst being available — show enough variation in head form to represent two or three species if these characters can be taken 228 seriously . Some specimens have the hiudhead definitely annulate laterally, while in others it is parallel sided. The typical "shoe-sole shaped" genital plate ol the female appears in the types of limnotragt, hut does not hold in other specimens which are at hand from the same host. There is also some range of variation in the form of the gonopods, some being acute and others rounded. However, the species l tmnotragi is here accepted as probably distinct. The result has been that the species gazella and gilvus are here placed in synonymy with breviceps. _ . This species has sometimes been placed in synonymy with L inognat hus angulatus (Piaget), which also is attributed to Cephalophus, but the two are clearly distinct. Linomathus brevicornis (Giebel) o 1874. Haematopinus brevicornis Giebel, Insecta Epizoa, page 43. 1932. Linognathus brevicornis (Giebel), Perris, Contributions 'lowardaMon- O'jraph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:3^5; figures 216D, 219- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Prom Camelopardalis giraffa in a zoological NOTES. The redescription given by Ferris was based upon specimens in the Piaget collection. Whether or not these belonged to the same lot as did Giebel 's types is not known. Linognathus cervicaprae (Lucas) 1847. Haematopinus cervicaprae Lucas, Annales de la Socidt£ entomologique de France (2)5:534; Plate 8, figures II, l-lh. 1938. Linognathus cervicaprae (Lucas), Werneck, Libro jubilar do Prol . Ira vassos, page 527; figures 1-5- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described by Lucas from Antilope cervicapr a, from a menagerie in Paris. Not seen again until recorded by Werneck fr°™ specimens taken from the same host species in the Zoological Garden of ^NOTES In 1939 Fahrenholz recorded under this name and described speci¬ mens from the Museum d'Histoire Naturelle de Paris which he assumed to have been left bv Lucas and therefore possibly to be the types of the ^cies. However Werneck had already redescribed the species and later published note in' which he indicated that Fahrenholz agreed that these specimens were d rob ably not those recorded by Lucas and accepted the interpretation given bv Werneck. The species involved was referred by Werneck to Linognat.us tibialis (Piaget) and the pertinent reference will be found under that name. Linognathus damaliscus Bedford 1936. Linognathus damaliscus Bedford, Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Science and Animal Industry 7:61; figures 3, 4. -nnl m-iral HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. IVpe from Damaliscus aibi ^rons^lhe n° %u th gardens at Johannesburg; also from Damaliscus dorcas at Bredasdorp, South AfrNOTE5. On the basis of the illustrations given by Bedford this appears to be identical with Linognathus taurotragi, but disposal of it must await a re— examination of its types. Linognathus fahrenholzi Paine linognathus forficulus Kellogg and Paine, Bulletin of Entomological 2i47; Plate 4. fibres 2. 4. (Not Sae.atoptnus forficulus 1911- 229 Rudow, which is supposed to be also a Linognathus) 1914. Linognathus fahrenholzi Paine, Psyche 21:117. 1932. Linognathus fahrenholzi Paine, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:370; figures 224, 225. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described as from Cervicapra arundtnarum, Marim¬ ba District, Nyasaland, and later recorded from Cervicapra fulvorufula at Mfongosi, Zululand. Linognathus fractus Ferris 1932. Linognathus fractus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:366; figures 220, 221. 1932. Linognathus sp., Bedford, Report of the Director of Veterinary Ser¬ vices and Animal Industry, Union of South Africa 18:409. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Tragelaphus sylvaticus at Onderstepoort, South Africa. Linognathus gnu Bedford 1927. Linognathus gnu Bedford, Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa 14:349; figures 3, 4. 1927. Linognathus ferrisi Bedford, Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa 14:351; figures 5, 7« 1929. Linognathus gorgonus Bedford, Report of the Director of Veterinary Services, Union of South Africa 15:502. 1932. Linognathus gnu Bedford, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:368; figures 222, 223. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. The type of Linognathus gnu was from Connochae- tes gnu at Clocolan, Orange Free State, and the type of gorgonus was from Gorgon taurinus, Zoutpansberg District, Northern Transvaal . The species was later recorded from this host at Maastrom, northern Transvaal, and in the Zoological Gardens at Pretoria. NOTES. This species was described by Bedford as gnu. and as ferrisi be¬ cause of the fact that he had the two sexes separately from different hosts. The name ferrisi, being preoccupied, was later changed by him to gorgonus.' He later concurred that they represent the same species. Fah- renholz, in 1939, without seeing any specimens, considered the two to be distinct merely on the basis of illustrations given by Bedford and by Ferns. There is no reason to accept this opinion. Linognathus hippotragi Ferris 1932. Linognathus hippotragi Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:373; figures 226, 227. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Eippotragus niger, in the zoological war¬ den at Johannesburg, South Africa. 0 0 Linognathus hologastrus Werneck i937. Linognathus hologastrus Werneck, Memorias do Institute Oswaldo Cruz 32:397; figures 7-10. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Gorgon taurinus at Grootfontein Southwest Africa. NOTES. Although this species occurs upon the same host as does Linog¬ nathus gnu, the two species are very distinct and no confusion between them need arise. 230 Linoguathus lewisi Bedford 1934. Linognathus leulsi Bedford, Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Sci¬ ence and Animal Industry 2:48; figure 11. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Gazella thomsont at Naivasha, British East Africa. Linognathus limnotragi Cummings 1913. Limnognathus limnotragi Cummings, Bulletin of Entomological Research 4:36; figure. 1932. L inognathus limnotragi Cummings, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mon¬ ograph of the Sucking Lice, Fart 5:333; figs* 231A, I, J, 232C, D. HOSTS AN D DISTRIBUTION. Types from Llmnotragus (= Trage laphus) gratu s in the zoological garden of London. Recorded also trom Tragelaphus s ylvaticus at Onderstepoort, Pretoria, and from Tragelaphus scrlptus in the zoological garden at London. NOTES. See the discussion under Linognathus breulceps. Linognathus oviformis (Rudow) 1869. Haematopinus oviformis Rudow, Zeitschrift fur die gesamten Naturwis senschaften 34:170. 1916. Linognathus ovl form is (Rudow) , Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, Abteilung A, 81:11:33* „ 4 , „ HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded by Rudow from Hircus manifrlclus, a host name that appears in no available lists. The host was presumably a goal . NOTES. This is an utterly unrecognizable species that Fahrenholz as¬ sumed to Linognathus purely as a guess. Linognathus ovillus (Neumann) Figures 99, 100 1907. Haematopinus ovillus Neumann, Revue veterinaire 32:520; ligure. 1932. Linognathus ovillus (Neumann), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:346: figures 209, 210 A, B, C, E. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described by Neumann as from domestic sheep from New Zealand and Scotland. There have been various records which are dubious because three other species of this genus occur on domestic sheep . The types were examined by Ferris and, on the basis ol this, records Irom domestic sheep in the Falkland Islands and New South Wales are here accepted. Linognathus pedalis (Osborn) Figures 101, 102 1896. Haematopinus pedalis Osborn, United States Department ol Agriculture, Division of Entomology, BuLletin (new series S.liO, l^ure . 1911. Haematopinus microcephalus Garnett, Journal of Comparative Patho ogj and Therapeutics, page 2; figures 1, 2. M 1932. Linognathus pedalis (Osborn), Ferris,1 Contributions ^Toward a. Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:344; ligures 207B, D, 2DS. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. First described from domestic sheep in the United States and recorded from this host in South America, New Zealan , Australia, and South Atrica. Linognathus peleus Bedford 1936. Linognathus peleus Bedford, Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Sci 231 Linognathus ovillus (Neumann) spiracles (above) compared with same of stenopsis ( below) female genitalia male genitalia Linognathus ovillus (Neumann), details Figure 100 ence and Animal Industry 7:59; figures 1, 2. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Pelea capreolus at Onderstepoort, South Africa. Linognathus petasmatus Ferris, new species HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Holotype, a female, allotype, and several par ar- tvpes, young and eggs, from "North African anti lope, presumably tron. a zoological garden in Manchester, England. Types in the collections oi Stanford University, California. . , u , FEMALE. About 2.25 mm. in length. Body form rather slender. Head e Ion crate and relatively slender, ven smoothly fusiform, the forehead on y slightly' shorter than the hindhead and apically acute, the widest point o the hindhead being slightly posterior to the center of this p0^10"'. rax and legs entirely normal. Abdomen with an uninterrupted row ot short setae and a median cluster of similar setae on segments 3-6 both dorsJ^ j ventrallv Median genital plate of the female unusually large, very definitely lozenge-shaped, the anterior extremity slightly Prol^ed* ^“- opods of female slightly convergent posteriorly, narrowly rounded apically and with setae around the apex and slightly up the mesal margin. 233 Linognathus pedalis (Osborn) Figure 101 MALE. About 2 mm. long. Genitalia with basal plate long and slender, ®xpanded ^nd slightly bifid at posterior end and somewhat expanded at the anterior end. Parameres apparently strongly curved dorsoventrally • the pseudopenis very short and indistinct, the endomeral piece either lack¬ ing or very weaklj' developed. NOTES. This species was received some years ago from a correspondent in Birmingham, England, whose name has unfortunately been lost, and it is not clear whether the specimens came directly from North Africa or from an ani¬ mal in a zoological garden. The species seems to be quite distinct from anything else that has been described. Linognathus pithodes Cummin ^s 1916. Linognathus pithodes Cummings, Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, page 260; figures 3-5. 1932. Linognathus pithodes Cummings, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph ot the Sucking Lice, Part 5:385; figures 235, 238D, 239F, G. 234 Linognathus pedalis (Osborn), details Figure 102 1949. Stobbella pithodes (Cummings), Eichler, Bolletino della Societa En- tomologica Italiana 79:13* HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. From Antilope cervicapra from India, in the zo¬ ological garden at London. NOTES. Eichler has designated this species as type ot the genus Stob¬ bella, which is not here accepted. Linognathus saccatus (Gervais) 1845* Haematopinus saccatus Gervais, In Walckenaer, Histoire Naturelle des Insectes Apt^res 3:307* . . 1905. Linognathus saccatus (Gervais), Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 29: 194. HOSTS .AND DISTRIBUTION. Known only from the original record from "un Bouc d ' Egyp te . " An utterly unrecognizable species which has been placed in Linognathus purely as a guess. Linognathus setosus (von Oilers) Figures 103, 104 1S16. Pediculus setosus von Olfers, De vegetativis et animatis corporibus in corporibus animatis reperiundis commentarius, page 80. 235 Linognathus setosus (von Olfers) Figure 103 1838. Pedtculus piliferus Burmeister, Genera Insectorum, Rhynchota, Spe¬ cies 13. 1842. Haematopinus piliferus (Burmeister), Denny, Monographia Anoplurorum Britanniae, page 28: Plate 25, figure 4. 184 1 . Haematopinus bicolor Lucas, Annales de la Soci6t4 Entomolo Part 5:349; figures 210D, 211, HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Originally described from domestic goats in Europe and since recorded many times from this host in various parts of the world. Some o i the numerous records are perhaps erroneous because of the presence of other species of this genus on this host. Described by Rudow N0t£C FerrTs”1 MqS) ^ *S ru^ica^ae from Caprella rupicapra. with thf; Ipip'j 9 ? has discussed at length the problems connected W) ^ d ^ various names that have been employed for it. He had at hand specimens from Capra ibex and Caprella rupicapra which he con- H1 erte+Kt0 lde!ltlcal with those from domestic goats and consequently re- review^of “1 ruPic^ to synonymy with s tenopsil A ™ oLni! Tk11 connection with the present work indicated no rea- 1D SPlte °f the faCt ^ attempted Linognathus taeniotrichus Werneck 1937' Ll^hUlt"nl0t:iChU3 Werneck- Memories do Institute Oswaldo Cruz 3^:3yi; iigures 1-5. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from Canis brasiliensis at Sao Ber¬ nardo das Russas, state of Ceard and recorded also from Canis azarae from Lassance, state of Minas Geraes, Brasil. azarae t rom NOTES. This species seems clearly to be distinct from Pediculus setosus which occurs on the domestic dog and also on arctic foxes. * Linognathus taurotragus Bedford 1927‘ “ZSSTJSZ'gfiflSSSi r“TCtiM,s 0f the ^ 193;- iKSS gr ‘ MOD- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from TaurotmZ! 07ux \ t CloeoLn Orange Free State. Also recorded from the sume host inNaJX South A, A*”’. Linognathus tibialis (Piaget) K80' '“^8.“ ttbta“S Piaeet’ US Pedic“lines> page 646; Plate 52, 188°. Saenotoptnus tibialis, variety antennatus Piaget, Les Pediculines, 238 Linognathus stenopsis (Burmeister) Figure 105 239 female genitalia Linognathus stenopsis (Burmeister), details male genitalia Figure 106 1880. Haematopinus tibialis, variety append iculatus Piaget, Les Pedicu- lines, page 647. 1916. Linognathus tibialis, variety euchore Waterston, Annals of the South African Museum 10:275; figure. 1932. Linognathus tibialis (Piaget), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:360; figures 217, 218. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from "Antilope maori " from the zoological garden at Rotterdam and recorded also by Piaget from Antilope subgutturosa and Ant Hope sp. from the same place. The type of Waterston's variety euchore was from Anti lope euchore in South Africa and the species has been recorded by Bedford from Aepyceros melampus from South Africa. NOTES, ieiris, in connection with the reference cited, examined the types of the forms recorded above. Specimens from Antidorcas marsupial is from Onderstepoort , Pretoria South Africa, which were recorded by Ferris as tibialis have been re-exam¬ ined and raise some doubt as to their identification. They are certainly very close to tibialis, but differ in the form of the genital plate of the female. Other specimens from Raphicerus campestris from the Rustenburg District in the Transvaal, South Africa, are extremely close to* tibialis but are somewhat different. Questions concerning these may be allowed to rest until someone with more material can approach the problem. 240 Linognathus vituli (Linnaeus) Figure 107 Linognathus vituli (Linnaeus) Figures 107, 108 1758. Pediculus vituli Linnaeus, 3ystema Naturae, ^Edition X, page 611. 1829. Haematopinus vituli (Linnaeus), Stephens, Catalogue of British In¬ sects 2: 329 . 1838. Pediculus tenuirostris Burmeister, Genera Insectorum, Rhynchota, Species 17. M . 1864. Pediculus oxyrrhynchus Nitzsch, Zeitschrift fur die gesamten Natur wissenschaften 23:21. 1932. Linognathus vituli (Linnaeus), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono Taph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:356; figures 214, 2l5, -16C. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Originally described from domestic cattle in Europe. Since reported from domestic cattle in all parts of the world. There are certain unusual records from wild boar in Europe, t rom sheep, and even from domestic dog, which may result from erroneous information as to the host. 241 thoracic dorsum / head Linognathus vituli (Linnaeus), details Figure 108 Genus MICROTUORACIUS Fahrenhoiz 1915. H icrothoracius Fahrenhoiz, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, Abteilung A, 81: 11:89. 1932. Hicrothoracius , Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck¬ ing Lice, Fart *1:390. 1933* Hicrothoracius, Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 27:21. GDi ERIC TYPE. Haematopinus (Linoinathus) praeloniiceps Neumann. CHARACTERS. Linognathidae in which clearly evident eyes are present, these being represented by a lens just posterior to the base ol' each anten- na. Head greatly elongated and more or less fusiform, at times being al¬ most as long as the abdomen. Thorax very small, with no indication of a sternal plate but with the sternal apophyses present and with a definite notal pit. Antennae five- segmented but with segments 4-5 at times more or less fused. Spiracles beset internally with points. Derm of the abdomen tending to be minutely wrinkled. NOTES. The assignment of this geuus to the Linognathidae is open to question, for an argument can certainly be made supporting its assignment rather to the Haematopinidae. The chief reason for the present assignment is the absence of the paratergal plates, but the presence of the thoracic sternal apophyses, the definite eyes, the thoracic notal pit, and possibly the spiracles, argue for its placement with the Haematopinidae. Such understanding of this genus as we have we owe chiefly to the work of Dr. Fa bio Werneck. The history of this genus and especially of its type species is ol in¬ terest and is worth recital. In 1688 Redi, in his famous work on the gen¬ eration of insects, illustrated certain ectoparasites of birds and mammals, among these being one which he designated merely' as the louse of the camel. There was apparently no discussion of any of these species, identity being indicated merely by the legend on the illustration. In his "Systema Naturae," Linnaeus gave this louse a binomial name, call¬ ing it Pediculus cameli, purely on the basis of the illustration given by Redi. From the time of Redi until as recently as 1934 the insect was never again reported. In fact the illustration given by Redi seemed so fantastic that its faithfulness was doubted and the peculiarities ol the species were ascribed merely to bad drawing of some other species, perhaps Haematopinus tuberculatus, which was the only sucking louse known from camels. However, in 1909. Neumann described a species from a llama which was sufficiently similar ’to cameli to indicate that the latter was not imaginary. In 1915 Fahrenhoiz assigned Neumann's species to the genus Hicrothoracius. In 1932 Ferris discussed this genus. He had examined a female from the type material of praeloniiceps and had also at hand specimens from a llama from the zoological park at Washington. His conclusions concerning the species were thus based upon what seemed to be quite authentic material. However, in 1932, Werneck described a new species, Hicrothoracius mazzal, and in 1933 he discussed these two species at length, the result of his work being to indicate that Neumann actually had two quite distinct species in his type lot of praeloniiceps . Neumann had indeed indicated that one ol his specimens differed from the others in the form of the head and it seems clear that this was the specimen examined by Ferris. Then in 1934 Werneck reported the rediscovery of the long-lost Pediculus cameli on the basis of specimens taken in Algeria and he described another species, Hicrothoracius minor, from another llama. In 1935, Ferris dis¬ cussed the crenus again but his work had gone to press before kerneck s paper of 1934 had become available and full account had not been taken ol Werneck 's conclusions. . . It is now evident that there are at least four species ol this genus on members of the family Camelidae, a family that according to Itfdekker s work 243 •1,,t ® a,s contains but tw0 genera, Camelus with one species and Lama with but two. Whether or not we even yet have the full complement of Anoplura occurring on this family remains to be determined. Key to Species of MICR01H0RACIUS a,HkreCk4haf4dKiS4CUSfd the problem of separating the species of this genus and has noted that it is difficult to do so upon the basis of any single character but that, m the totality of their characters, they seem to°be readily recognizable. Unfortunately, specimens of minor are not available and this species must be included in the key solely upon the basis of Werneck s description, while available material of the other species is ex¬ tremely scanty. Furthermore, differences in the treatment of the specimens may cause apparent differences in the form of the head and lead to confu- sion thus in mazzai a species in which the head is extremely slender, a slight collapse of the specimen will exaggerate this slenderness. In the light of this the following key must be used with discretion. 1. Head very narrow throughout, but with a quite definite swelling on each side just posterior to the antenna, this swelling bearing the eyes: it P°s^erior this swelling the head narrowing aorain . MAZ7AT Head broader, definitely fusiform, expanding into a moderately Tharp angle just posterior to each antenna, narrowing again immediately posterior to the swelling, the margins of the hindhead being smoothly 2. Anterior legs almost identical in size and shape with the others: a iar- ?®r t01rm' attaining a length of 4 mm. for the female and 2.5 mm. for the male; 4th and 5th antennal segments quite closely fused. .. .CAMELI Waller forms the adult female not exceeding 3 mm. in length; first -*-egs definitely more slender than the others . 9 J. Female attaining 3 niro- in length . PRAFT/lNrTnrpQ Female recorded as less than 2 mm. long . 5^77. N^MiSr Microthoracius cameli (Linnaeus) Figures 109, 110 Pediculus cameli Linnaeus, Sy sterna Naturae, Edition X, page 611 18/4. Haematopinus cameli (Linnaeus), Giebel, Insecta Epizoa, p^ge 47.’ 1909. Haematopinus tuberculatus (Burraeister) , Neumann, Archives de Para- sitologie 13:499. (Misidentification) 1916. Microthoracius cameli (Linnaeus), Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturcre- schichte, Abteilung A, 81:11:30. " ° 1932. Microthoracius cameli (Linnaeus), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mon- int), ograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:394; figure 242. 1934. Microthoracius cameli (Linnaeus), Werneck, Memorias do Instituto Os- waldo Cruz 29:179; figures 1-5. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. The only actual record of the species is that given by Werneck, from Camelus dromedarius in Algeria. P 13 thdt Microthoracius mazzai Werneck 1909. Haematopinus (Llnoinathus) praeloni iceps Neumann, Archives de Para- 1014; stogie 13:509. (In part; specimen recorded in a footnote) 1916. Microthoracius praeloni iceps (Neumann), Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Na- ioo9 turgeschichte, Abteilung A, 81:11:30. (In part) 93 • Microthoracius praeloni iceps (Neumann), Ferris, Contributions Toward (MisYdenUftcation* Dg LlC6’ Part 5:S9: fi6ures 24°- 2«- 244 Microthoracius cameli (Linnaeus) 245 female genitalia Microthoracius cameli (Linnaeus), details Figure 110 246 1932. Mtcrot horac lus mazzal Werneck, Revista medico-cirurgica do Brasil 40:346; figure. 1933* Mlcrothoraclus mazzal Werneck, Werueck, Meaorias do lnstituto Oswal do Cruz 27:26; figures 9-15* 1935* Mlcrothoraclus mazzal Werueck, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Fart 9:612; figures 338B-E. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Types from Auchenia liana at Santa Catalina, province de Jujuy in Argentina. Presumably also the specimen recorded by Neumann in the footnote to his description of praeloniiceps, this from Auchenia llama from Choquecomato, Bolivia, is this species, and the speci¬ mens recorded by Ferris from the same host, froman animal in the Zoological Park of Washington, are the same. Microthoracius minor Werueck 1935. Mlcrothoraclus minor Werneck, Revista medico-cirurgica do Brasil 43: 112. 1935. Microthoracius minor Werneck, Werneck, Revista de Entomologia 5:168; figures 1-4, 5- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Types from Lama pacos, Abra Pampa, province de Jujuy, Argentina, and other specimens from Lama ilama at the same place. Microthoracius praelongiceps (Neumann) 1909. Haematoplnus ( Linoinathus ) praeloniiceps Neumann, Archives de Para- sitologie 13:508; figures 10-12. (In part) 1916. Microthoracius praeloniiceps (Neumann), Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Na- turge schichte, Abteilung A, 81:11:30. (In part) 1932. Microthoracius praeloniiceps (Neumann), Werneck, Revista medico- cirurgica do Brasil 40:346; figure. 1933. Microthoracius praeloniiceps (Neumann), Werneck, Memorias do Insti¬ tute Oswaldo Cruz 27:21; figures 1-8. 1935. Microthoracius praeloniiceps (Neumann), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 8:610; figure 338A. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Types recorded as from Auchenia huanaca, Choque- comato, Bolivia. Also recorded by Werneck from Auchenia llama. A specimen at hand from "llama" in the zoological garden at Onde rstepoort , South Africa, received from the late Mr. G. A. H. Bedford, seems definitely to be this species. Genus PR0LIN0GNATHUS Ewing 1929. Prolinoinathus Ewing, Manual of External Parasites, pages 136, 201. 1932. Prolinoinathus, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck¬ ing Lice, Part 5:408. _ , ...... i . 1939. Prolinoinathus, Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Parasitenkunde 111:1.1. GENERIC TYPE. Pediculus caviae-capensis Pallas. CHARACTERS. Linognathidae in which there is no external indication of eyes. Antennae apparently' four-segmented because of a close fusion of the fourth and fifth segments, although the sensoria of these segments remain. Thorax without a sclerotized sternal plate and the ventral thoracic apophy¬ ses lacking. Spiracles of the abdomen extremely small. Abdominal setae much reduced in numbers, there being usually not more than two setae in the median group on each segment, either dorsally or ventrally, and never any indication of more than one row of setae on any segment. Gonopods ol the female well developed and produced apically. . „ r 4. NOTES- The members of this genus occur exclusively on members ol the family Procaviidae of the Order Hyracoidea. 247 The material at hand representing this genus is quite scanty and does not permit an extended treatment. Key to Species of PROLINOGNATHUS This key is based largely upon that given by Fahrenholz in the reference cited above, with some modifications suggested by such material as is avail¬ able. 1. Head definitely more than twice as long as wide . 2 Head not more than twice as long as wide . 3 2. Sclerotized areas at the lateral margins of the forehead produced some¬ what posteriorly on the dorsal side about the bases of the antennae.. ^ . •••••: . CAVI AE- CAPEN SI S These sclerotized areas produced posteriorly on the dorsal side of the head until they meet at the mid-line . ARCUATUS 3- Abdomen with a single long seta on the lateral margin of each of the segments anterior to the seventh, in addition to the usual, long, paired setae at the margins of segments 7 and 8 . LEPTOCEPHALUS Abdomen with such setae absent only on segments 5 and 6 . 4 4. These setae present only on segments 2 and 3 . AEftilOPICUS These setae present on segments 2-4 . pj 5* Forehead rather short and the sclerotized transverse area so broad that it involves at least half its length . FERRISI Forehead with this transverse area involving at the most one-fourth of its length . FOLEYI Prolinognathus aethiopicus Fahrenholz 1939- Prolinoinathus aethiopicus Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Parasiten- kunde 11:1:13; figures 8 A, 9. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described as taken from Procauia shoana in the zoological garden at Copenhagen. According to Hopkins the proper name of this host is Procavia habessinica sciona. A specimen that seems to be this species is at hand from a host identified merely as Procauia capensis from Rooi Krans, Transvaal. Prolinognathus arcuatus Fahrenholz 1939. Prolinognathus arcuatus Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Paras it enkunde 11:1:5; figures lb, 2-4. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described as from the same animal as recorded under aethiopicus . Certain specimens at hand from a host identified as Procavia coombsi at Onderstepoort, Pretoria, South Africa, seem to be this. This host seems to be regarded as a subspecies of Procavia capensis. Prolinognathus caviae-capensis (Pallas) Figures 111, 112 1767. Pediculus caviae-capensis Pallas, Spicilegia Zoologica 2:32: Plate 3, figure 12. 1816. Pediculus collaris von Olfers, De vegetativis et animatis corporibus in corporibus animatis reperiundis commentarius, page 84. 1913. Linoinathus caviae-capensis (Pallas), Cummings, Bulletin of Entomo¬ logical Research 4:37; figures 2, 3. 1932. Prolinoinathus caviae-capensis (Cummings), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:409; figures 250A. 251A, E, F, G, H, I, J. ' 248 Prolinognathus caviae-capensis (Pallas' Figure 111 249 Prolinognathus caviae-capensis (Pallas), details Figure 112 1939. Prolinognathus caviae-capensis (Pallas), Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Parasitenkunde 11:1:2; figure la. 1949. Prolinognathus caviae-capensis (Pallas), Hopkins, Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 119:2:515, 516. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Originally described as from Procavia capensis t rom the Cape ot Good Hope. Recorded by Cummings from this host and from a host identified under the same name in the zoological garden at London. The species was redescribed by Ferris on the basis of Cummings' material and a record 1 rom a host identified as Procavia coombsi from Onderstepoort, Pretoria, South Airica, was added. Hopkins records the species from a lono1 list ot subspecies ol Procavia capens is, this including capensis, narlothi , klaverensls, grlquae, albaniensis, natalensis, windhuki, reuningi, and waterbergensls, and from Procavia johnstoni johnstoni from various local¬ ities. 250 NOTES. The present writer has previously maintained that the first gen uine validation of the name cav iae-capens is is to be ascribed to Cummings but Fahrenholz has given cogent reasons for accepting Pallas as the author of the specific name. Whether or not Cummings actually had the species described by Pallas is open to question, but there is no special point to inquiring too closely into this. The accompanying illustrations are based upon his specimens. Prol inoguathus ferrisi Fahrenholz 1932. Prolinognathus leptocephalus (Ehrenberg), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:142; figures 25011, 251C. (Misideiitification) 1939. Prol i nognat hus ferrisi Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Parasi tenkunde 11:1:12. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. The name given by Fahrenholz seems to have been based entirely upon the illustration given by Ferris and consequently the type of the species must be the specimen from which this illustration was made, this having been recorded as from Procauia brucel rudolfi, Marsabit Road, British East Africa, which, according to Hopkins, is Heterohyrax syriacus rudolfi. This type specimen should be in the United States National Museum. Hopkins has also recorded the species from the same host. Prolinognathus foleyi Fahrenholz 1939. Prolinognathus foleyi Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Parasi tenkunde 11: 1:9; figures 5—7, 8b. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded as from Procavla rufescens bounhloll from Algeria. This is the only record. Prolinognathus leptocephalus (Ehrenberg) 1828. Pediculus leptocephalus Ehrenberg, Symbolae Physicae, Decas Prima, page f. 1874. Haenatoplnus leptocephalus (Ehrenberg), Giebel, Insecta Epizoa, page 47. (In part) 1932. Prolinognathus leptocephalus (Ehrenberg), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:142. (In part; not as to figures) 1939. Prolinognathus leptocephalus (Ehrenberg), Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Parasi tenkunde 11: 1:8. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from Procauia syriacus, presumably from Syria- Ferris recorded a single immature specimen from this host from Syria and Fahrenholz has given additional notes on the species. Genus SOLENOPOTES Enderlein 1904. Solenopotes Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28: 143- 1909. Haematopinus (Solenopotes) Neumann, Archives de Parasitologie 13:530- 1915. Cervophthirius Mj&berg, Entomologisk Tijdskrift 36:282. 1916. Linognathus, Ferris, Entomological News 27:199- 1921. Solenopotes, Bishop, Journal of Agricultural Research 21:797. 1929. Cervophthirius, Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, page 136 . 1929. Solenopotes, Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, pages I36, 139. 1932. Solenopotes, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:395- GENERIC TYPE. Solenopotes caplllatus Enderlein. Typ e of Cervophthirius: Cervophthirius tarandi MJoberg. 251 CHARACTERS. Linognathidae without eyes. Antennae five-segmented. Head variously shaped hut usually slightly elongate and broadened but little •posterior to the antennae. Thorax with a sternal plate filling most of the space enclosed by the coxa but not marginally or apically free from the body. Abdomen membranous throughout except for the usual ninth tergite and the ventral genital areas; with not more than one row of setae on any seg¬ ment either dorsally or ventrally. Spiracles, in the type species, more or less cylindrical, their apices projecting somewhat from the body on slight¬ ly sclerotized prominences. In other species they may be shorter, in some species being almost spherical, but some indication of the tubercle is present. Genitalia of female including a pair of quite large and prominent gonophyses. Ninth segment terminating in a pair of ventral, flattened lobes which may be quite long and slender. Genitalia of the inale with the parameres well developed, elongate and enclosing the penis and pseudopenis. NOTES. The type species of this genus was based upon a single male specimen which was rather poorly described and led Ferris to the belief that it was simply an immature specimen of Linognathus vltull. This was later shown to be quite erroneous when the species was rediscovered in North America. MjOberg described the supposed new genus Cervophthirius in 1915> but this was placed as a synonym of Solenopotes by Ferris in 1932. Except for the one species, capillatus, all the members of this genus at present known are from Cervidae. It is probable that several more remain to be found . Key to Species of SOLENOPOTES Only a partial key can at present be given, and identifications must de¬ pend largely upon host associations until the genus has been completely re¬ viewed by someone. 1. Head with the lateral margins posterior to the antennae tending to con¬ verge and presenting neither postantennal nor posterior lateral angles . . Head with the lateral margins posterior to the antennae tending to be nearly parallel, with definite postantennal and posterior lateral angles . g 2. Abdominal spiracles strongly protuberant; female with apical lobes of the abdomen which are short and moderately broad and then are con¬ stricted sharply into a short, slender, terminal process; male with the parameres enclosing a broadly Y-shaped pseudopenis; as far as known occurring only on domestic cattle . CAPILLATOS Abdominal spiracles but very slightly protuberant; female with the api¬ cal lobes of the abdomen constricted gradually into long, tapering processes; parameres of the male enclosing merely a very short aedea- gus; occurring as far as known on New World deer of the genera Odo- co ileus and Mazama . BINIPILOSUS 3. Abdomen of the female with not more than 2 long setae in the median group, either dorsally or ventrally, on any segment . CAPREOLI Abdomen of the female with 4-8 long setae in the median cluster, both dorsally and ventrally, on the abdominal segments; occurring as far as known on New World deer of the genus Odocoileus . FERRISI (The species tarandt and burmeistert will run in this key to the last couplet.) Solenopotes binipilosus (Fahrenholz) 1910. LtnoQnathus an£ulatus (Piaget), Mjbberg, Arkiv f6r Zoologi 2:157. (Misidenti fication) 252 1916. Linognathus btnlpl losus Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, A t»- teilung A, 81:11:11; Plate, figures 11— 1^ - 1916. Linognathus coassus Fahrenholz, Jahrbuch der Hamburgischen Wissen- schatt Lichen Anstalten 34:2. 1927. Lino&nathus panamens is Ewing, Proceedings of the Entomological Soci¬ ety of Washington 29:119. 1932. Solenopote s binipilosus (Fahrenholz), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:131: figures 245, 246. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION . First described by Fahrenholz from "Mazaina liirsch" without indication of origin, but this name implies a host of the genus Mazama from South or Central America. Recorded by Falirenholz from "Ooossus" from the Hamburg zoological garden, this generic mune apparently being a synonym of Mazama. Recorded by Ewing from Odocoileus chiriqulensis from Panama and by Ferris from the same host species from the Panama Canal Zone. Specimens are at hand from Mazama s imp l ic icorn is at Juj uy, Argentina; from Odocoileus couesi at Tucson, Arizona; United States; and from "deer," at Sonora, Texas, United States. Solenopotes burmeisteri (Fahrenholz) 1818. Pediculus crassicornis Nitzsch, Germar's Magazin der Entomologie 3*- 305. (Not Pediculus crassicornis Scopoli, and therefore preoccu¬ pied) 1916. Lino^nathus crassicornis (Nitzsch), Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturge- schichte, Abteilung A, 81:11:34. 1919. Linofnathus burmeisteri Fahrenholz, Jahresbericht des Niedersach- sischen zoologischen Vereins zu Hannover 5-10:23- 1935- Solenopotes burmeisteri (Fahrenholz), Freund, Recueil de Travail d6- di£ au 25me Anniversaire scientifique du Professor Eugeni Pavlov¬ sky, 1909, 1934, Leningrad et Moscow, page 278; figure A- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from Cervus elaphus in Europe and known only from a few records from that continent. NOTES." European authors have considered that the species recorded from North Anerica by Ferris as this, under the name of Solenopotes crassicornis, is distinct, as is also the species illustrated by Ferris as burmeisteri in 1932, and which has been named as Solenopotes capreoli. The name crass i- cornis, being preoccupied, was replaced by the name burmeisteri in 1919- These three species are very closely similar and it remains to be deter¬ mined just how they can be separated. Solenopotes capillatus Enderlein Figures 113, 114 Solenopotes capillatus Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28:144; lig- ures 14, 15- ^ Linotnathus vituli (Linnaeus), Ferris, Entomological News 27:199- (Misidentification) Solenopotes capillatus Enderlein, Freund, Zentralblatt fur Bakteri- ologie und Parasitenkunde (1)84:142; figure. Solenopotes capillatus Enderlein, Bishop, Journal ol Agricultural Research 21:797; figures. Solenopotes capillatus Enderlein, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:397; figures 243, 244. HfKTS AND DISTRIBUTION- First recorded from domestic cattle in Germany . Now known from domestic cattle from various localities in Europe and North America. , . , NOTES. The opinion is held by the writer that this species has trans ferred to domestic cattle from deer, although it has never been taken 1 rom 1904. 1916. 1920. 1921. 1932- 253 Figure 113 female genitalia Solenopotes capillatus Enderlein, details 255 male genital plate Figure 114 any cervid and this opinion may be entirely erroneous. An extended discus¬ sion of the biology of the species is given in the reference by Bishop cited above. Solenopotes capreoli Freund 1932. Solenopotes burmeisteri (Fahrenholz) , Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:404; figures 247, 248. (Mis- identification) 1935. Solenopotes capreoli Freund, Recueil de Travail dedie au 25me Anni- versaire, Scientifique du Professor Eugene Pawlowsky, 1909, 1934, Leningrad and Moscow, page 278; figure B. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. The specimens upon which the record and illus¬ trations given by Ferris (reference cited above) were based were from Cap- reolus caprea from Czechoslovakia. Freund described the species as new on the basis of specimens from the same host without indication of origin. NOTES. This species, as Freund remarked, is "In alien Details . prak- tisch identisch mit Solenopotes ferrisi . " differing only in the ar¬ rangement of the abdominal setae. Differences cited between this and bur¬ meisteri are so slight as to offer no definite "key characters" for the separation of these two species. Solenopotes ferrisi (Fahrenholz) 1916. Cervophthirius crassicornis (Nitzsch), Ferris, Entomological News 27:197; figures. (Misidentification) 1919. Linoinathus ferrisi Fahrenholz, Jahresbericht des Niedersachsischen zoologischen Yereins zu Hannover 5-10:24. 1932. Solenopotes ferrisi (Fahrenholz), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mon¬ ograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 5:134; figures 247, 248. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Odocoileus columbianus at Laytonvi lie, Mendocino County, and recorded also from the same host at San Gregorio, San Mateo County, California, United States. NOTES. This species was identified by Ferris as the European species which is now known as Solenopotes burmeisteri, but Fahrenholz considered it to be distinct and named it as new on the basis of Ferris' description. For this reason it appears that the types of the species must be regarded as being in the material recorded by Ferris. Freund has given a redescrip¬ tion of burmeisteri, but it is still not clear wherein the two species dif¬ fer, if they do so at all. Solenopotes muntiacus Thompson 193S. Solenopotes muntiacus Thompson, Annals and Magazine of Natural His¬ tory (Series 11) 1:634; figures. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Known only from the original record from Munti¬ acus malabaricus at Mousakande, Gammaduwa, Ceylon. According to Hopkins this is Muntiacus muntjak. NOTES. Unfortunately the description and illustrations of this species are not adequate to permit any very clear concept of it or to afford any "key characters" for its identification. It is said to be very similar to binipilosus. Solenopotes tarandi (Mjbberg) 1915. Cervophthirius tarandi Mjoberg, Entomologisk Tijdskrift 36:283; fig¬ ures 1-4. 1932. Solenopotes tarandi (MjOberg), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono- 256 graph of the Sucking Lice, Fart 5:136. HOSTS AM) DISTRIBUTION. Described as from Han^ifer tarandus at K;tresu- ando, Sweden. Hopkins, in his recent host list, indicates another record, which has not been traced in connection with the present work. NOTES. The original description and illustrations of this species are inadequate and offer no basis for its separation from such species as bur- nelsterl and ferrtsi. Family NEOLINOGNATHIDAE Fahrenholz 1929. Neol inognathidae, Ewing, Manual of External Parasites, page 133* 1936. Neolinoguathidae, Fahrenholz, Zeitschrift fur Farasi teukunde 9:1:56. DESCRIPTION OF THE FAMILY. Auoplura in which the abdominal spiracles are reduced to a single pair, this belonging to the eighth abdominal seg¬ ment. Abdomen membranous throughout except for the usual sclerotizations of the genital region and the terminalia and except for the presence at times of minute sclerotized points; almost devoid of setae except for a pair at each lateral angle of segment eight and in the genital area. Legs with the first pair small and slender with sleuder claw; second and third pairs enlarged and stout, with stout claw. Antennae five- segmented, sexu¬ ally dimorphic. Thoracic sternal plate present but not apically free, di¬ vided into two longitudinal plates. NOTES. This family was first recognized as an entity by Ewing who es¬ tablished it as the subfamily Neolinoguathinae of the family Haematopinidae . It was elevated to family rank by Fahrenholz in 1936. The single included genus with two species occurs on members of the fam¬ ily Macroscelididae of the Order Insectivora. The members of this family are peculiar forms. The probabilities are that their actual relationships are with the family Hoplopleuridae but they are so peculiar that even if referred to this family they would have to be maintained as a subfamily. Genus NEOLINOGNATHUS Bedford 1920. Neol i nognat bus Bedford, Entomologist's Monthly Magazine (3)6:88. 1922. Neol inognathus, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Suck¬ ing Lice, Part 3:166. GENERIC TYPE. Neol inognathus elephantuli Bedford, by monotypy. One other species is included in the genus. CHARACTERS. Without eyes. Antennae five-segmented, not sexually dimor¬ phic. Head fusiform. Thorax with the sternal plate not apically or mar¬ ginally free, divided longitudinally into two small plates. Anterior legs small and with slender claw. Middle and posterior legs enlarged, somewhat flattened, with stout claw. Abdomen membranous throughout except for the ninth tergite and the genital sternites beset with small, sclerotized points and entirely without setae except for a pair at each lateral margin of segment eight. Abdominal spiracles present only on segment eight, these noticeably enlarged. NOTES. The two species referred to this genus may be separated by the following key. With a retrorse, tooth-like process on the dorsal (outer) distal angle of the tibia of legs 2 and 3 . ELEPHANT! LI Without such a tooth . PRAELAl ITS 257 Neolinognathus elephantuli Bedford Figure 115 1920. Neolinognathus elephantuli Bedford, Entomologist's Monthly Magazine (3)6:89-90; figure. 1922. Neolinognathus elephantuli Bedford, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 3:166; figures 110-111. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. First described as from Elephantulus rupestris ( myurus) jamesoni at Onderstepoort, Transvaal, South Africa. Later re¬ corded by Ferris from Petrodromus tetradactylus and Nasilio brachyrhynchus delameri from British Central Africa and Loita Plains, British East Africa. Neolinognathus praelautus Ferris 1922. Neolinognathus praelautus Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 3:169; figure 111E and 112. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Type from Elephantulus pulcher phaeus at Lime Springs, British East Africa. Also from Elephantulus rufescens at Vor, British East Africa. Family PEDICULIDAE Leach 1817. Leach, The Zoological Miscellany 3:64. 1842. Denny, Monographia Anoplurorum Britanniae, page 1. 1880. Piaget, Les Pediculines, page 6 15- 1904. Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28:136. 1929. Ewing, A Manual of External Parasites, page 141. DESCRIPTION OF THE FAMILY. Anoplura in which the eyes are very definite¬ ly present externally as a pair of distinct lenses which are accompanied each by a distinct spot of pigmentation that shows in uncleared specimens. Antennae five-segmented, not sexually dimorphic. Legs variable in form, either all practically the same or with the first pair small and slender and the second and third pairs large and stout. Paratergal plates repre¬ sented on certain of the abdominal segments by a sclerotization which covers the apex of lateral lobes of the abdomen and which never has any part free from the body wall, although at times with lateral lobes. Abdomen other¬ wise membranous except for the usual terminal and genitalic plates and small tergal plates in the male. Female with well-developed gonopods on the eighth segment but with no definite indication of the gonopods of seg¬ ment nine present. Genitalia of the male with the parameres fused basally with the aedeagus. NOTES. As here understood, this family — which at one time included all the Anoplura — is reduced to two genera that are here considered to involve not more than four unquestioned species. Ewing has held that the genus Phthirus should also he removed from it, leaving only the genus Pediculus in the family. While an argument can he made for this step it is not here accepted. A step is taken, however, which undoubtedly will not meet with general approval, but which is supported by the facts of morphology. That is& to re¬ move the genus Pedic inus from the Pediculidae. Those who base their concept of the classification of the Anoplura upon the relationships of the hosts — real or supposed— will object to this procedure, but the fact remains that, considering the question from a morphological basis, the genus Pedic inus appears to have very little to do with Pediculus, being apparently more closely related to the members of the family Hoplopleuridae as here under¬ stood. The question is discussed at length in connection with Pedicinus. The two genera remaining in the Pediculidae can be separated from each other so readily that no key for their differentiation is here presented. 258 / 1 i V,* I'XAv^J’^v v f" t 1 ♦ t abdominal ornamentation Neolinognathus elephantuli Bedford female or nit alia It thoracic sternal i>late 2nd or 3rd clam i » f r??*1 ^ i * 1 T y i i *• f Y > f' < > r I I » V’ * Vj ; / . v\'-:r,s; V Vv* * * »*•!'« ;> i, ~ ' » >v’ ' ' V >\v 0\ '■f '#yif I)/;;-.:;-: ; r *• -f r, V , *» s - V4- y/.; >•“ . .. • Genus PEDICULUS Linnaeus It would be utterly impracticable here to present a complete bibliography of this genus. Consequently, only those references are given to which a specialized student of the group may refer for his purposes. 1758. Pedlculus Linnaeus, §ystema Naturae, Edition X, page 610. 1926. Pediculus, subgenus Parapediculus Ewing, Proceedings of the United States National Museum 68: Article 19: 7. 1926. Pediculus, subgenus Paenipediculus Ewing, Proceedings of the Biolog¬ ical Society of Washington 45:117- 1935- Pediculus, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 8:534. 1938- Pediculus, Ewing, Journal of Parasitology 24:13. GENERIC TYPE. The type of Pediculus is Pediculus humanus Linnaeus. The type of the proposed subgenus Parapediculus was stated by Ewing to be Pediculus consobrinus Piaget. The consequences of this latter type selec¬ tion will be discussed in the notes which follow. The type of the proposed subgenus Paenipediculus was stated by Ewing to be Pediculus simiae Ewing, which is here considered to be a synonym of Pediculus schaffi Fahrenholz. CHARACTERS. Anoplura in which eyes are very distinctly developed. Legs all of essentially the same size and shape, the tibiotarsal articulation distinct, the claws slender. Margins of the abdomen more or less strongly lobed, the lobes covered by the sclerotized paratergal plates which are not at all or at the most but in part and then only slightly free from the body at any point on their margins. Thorax with a distinct notal pit. Thoracic sternal plate sclerotized, but with its margins not free from the body. Dorsum of the abdomen in the female membranous or at the most with slightly developed, sclerotized plates; that of the male usually with small tergal plates, the surrounding derm not minutely wrinkled. Spiracles present°in normal position on the abdomen, six pairs being present, these all enclosed within the borders of the paratergal plates. Male with the genitalia bear¬ ing very' small parameres which are united basally with the pseudopenis. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Occurring on members of the Order Primates, es¬ pecially on man, the chimpanzee, and the New World monkeys of the family Cebidae. There are records of its occurrence on gibbons. It may be stated at the outset that the two supposed subgenera, Para¬ pediculus and Paenipediculus are here categorically rejected. The author of these two subgenera, himself, indicated (1938) doubts as to the justifi¬ cation of the first of these but suggested that the second might well be raised to the rank of a genus. That anything at all is to be gained by the recognition of either remains to be demonstrated. In the case of Para¬ pediculus we have a question arising from a misidentified generic type. The type of this proposed subgenus was definitely stated to be Pediculus consobrinus Piaget, a species that has been shown/ on the basis of an exam¬ ination of the sole remaining specimen in the Piaget Collection at the British Museum, to be Pediculus humanus. Ewing, however, had before him when he named this subgenus specimens which were not this species and he had never seen this type specimen. If Parapediculus, as a name for the lice of the New World Cebidae, is ever recognized the question as to the status of its type species will need to be settled, but since it is here rejected no time will now be spent on the question. Key to Species of PEDICULUS Only those forms are included in this key which in the writer's opinion have a reasonable claim to be recognized as species. 260 1. Spiracles of altdominal segments 3~5 each borne within a very small, cir cular, sclerotized area; occurring on chimpanzees . SCHAFFI Not so . 2 2. Paratergal plates throughout clearly without evidence of lateral lobes; occurring normally on man although at times to be found on monkeys of the family Cebidae and on gibbons in captivity . HUMANUS Paratergal. plates of at least some abdominal segments showing clear ev¬ idence of lateral lobing, both dorsally and veutrally . 3 3. Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 5-6 bearing strong lateral lobes, both dorsally and veutrally; occurring on monkeys of the fami¬ ly Cebidae . MJOfflRG] Paratergal plates of abdominal segments 5-1 with slight, but distinct, evidence of lateral lobes, both dorsally and ventrally; occurring on man and Cebidae in the New World tropics and on man in the southwest¬ ern Pacific area . PSEUDOHUMANUS In presenting the following review it has seemed desirable to consider the species by host group rather than alphabetically. Pediculus humanus Liunaeus Figures 116, 117, 118, 119 The literature on this species is very extensive, but for the most part is not pertinent in considering the taxonomy of the species. Only those references are cited which are of importance in establishing synonymy or in presenting evidence concerning the status of the various forms that have been described. 17f>8. Pediculus humanus Linnaeus, Systema Naturae, Edition X, page 610. (The original description of the species, containing no indication that the head and body lice were considered to represent varieties. ) 1761. Pediculus humanus Linnaeus, Linnaeus, Fauna Suecica, Edition 2, page 475. (The beginning of the controversy concerning the two varie¬ ties. "Qui in vestimentis victitat ab eo, qui in capite vivit, non differt ut species, sed tantum varietas.") 1767. Pediculus humanus Linnaeus, Linnaeus, Systema Naturae, Edition XII, page 1016. (The two supposed varieties are designated as 1 and 2, respectively, for the head louse and the body louse and character¬ ized thus: "Varietas Capitis durior, coloratior; Vestimentorum laxior, magis cinerea.") 1778. Pediculus humanus Linnaeus, de Geer, Memoires pour servir a l'his- toire des insec tes 7:67; Plate 1, figures 6, 7. (Here the terms "capitis" and "corporis" are first employed. "II y a done une difference palpable entre ces deux sortes de poux, et qui semble indiquer qu'ils sont d'espece differente, a moins qu'on ne veuille plutdt, comme a fait M. de Linne, les regarder comme deux variates. Quoiqu'il en soit, on pourroit les distinguer par les demoninations suivantes: (1) Pediculus (humanus capitis) cinereus, thorace ab- domineque fascia interrupta nigra marginatus ; (2) Pediculus (hu¬ manus corporis) albidus, totus intmaculatus. ") 1803. Pediculus humanus Linnaeus, Latreille, In Nouveau dictionnaire d'his- toire naturelle 18:403- (This reference not seen. According to Nuttall, the name "humanus" is here definitely restricted to "le pou du corps," which would constitute the first type fixation.) 1803. Pediculus cervicalis Latreille, In Nouveau dictionnaire d'histoire naturelle 18:403- (This reference according to Nuttall. The name is indicated as applying to "le pou de tete.") 1805. Pediculus nigritarum Fabricius, Systema Antliatorum, page 340. (Es- 261 Pediculus humanus Linnaeus, the typical form called capitis Figure 116 10-.C tablished for lice having their "habitat in nigritarum corpore. ") 1816. Pediculus ni£rescens von Olfers, De vegetativis et animatis corpor¬ is5 in corporibus animatis reperiundis commentarius, Part 1, pare 81 . 13 1816. Pediculus albidior von Olfers, De vegetativis et animatis corporibus in corporibus animatis reperiundis commentarius. Part 1, page 81. (Merely a new name lor the body louse.) 1816. Pediculus pubescens von Olfers, De vegetativis et animatis corpor¬ ibus in corporibus animatis reperiundis commentarius, Part 1, page 81. (Merely a new name for the head louse.) 1818‘ pp'ilJLulu? vesttmenti Nitzsch, German's Magazin der Entomologie 3; 306. (New name for the body louse.) 1824. Pediculus tabescentium Alt, De Phthiriasi, page 7. 1834. Pediculus capitis de Geer, liumieister, Genera^lnsectorum, Rhynchota, Order 1, Tribe 1, Family 1, Species 1. 1880. Pediculus consobr inns Piaget, Les Pediculines, pa In 1805, Fabricius named a Pediculus nitritarum trom Negroes and it the form which ’seems actually to occur on Negroes is to be recognized nomencla- torialiy it would appear that this name is available tor it. In 1816, von Olfers named a Pedlculus nigrescens from Negroes and re- named the head and body lice as pubescens and albidior respectively. In 1818, Nitzsch used the name capitis for the head louse and employed the name vestimenti for the body louse. JD Son’ ProPosed the name Pediculus tabescentium for the body louse. In 1880, Piaget named Pediculus consobrinus from a New World monkey of ghe tenus Ateles, this bein^, according to the evidence of the one specimen remaining in the Piaget collection, nothing more than Pediculus humanus. Now the idea came to be generally accepted that the head louse and the body louse constitute two distinct species, these being referred to under various combinations of the names previously mentioned. In 1911, Neumann concluded that these two forms can at the most be re¬ garded as only subspecies and employed the names Pediculus capitis and Pediculus capitis vestimenti for them in complete disregard of the accepted rules of nomenclature. Fahrenholz, beginning in 1912, maintained the distinctness of the head louse and the body louse as species and began the process of supplying each presumed race of man with a subspecies or variety of each of them. He as¬ sumed to recognize Pediculus corporis nigritarum— on the basis of a single specimen and named the varieties Pediculus capitis angustus and Pediculus corporis marginatus from Japanese. In 1916, he named Pediculus humanus chinensis from Chinese and added, also, the supposed species Pediculus friedenthali and Pediculus oblongus, both from gibbons, and the species Pediculus lobatus from a New World monkey of the genus Ateles. The name oblongus being preoccupied, he later altered it to assimilis. During the first World War the recognition of the importance of the lice as the carriers of disease, most importantly typhus, led to a very' large a- mount of study of them. Professor 6. H. F. Nuttall gathered a large amount of material from various parts of the world and various races of man and came to the conclusion that the lice of man constitute at the most two un- stable races of a single species. Work done by Bacot seemed to show that the head louse can be converted into the body louse experimentally, although he did not demonstrate the converse of this. His experiments are open to question in regard to the material that he employed, but he at least demon- strated that the two forms will interbreed successfully. Nuttall concluded that all records up to that time of supposedly distinct species of Pedicul us on New World monkeys referred also to humanus, although this conclusion can not now be supported. He vigorously— and from the point of view here held quite justifiably— criticized the work of Fahrenholz, although in some re¬ spects his conclusions were erroneous. Freund, ina series of papers (1924, 1925, 1927) maintained the distinct¬ ness of head and body lice as species. In 1926, Ewing accepted the opinion that head and body lice of Europeans constitute a single species, but clung to the opinion that they represent subspecies. Although he was unable to accept Fahrenholz' assignment of three forms to Japanese and Chinese, he assumed to recognize one^of these forms and also accepted the Pediculus nigritarum of Fabricius for lice from Negroes. He then, for his own part, added a supposed subspecies, Pediculus humanus americanus, for lice from American Indians. In addition, he named two supposedly new species for lice from New World monkeys and accepted two already established names. ^ The result of alJ this naming stood at this time at about twelve names tor the lice of man himself, two names for lice from gibbons, two names for Lice of the chimpanzee— which are discussed elsewhere— and seven names for theT in*?* new W°rid monkeys> whic6 "ill 6e discussed elsewhere. In 1935, Perris reported upon his studies upon the large collection of lice assembled by Professor Nuttall and material accumulated from other sources. He was able to examine types or other authentic specimens of the forms named by Fahrenholz and the type of Pediculus humanus americanus, named by Ewing, as well as the solo remaining specimen from the type lot of Piaget's Pedlcu l us consobr intis. It muy as well be frankly stated that his conclusions were to a consid¬ erable degree influenced by disgust at what he had seen in the course of this work and revolt against the methods that had been employed in the sys- tematics of this group. It was clear that some forms had been named solely upon differences in the method of preparation of specimens, upon supposed differences of the utmost triviality which had not been checked against a series oi specimens to determine normal variation, and upon a philosophy of taxonomy which apparently adopted the concept that a species "is a specimen which looks different from other specimens." It is entirely possible that iu this revolt against such methods he may himself have gone too fax and in his turn made errors that arose from too great conservatism, but he still holds that the revolt was sound in principle. In 1936, Ewing, in a paper dealing specifically with the lice of New World monkeys, expounded the view that Piaget must have had two species in his material of Pedlculus consobrinus, one from monkeys and one from man. He recognized, however, that in selecting the sole remaining specimen from the Piaget collection as type Perris had relegated this species to synonymy with Pediculus humanus. In addition he named a new species, Pedlculus pseudohumanus , which, while based upon lice from monkeys, also included specimens from American Indians. It will be discussed especially in con¬ nection with the lice of the Cebidae. This, then, iu brief is how the matter of the lice of the genus Pedlculus occurring on man stands at the present moment. The Problem of the PED1CULI of Man This problem has been recognized and argued about for nearly a hundred and fifty years, with still no satisfactory solution. Ferris (1935) has presented the story in detail up to that date and it will here merely be abstracted. As early as 1761, Linnaeus, in his "Fauna Suecica," recognized the exis¬ tence of two forms of Pediculus on man, these being the head louse and the body louse. In 1878, de Geer applied names to these forms, calling them respectively Pediculus hrnanus capitis and Pediculus humanus corporis. Un¬ der our now accepted rules of nomenclature one of these forms should have been called Pediculus humanus humanus. Tracing the matter out it appears that the first restriction, at least by implication, was by Latreille about 1805, in such a manner that the name Pediculus humanus humanus should be applied to the body louse and humanus capitis he used for the head louse, if the two forms are considered sufficiently distinct to be worthy of sci¬ entific names. Since our present rules of nomenclature were not well developed and not widely followed until almost 1900, other names came to be applied to these lice/ Thus, the names vestimenti, cervlcalis, and tabescentium , as well as both capitis and corporis were variously employed and the name vestimenti especially was much used for the body louse. Also, the idea developed that the head louse and the body louse constitute two distinct species and it was not until 1911 that this idea was challenged by Neumann. Since that time it has been both supported and attacked. Fahrenholz and Freund espec¬ ially have supported the idea that two species are involved, while Nuttall and Ferris have maintained the opposing point of view. It should here be emphasized that at the bottom of this difference of opinion lies the funda¬ mental question of "what do we mean by species?" So important is that question that a brief discussion of it and of the writer's point ol view will be presented somewhat farther along. Concurrently with the idea that two species are involved has gone also 269 the idea that different forms occur on the different races of man. As early as 1805, Fabricius named a Pediculus ni£ritarum from Negroes and in 1816 von Olfers named a Pediculus nigrescens from the same source. In 1912, Fahrenholz not only maintained the distinctness of head and body lice as species, but apparently set out to provide every race of man with its own "variety" of each of these species and this was added to by Ewing, who as late as 1936 named Pediculus humanus americanus from American Indians. Now, in the light of the evidence afforded by some other quite clear ex¬ amples of the occurrence of two or more species of lice of the same genus on hosts of the same species, the possibility must be admitted that we may have to do with a similar situation in connection with the Pediculi of man. Thus, leaving out of consideration the extraordinary' situation connected with the biting lice oi the Order Hyracoidea, it appears that something of this sort occurs in the sucking lice of the Hyracoidea. Three clearly dis¬ tinct species of the same genus of Anoplura occur on domestic sheep. Two clearly distinct species of the same genus occur on rodents of the genus Thryonomys . Apparently' two quite distinct species of Haematopinus occur on zebras. So in the light of these considerations there is no a priori reason to assume that a parallel situation could not occur in the case of the lice of man. The question is merely as to whether or not it does. It is a risky business for an entomologist to become involved in anthro¬ pology without any personal basis of knowledge and in the face of the very considerable differences of opinion which exist among anthropologists. However, there are certain ideas which seem rather widely to be accepted. Thus it appears rather generally agreed that present-day Homo sapiens falls into three broad groups which seem to be subspecies as that term is general¬ ly understood by mammalogists. Furthermore, it is to be recalled that up to a relatively few thousand years ago there existed what is generally consid¬ ered to have been a distinct species of man, Homo neanderthalensis — if one can untangle the weird nomenclatorial practices of the anthropologists— who must certainly' have had contact with Homo sapiens and whose females may very well have furnished sport and variety for the males of a conquering race. Somewhat parallel situations are not unknown today. It must also be recalled that there is evidence of other ancient forms of man regarded by some anthropologists as distinct species, which doubtless were to°some de¬ gree contemporaneous with the ancestors of the living subspecies. In fact, it appears that these three existing groups or subspecies, which display' an apparently unlimited capacity for exchanging genes with unimpaired fertility to unnumbered generations, offer one of the best ex¬ amples of the biological meaning of the word "species." Relatively pure representatives ot each of these groups exist and if considered bv systema— tists working from a few preserved specimens would almost inevitably be re¬ garded as belonging to distinct species. But there exist in the total pop¬ ulation of man every conceivable degree of variation and every conceivable combination of the characters that mark these races as they presumably were constituted in their original state of nature. Thus man, as he exists today, is a species within the formula which seems best to express the biological concept of that term as used in zool- ogyr . That formula, as the writer has attempted to express it after a care¬ ful weighing of every word is this: A species is a population, the members of which are parts of' a continu¬ ously interlinked genetic complex, which is separated from other such com¬ plexes by barriers or incompatibilities of genetic origin and which under natural conditions, that is, the conditions which have been concerned with evolution, maintains itself from its own genetic resources. An enormous experiment lias been going on for many thousands of years, in which man has been the experimental animal. In the course of that experi¬ ment we may assume that certain mutants appeared from an original common 270 stock. These mutants became geographically localized and distributed as subspecies and minor groupings within the population of man. Certain of these minor genetic groups, being perhaps more aggressive than others, spread from their original centers, and since no genetic bar¬ riers existed betweeu them and the groups which they overcame or with which they mingled, hybridization resulted and finally we have a world population in which all the mutations are mingled in every combination and to such a degree that the population as a whole is continuously genetically inter¬ linked. Nor do the hybrid offspring have to be renewed by continued hy¬ bridization in order to maintain themselves. In contrast to this we may cite the case of the domestic mule, which must continually be re-established by renewed crossings and which otherwise cannot maintain itself. This would seem to be a reasonably objective statement of the conditions which exist in the human population of the earth and of the basis for con¬ sidering man to constitute a single species. Now it would seem probable that something of this sort may very well have happened in connection with the Pediculi which have been the constant companions of man and which have accompanied him in his original process of diverging into subspecies and his later reunification by hybridization. These Pediculi may very well have begun to develop into genetically dif¬ ferentiated forms upon the various species of man, for the past existence of which there is evidence, and the various subspecies that still exist. But as their hosts have intermingled with each other the opportunity for the intermingling of the parasites also has occurred. Thus we would arrive at a condition among the parasites which may rather closely parallel the condition found among their hosts. A population has resulted which con¬ forms to the same formula as does the host population. Here and there rel¬ atively pure populations of the parasites may exist. It is conceivable that certain forms may have inherited physiological as well as morphological differences which would lead to some degree of segregation in the hybrids in accord with the degree of inheritance of these physiological character¬ istics. But the population as a whole presents a picture which closely parallels that presented by man himself. It is the writer's belief, based upon an examination of many specimens of lice from different races of man and from various parts of the world, that the situation above described is that which actually exists in the population of Pediculus on man. Material at hand from Negroes in Africa and South America would offer to a systematist working merely from a few specimens a real basis for the be¬ lief that a distinct species of Pediculus occurs on Negroes. Ten specimens of this form compared with ten specimens of the characteristic "body louse" of Europeans would almost inevitably lead to such a conclusion. These lice from Negroes are very darkly pigmented, their bodies are very compact, their length is scarcely more than one-half the length of the European body lice. However, other specimens present in a lot from Negroes in Africa show every degree of gradation into normal head lice of Europeans. And so with a comparison between normal "head lice" and normal "body lice" of Europeans. The body louse, in its most characteristic lorm, is much larger than the typical head louse, is paler in color and differs mor¬ phologically in the fact that the parater^al plates of the abdomen do not extend around the apex ot their abdominal lobes into the intersegmental notch as is the case with the paratergal plates of typical head lice. But every degree of variation among these forms exists. There have been available a wide range of specimens from Europeans, Eskimos, Hindus, Arabs, Negroes, .American Indians, Chinese, and so on. From the point of view here adopted these constitute a single species, within the definition oi the term explained above. There remains the questions involved with the nomenclatorial procedure 271 which should be followed in dealing with this material. Within this material certain rather well-marked forms can be recognized and certainly some basis exists for the recognition of two or more groups that might be called subspecies, within the meaning of that term as em¬ ployed by those who accept it on a biological basis. Actually, however, onl;y a certain portion ot this material will fall within these subspecies. The remainder consists of variants from the typical forms in such combina¬ tions that nothing more can be said of them than that they are Pediculus humanus. Under these conditions and until the whole problem can be submitted to examination by experimentation the opinion is here held that nothin* what¬ soever is to be gained by naming a series of "varieties" or subspecies. In fact, if this process is once started and carried to its logical conclusion the number of named forms could be extended indefinitely. “ For example, a lot is at hand from natives of Rennell Island, one of the Solomon Islands group, that could certainly be named as a new species if we were to employ criteria of the order of those used by Fahrenholz and Ewing. And when we have carried this process of naming to its ultimate limits, what have we gained? Nothing more than a series of names of forms which can be recog¬ nized only if a perfectly typical example is at hand, which will be rela¬ tively seldom. When the needed experimental work has been done it may prove that some definite nomenclature can be supported, but there seems to be no justification for complicating the nomenclatorial situation in ad¬ vance of such work. The employment of the name Pediculus humanus Linnaeus to cover this pop¬ ulation as a whole, with the addition of the vernacular names head louse and body louse for those forms when the occasion demands, would seem ade¬ quately to take care of the situation as it exists at present. Review of the Purported Species of PEDICULUS from Gibbons In the bibliography of Pediculus humanus there are included two names which have been given to lice reputed to have been taken from gibbons, which are Primates of the genus Hylobates. The two purported species are Pediculus assimilis Fahrenholz and Pediculus friedenthali Fahrenholz. The writer has earlier seen specimens of the first-named of these, "deter¬ mined by Fahrenholz, which came from Hylobates syndactylus in the Zoological Garden at Berlin, but has not seen specimens of the second, which was de¬ scribed as from Hylobates miilleri without indication of locality. The examination of specimens of assimilis and the description of frieden¬ thali indicate no reason whatsoever for the recognition of these species as distinct from Pediculus humanus. Review of the Purported Species of PEDICULUS from New World Monkeys As will appear from the following discussion the question of the name to be used for the characteristic louse of the New World monkeys, which belong to the family Cebidae, is much confused. In the opinion here held there is but one species, apart from the at present very dubious question of Pediculus humanus Ewing, but if this be true what shall this species be called/ Actually, not until the matter has been subjected to an extended inves¬ tigation involving an examination of a large mass of material, including the types— such as still exist — and an experimental genetic study of all the forms involved, will it be possible to arrive at absolution that may be generally satisfactory. J Leaving aside the name quadrumanus, for which no evidence of any sort is— or is likely to become— available, the first possible name is Pediculus mjobergi Ferris. But this is clouded by the deficiency of the original de¬ scription and b} the tact that the type — the whereabouts of which is un¬ known has not been re-examined. The ntuue lobatus Fahrenholz is entirely unclouded, although the type is probably not now in existence. Pending the tinul stud} which must be made, the writer is inclined to re¬ tain the use of the name Pedtculus mjobergi Ferris pending a final settlement. Realizing fully that the questions concerning the species of lice on the New World monkeys involve many differences of opinion and that future wor¬ kers may decide that certain of the purported species are valid, the fol¬ lowing review lists these names and their bibliographies separately in or¬ der to minimize future confusion as far as may be. Pediculus atelophilus Ewing 1926. Pediculus ( Parapediculus) atelophilus Ewing, Proceedings of the United States National Museum 68:19:9; figures 4A, 6- 1931- Pediculus ( Parapediculus ) atelophilus Ewin % Hinman, Parasitology 23: 488. 1935- Pediculus mjdbergi Ferris, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 8:688; figures 318E, 319E, 322F, 3231, 328-332. 1938. Pediculus atelophilus Ewing, Ewing, The Journal of Parasitology 24: 26; figures 2, 6b, 6b. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. The type of this species was recorded as from Ateles geoffroyi with unspecified type locality. Recorded at the same time from skins of the same host taken in Costa Rica. Recorded by Ewing in 1938 from Ateles pan from Guatemala; from Ateles dar iensis from Panama; from Ateles hybridus from the National Zoological Park at Washington, D. C. There is at hand a considerable amount of material undoubtedly referable to this name, including specimens from the material recorded by Hinman out of a lot identified by Ewing from Ateles geoffroyi in captivity and others from this host in Panama; numerous specimens from Ateles dariensis, Cebus capuchinus, and Alouatta palliata, all from Panama from monkeys in captiv¬ ity; "ring-tailed monkey" from the Bronx Zoological Park in New York. NOTES. No basis appears in all this material for the recognition of more than one species. It is here held that all these specimens are cov¬ ered by Pediculus lobatus Fahrenholz. Pediculus chapin'i Ewing 1926. Pediculus ( Parapediculus ) chapini Ewing, Proceedings of the United States National Museum 68:19:13; figs. 2, 4b, 6; Plate 1, figs. 3 -4. 1935* Pediculus mjobergi Ferris, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 8:588. 1938. Pediculus chapini Ewing, Ewing, The Journal of Parasitology 24:23; figures 4a, 5c, 6c. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. The types were recorded as from Ateles ater from the National Zoological Park at Washington. Specimens considered by Ewing to be stragglers were later recorded by him (1938) from Ateles geof¬ froyi from the same place and from Cebus capuchinus from Panama. NOTES. Unfortunately the only specimens at hand from the type host of this supposed species are immature. In the absence of authentic specimens it is not possible to assert that this species is identical with any other, although in the opinion here held it is the same as atelophilus. Pediculus lobatus Fahrenholz 1916. Pediculus lobatus Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte , Abteilung 273 A, 81:11:16; Plate, figures 6, 7. (August) 1926. Pedi cuius ( Parapediculus) lobatus Fahrenholz, Ewing, Proceedings of the United States National Museum 68:19:8; Plate 2, figure 5.1" 1935- Pediculus mjbbergi Ferris, Ferris, Contributions Toward °a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 8:588. 1938. Pediculus lobatus Fahrenholz, Ewing, The Journal of Parasitology 24: 29; Plate 2, figure 5- HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded by Fahrenholz from Ateles rellerosus from the Berlin Zoological Gardens. Ewing (1938) identified with this specimens from Ateles paniscus from the National Zoological Park at Washing¬ ton and recorded specimens which he considered to be stragglers from Leon- tocebus nigricollis at the same institution. NOTES. The original description of this species is composed chiefly of useless detail which aids not at all in recognizing the species and the ac¬ companying photographic illustrations do nothing more than indicate from the form that the species is probably of the type of those known from New World monkeys. Actually, comparing the illustration of the male given by Fahrenholz with that given by Mjoberg for his Pediculus af finis {-mjobergi) there is no more basis for the identification of a species on the basis of one of these illustrations than of assuming it to represent some other species. Pediculus mjobergi Ferris 1910. Pediculus af finis Mjoberg, Arkiv for Zoologi 6:169, 258; text fig¬ ures 85, 151 ; Plate 5, figure 8. (Preoccupied) 1916. Pediculus mjobergi Terris, Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences (Series 4) 6:136. (May) 1935* Pediculus mjobergi Ferris, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 8:588. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. The types were recorded from Ateles sp. in a traveling menagerie. This constitutes the only positive record of the species. NOTES. The name mjobergi vtas proposed by Ferris to replace af finis of Mjoberg which was preoccupied by an earlier Pediculus 'af finis. A question might arise as to the priority of mjobergi and lobatus, both of which were established in 1916. In 1913> Fahrenholz used the name lobatus without any accompanying description and the name was not nomenclatorially established until August, 1916. Unfortunately, the name mjobergi was established by publication in May, 1916, to replace the preoccupied name af finis of Mjoberg and therefore has priority in case any question arises in the future con¬ cerning these names. If it be concluded that the lice of the New World monkeys represent but a single species it apparently should be called by the name mjobergi. Ewing (1936) has put forward the thesis that MjSberg's description indi¬ cates his specimens to have been Pediculus humanus . Actually, Mjobercr's * pp0ns remained a nomen nudum until 1916. The present writer has examined the types of lobatus and illustrated them (19*1*1). This species is here held to be distinct from humanus on good mor¬ phological grounds. The illustration given by Ferris was based upon the uncleared type specimen and represents that particular specimen as well as possi ble. In 1926, Freund recorded specimens from A tele s ater from the Leipzig Zoological Garden and employed for them the name Pedlculus capitis forma atelis. This is unrecognizable from the description. In 1926, Ewing presented an extensive paper on the New World lice of the genus Pedlculus (Proceedings of the United States National Museum 68, Ar¬ ticle 19) in which he presumed to recognize Pedlculus consobr tnus Piaget and Pediculus lobatus Fahrenholz and named two new species, Pedlculus atelophilus and Pediculus chapini from New World monkeys. In 1935, Ferris (Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 8) reviewed the whole question of the species of Pediculus and came to the conclusion that there is but one valid species on the family Cebidae — exclusive of occasional occurrences of what seems definitely to be Pediculus humanus. For this species he employed the name Pediculus mjdberfi Ferris. Iu 1938, Ewing (The Journal of Parasitology 24:13- 33; figures 1-6) pre¬ sented another paper on the lice of the New World monkeys, maintained the validity of the two species previously described by him and named another, Pedlculus pseudo humanus. A considerable amount of material has been available in connection with the present work and on the basis of this material the writer still main¬ tains the opinion that — apart from Pediculus humanus, which apparently can transfer to and survive upon members of the Cebidae, and Pediculus pseudo- humanus — there is but one actual species which seems to be normal to the New World monkeys of the family Cebidae. That species seems to be distinct from Pediculus humanus. Pediculus sch&ffi Fahrenholz Figure 121 1910. Pediculus schdffi Fahrenholz, Jahresbericht des Niedersachsischen zoologischen Yereins zu Hannover 1:57; Plate 1, figures 1-3; Plate 3, figures 1, 2, 4. 5; Plate 4, figures 2, 6. 1915* Pediculus schdffi Fahrenholz, Fahrenholz, Archiv fur Naturgeschichte, Abteilung A, 81:11:1. 1919. Pediculus humanus race schdffi Fahrenholz, Nuttall, Parasitology 11: 336. 1932. Pediculus (Paenipediculus) s imiae Ewing, Proceedings of the Biologi¬ cal Society of Washington 45:117. 1933- Pediculus (Paenipediculus) simiae Ewing, Ewing, Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 46:168; figure 2c. 1935- Pediculus schdffi Fahrenholz, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Mono¬ graph of the Sucking Lice, Part 8:599; figures 322H, 333> 334 - H0ST5 AND DISTRIBUTION. Recorded by Fahrenholz from chimpanzee, Pan (= Simla) troilodptes from the Zoological Gardens in Hamburg, and by Ewing from the same host from the London Zoological Gardens. NOTES. The accompanying illustrations, which are those given by Ferris in 1935, were made from specimens which are apparently a part of the same lot on which Ewing based his name simiae. The type of schdffi was not seen by Ferris, but the description is suf¬ ficient to indicate clearly that only one species is involved. Ewing has based the subgenus Paenipediculus upon this species. This is not here accepted. 277 Pediculus schaffi Fahrenholz Figure 121 278 Suggestions for Future Research In tiie species of Perlicul us occurring on man and on the New World monkeys ot tiie tamily Cebidae there appear a number of problems which should be ap¬ proached t rum a biological point ot view and submitted to examination by the methods ot experimental biolo^. It is evident that no solution can be achieved merely by the contemplation of preserved specimens. First of all there is the problem of the lice of man himself. While this has been submitted to a certain amount ot experimental investigation those experiments are not entirely free from criticism and they are not sufficiently extensive to permit definite biological conclusions. Thus the experiments of Bacot seemed to show that it is possible to convert the head lice of man into forms having the appearance of body lice, but the converse of this experiment was not described. The experiments of Bacot showed a complete hybridization of what he considered to be head lice with what he considered to be body lice. But in the offspring of these hybridizations there appeared a large number of abnormalities that have been considered by Keilin and Nuttall (Parasitology 11:279-328; text figures 1-26; Plates 12- 17. 1919). Some occurrence of abnormalities seems to appear in "wild" pop¬ ulations, but that shown in this material is relatively large. Certain of the abnormalities are perhaps genetic. The suspicion occurs that these ab¬ normalities may have in part resulted from the hybridization of genetically disharmonious individuals. Also, as the work was done in Egypt there is a suggestion that perhaps the supposed head louse employed represented a strain that is possibly farther removed from typical humanus than are typi¬ cal head and body lice from each other. Attention has been called to the existence on African Negroes of a form which is so different from the typi¬ cal head lice of Europeans that if specimens of both extremes were placed side by side the conclusion would almost inevitably be reached that we are dealing with different species. It is conceivable that Bacot had this ex¬ treme form actually in his possession and that the experiments on hybridi¬ zation were in part based upon it. If so, these abnormalities might be ex¬ plained on this basis. Nuttall records experiments (Parasitology 11:345. 1919) which led him to the conclusion that the two supposed subspecies, capitis and corporis, rep¬ resent merely two unstable races of a single species. He indicates that the head louse can be converted into the body louse by environmental condi¬ tions. But it remains to be shown that the changes of color and size re¬ corded by him also extend to the apparent differences in structure which are revealed by typical specimens of either race. So it appears that this experimental work should be done again, with proper precautions as to the status of all the material employed and proper attention to all changes that might be ascribed to changes in environment and proper consideration of all genetic factors that might be involved. But this problem of the lice occurring normally on man is by no means all of the problem. There remains that of the lice of the Cebidae. The Cebidae are supposed to be rather far removed from the remainder of the Primates. Simpson (The Principles of Classification and a Classifica¬ tion of the Mammals, "Bulletin of the .American Museum of Natural History," Volume 85, 1945) divides the Primates into three superfamilies — Ceboidea, Cercopithecoidea, and Hominoidea. There occurs on the Cercopithecoidea a group of lice, the genus Pedicinus, which is far removed from the lice of the Hominoidea. Why is it that the lice of the Ceboidea seem to be so closely related to those of the Hominoidea that they belong in the same '■enus? The Ceboidea are considered to be connected with the remainder of the Primates only at the base of the stem of the Order. Is it to be sug¬ gested that the members of the Ceboidea have retained the genus Pediculus from the time when the various stocks diverged, or is it to be supposed 279 that they have received them from man in the time that man has been in the New World? How close are they genetically to the lice of man? And yet it is supposed that the lice of the Cehidae are sufficiently plastic in an evolutionary sense, to have formed at least four species, al¬ though at the best the characters assigned to those species are extremely unconvincing. What are the genetic relationships of these supposed species to each other? It certainly appears on morphological grounds that the New World monkeys have upon them a species that can he easily distinguished from the lice of man, but even this is somewhat clouded. And, to add the last hit to this tantalizing problem, what is the situa¬ tion in regard to the supposed Pediculus subhumanusl Here is a form that is supposed to occur both on New World monkeys and upon man. More than that, it occurs not only upon man in the region where these monkeys occur naturally but what is apparently the same form occurs on man in the far distant South Sea Islands? What are the genetic relationships of the lice oi this form in the New World to those on man in the New World and to those of the South Pacific? These are problems for which the solution is to be obtained — if at all— by experimental methods. Speculation on the basis of the present known specimens might easily lead the systematist to the endorsement of some idea that this form developed on man and monkeys after man appeared in the New World and then passed to the South Pacific following the migration of man from the New World to that area, supporting the views of the 'author of Ron- Tiki. It is futile to speculate upon such matters when all that is known of the lice is actually but a relatively few specimens. The author holds that this is a problem which is eminently suited to an approach by experimental methods. Should some one gather together at one place representatives of typical head lice and bod} lice of Europeans, typ¬ ical lice from African Negroes, lice of the type of Pediculus pseudohumanus from both man and monkeys from Central America and from the South Seas, and typical lice from a wide assortment of New World monkeys, subjecting them to careful genetic experiments, we might at last put an end to the other- & n concerning thei r relationships to each other. More than that, we might possibly have an answer that would apply to other cases involving parasitic insects and thus to a general biological problem. Until that has been done the problems associated with the genus Pediculus will remain for mere opinion and for speculation. Genus PTHIRUS Leach 1815- Pthirus Leach, Edinburgh Encyclopaedia 9:77. 1817. Pthirus, Leach, Zoological Miscellany 3:365. 1935- Phthirus, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 8:602. GENERIC TYPE. Pediculus pubis Linnaeus. CHARACTERS. Pediculidae with distinctly five-segmented antennae which are not sexually dimorphic. Anterior legs very slender, with slender claw; middle and posterior legs very large and stout, with stout claw; the coxae of all the legs set at the extreme margins of the thorax and thus the mem¬ bers of corresponding pairs set far apart. Thorax very wide, forming the greater part ol the body, without a sternal plate and without a notal pit, the sclerotization of the apparent notum confined to the lateral areas.* Abdomen relatively small., as broad basally as the posterior part of the thorax and tapering somewhat posteriorly, membranous except for the projec¬ ting lateral, segmentaJly arranged tubercles. These lateral tubercles sclerotized and prominent, there being one at the margin on each side of segments 6-8. Spiracles of these sejjments borne slightly removed from the base of tubercles, those of segments 3-4 being crowded close to those of 280 sequent, tour, somewhat displaced toward the median line and being the only cleax- evidence of these segments. The spiracles are of a peculiar fonn, the atrium be in^r much enlarged, conical, with the base of the coue at the inner end, the walls marked by parallel, longitudinal ridges. Female with well-developed gonopods on segment eight and with a very large spennatheca. Male with small, pointed paramei*es which articulate near their apices with a pair ot small sclerotized points; no endomeral plate present and no scle- rotized peuis, the gonopore being surrounded merely by a partially sclero- tized ring. NOTES. This genus was employed by Ewing (1929) as the type of the family Phthiridae, it beiug the only genus of this family. Other woi’kers have rec¬ ognized it as the type of a subfamily, Phthirinae, of the Pediculidae. It is a peculiar form, indeed, yet its relationship seems to be with Pedieulus and to place it in a separate family is to obscure this relationship. Its peculiar position is here recognized to the extent of accepting the subfam¬ ily Pthirinae of the Pediculidae. Pthirus pubis (Linnaeus) Figures 122, 123, 124 1758. Pedtculus pubis Linnaeus, Systema Naturae, Edition X, page 611. 1815* Pthirus inguinal is Leach, Edinburgh Encyclopaedia 9:77- 1816. Pediculus ferus von Oilers, De vegetativis et animatis corporibus in corporibus animatis reperiundis commentarius, page 83- (Definite¬ ly a synonym of pthirus pubis (Linnaeus) 1904. Pthirus pubis (Linnaeus), Enderlein, Zoologischer Anzeiger 28:136; figures 10, 11. 1918. Phthirus pubis (Linnaeus), Nuttall, Parasitology 10:383; figures 1, 3-5, 7-9. 1935- Phthirus pubis (Linnaeus), Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 8:603; figures 335> 336, 337. 1935* Phthirus chavesi Escomel and Velando, Cronicas de Medicina (Lima, Peru) 52:335- 1936. Phthirus pubis (Linnaeus), Bedford, Onderstepoort Journal of Veteri¬ nary Science and Animal Medicine 7: 105- 19 39 - Phthirus pubis (Linnaeus), Buxton, The Louse, page 93; figure 25. HOSTS AND DISTRIBUTION. Occurring on man in many parts of the world. Bedford (1935) has recorded it from a chimpanzee from the French Congo. There have been occasional records of its occurrence on dogs, but no infor¬ mation exists that these are anything more than incidental. NOTES. The original description of Phthirus chavesi Escomel and Velando has not been seen in connection with this work, but the species was recorded as occurring in the eyebrows of man and since this is well known for pubis there is no reason to suppose that any other species was involved. The account by Buxton (1939) sums up what is known concerning the biology of the species. Pthirus gorillae Ewing 1927. Phthirus gorillae Ewing, Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 29 : 120 . 1933. Phthirus gorillae Ewing, Ewing, Proceedings of the Biological Soci¬ ety of Washington 46:170; figures lc, 2b. 1935. Phthirus gorillae Ewing, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 8:608. HOSTS .AND DISTRIBUTION. Described from eggs and first-stage nymphs taken from skins of Gorilla berengeri in the Belgian Congo. NOTES. In the absence of any information other than that given by its 281 Pthirus pubis (Linnaeus) Figure 122 describer, nothing can be said concerning this species other than that it presumably demonstrates the occurrence of a species of Phthirus onagorilla. Unplaced Names Th® following species names have been proposed, but the original descrip¬ tions are unavailable or are so inadequate that the genera to which they be¬ long cannot be determined. Perhaps future workers may be able to clarify them either through the rediscovery of their tj^pes or through circumstan¬ tial evidence. Pediculus aquaticus Pontoppidan 1763. Pediculus aquaticus Pontoppidan, Danske Atlas 1:69Q. The original description of this species has not been available and I know nothing of it except a bibliographic reference by Fahrenholz. Pediculus clavicornis Nitzsch 1864. Pediculus clavicornis Nitzsch, Zeitschrift lur die gesamten Natur- wissenschaften 23:32. 1874. Haematopinus clavicornis (Nitzsch), Giebel, Insecta Epizoa, pa^e 37 Perhaps a species of Hoplopleura, if we may judge by Giebel' s redescrip- tion, which was based upon a single female from Meriones sp., from Africa 282 (UltflllUl male abdomen male yenitalia Pthirus pubis (Linnaeus) .details Figure 123 Pediculus spiculifer Gervais 1844. Pediculus spicultfer Gervaris, In Walckenaer's Histoire naturelle des insectes apteres 3:302. This is apparently a species either of Polyplax or Hoplopleura. It was recorded as from "Hus barbarus" from Algiers. This host is now called Lemniscomy barbarus. Polyplax miacantha Speiser 1905. Polyplax miacantha Speiser, Centralblatt fur Bakteriologie, Originate 38:318- (The figure does not belong with this.) 193?. Polyplax miacantha Speiser, Ferris, Contributions Toward a Monograph of the Sucking Lice, Part 4:237. Recorded as from a small rat with very thick, spine-like hair, from Salomona in Abyssinia, in the collections of the Museum at Konigsberg in Prussia. The original description is entirely inadequate for placing the species even generically, although it is probably either a Polyplax or a Hoplopleura. 283 1st clam Pthirus pubis (Linnaeus), details 2nd or 3rd claw Figure 124 284 ERRATA The following references have been omitted from the preceding text: Haematopinus asini (Linnaeus) 1865. Haematopinus equi Simmonds, Journal of the Royal Agricultural Soci¬ ety of England (2)1:60. 1880. Haematopinus astni, variety colorata Piaget, Les Pediculines, page 654. Schizophthirus pleurophaeus (Burmeister) 1874. Haematopinus leucophaeus Giebel, Insecta Epizoa, page 37. Haemodipsus lyriocephalus (Burmeister) 1864. Pediculus lyriceps Nitzsch, Zeitschrift fur den gesamten Naturwis- senschaften 23:24. 285 CHAPTER VII Host List The preparation of a dependable list of the mammal species from which Anoplura are known is not entirely a simple matter. In the first place, some of the hosts have been recorded merely by their vernacular names and these are not always sufficient to fix the record to a particular animal species. Then there have been a certain number of definite errors by the entomological recorders and there have been errors in the transcription of names from mammal specimens and also in regard to the identifications of mammals from which Anoplura have been taken in zoological gardens where the mammals may have been misid entitled. But the greatest source of difficulty arises Irom the tact that in many instances mammalogists themselves are not or have not been in agreement either as to the nomenclature or even the zoological status of the mammals. Furthermore, there is no one master list of the mammals of the world which we may utilize as a source of reference. The catalogue of the mam¬ mals of the world, which was published many years ago by Trouessart, has long been obsolete and nothing has been published that takes its place. We are therefore compelled to rely upon a series of lists, some regional, some applying only to the mammals of a limited group, and where these lists overlap they are not always in agreement either as to nomenclature or as to i status °f some particular species. Under such circumstances an additional source of error is added, since the compiler of a host list, in pursuing names through these various lists of mammals, may himself go wrong and commit errors o f his own. All this should be understood by future students of the parasites. In preparing the following list the following sources have especially been utilized. First of all appreciation needs to be expressed of the work of Mr. G. H. E. Hopkins, who has published a host list of the Mallophaga and Anoplura of mammals. This was very carefully done and has aided greatly in checking the records of the names which had already independently been arranged in such a list for this work. Hopkins' paper is replete with notes, many of which are beyond the scope of the list here presented. The reference to his work is as follows. HOPKINS, G. H. E. The host association of the lice of mammals "Pro— ^d!nfS -i0£nthe Zool°gical Society of London, " Volume 119, Part 2, pages 387-604, 1949. ^ Fortunately, a large percentage of the known species of the Anoplura occur on rodents and for this group we have available the great work of Ellerman which relatively simplifies the preparation of this portion of the host list. ELLERMAN, J. R. "The Families and Genera of Living Rodents." Tliree vol¬ umes. Published by the British Museum (Natural History) . Volume 1, issued June, 1940; Volume 2, issued March, 1941; Volume 3, issued March, 1949. for the so-called "Ungulates," the only work that the writer has been abfe to find that is at all comprehensive is that of Lydekker, in which although it is scarcely recent, one can at least find the names that have been employed for most of the mammals of this series, very' few havin '- been described since its publication. /.I. 1 1,1 f V II ,1- 13 1 ^ Mamina Ls in the British Museum (NaturaJ History). five volumes. Published by the British Museum (Natur¬ al History). Volume 1, issued 1913; Volumes 2 and 3, issued 1914; Volumes 286 4 and 5> issued 1915* For the Primates the large work of Elliot appears to be the only avail¬ able general reference although the entire group seems still to be in a cout'used condition nomenclatorially . Thus, Simpson (1945, page 181) re¬ marks that "most Primates have alternative names and hardly any two stu¬ dents use the same nomenclature for them." Simpson's work (cited below) has been employed for the names of genera and larger groups and Elliot's for the names of species. ELLIOT, D. G. A review of the Primates. "Monographs of the American Museum of Natural History," Volumes 1-3, 1913. Of regional lists the most useful are the following. The first named of these is especially important because of the large number of mammal species involved. ALUU , G. M. A checklist of African mammals. "Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College," Volume 83, 1939. MILLEK. G. S. "Catalogue of the Mammals of Western Europe (Europe exclu¬ sive of Russia) in the Collections of the British Museum." Published by the British Museum. 1912. MILLER, G. S. List of North American laud mammals in the United States National Museum. "Bulletin of the United States National Museum" 79, 1912. For the higher categories of the mammals the recent work by Simpson is here relied upon. SIMPSON, G. G. The principles of classification and a classification of the mammals. "Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History'" 85, (350 pages) 1945. For a few forms such as the Pinnipedia it has seemed necessary to accept all names as given by the recorders of the lice. Since the hosts of all the comparatively few sucking lice known from South America are, with few exceptions, rodents, they are cared for in the work of Ellerman, as are also the rodents of Asia. The Carnivora, except for the Canidae and the Pinnipedia, have no sucking lice and the few names here needed cause no special difficulty. The Insectivora are cared for chiefly in the list of African mammals given by Allen ahd in various other regional lists. Names of hosts are usually given in the review of species of lice in the text as given by the original recorders of the lice, but the correct names — as far as they can be determined — will be found in the host list. One other source of possible error in this list should be noted. This begins with the collecting of the mammals. The writer has himself partici¬ pated in such field collecting and is familiar with the problem involved. The collector of mammals is likely to obtain a considerable number of spec¬ imens and to pile them up on his work table before preparing the skins. As the animal becomes cold the parasites tend to come out to the ends of the hairs and from that position may cross over to other animals that may¬ be in contact, thus leading to their ascription to the wrong host. Then the dried skins may be packed together in shipment, leading to the possi¬ bility that the dead lice may be shaken from one host to another and this may be followed by other possibilities of accident. Many of the records of lice, especially from the rodents, have been based upon specimens secured by- examination of museum skins. It is there¬ fore probable that at least some of these records are erroneous. Not until repeated collections, or the finding of the parasites on freshly collected animals, have been made can this possibility be eliminated. On the other hand, merely to dismiss any peculiar record immediately as the result of such straggling or contamination is probably also a mistake and is likely to produce a too great assurance that normal transfers never occur. A small proportion of the records of lice from the larger mammals are based upon specimens taken in zoological gardens. Some of these are espe- 287 cially questionable, but they must be accepted until more positive informa¬ tion is available. Considerable thought has been given to the question as to whether or not the host list should include subspecific mammalian names. The decision has been to ignore subspecific names and to present all mammal names under the species names to which the subspecies are to be referred. The reasons for this action are as follows. In the first place, the writer knows of no in¬ stance where the subspecies make any difference in the distribution of the lice, except perhaps in the Hyracoidea. The whole subject of the lice of the Hyracoidea must be subjected to later review on the basis of much more extensive material of the lice than is available to anyone at present. In the second place, a listing of the mammalian subspecies would greatly ex¬ tend the host list, to no special purpose. Mammalogists have been much enamored of the subspecies concept and have employed it to such a degree that in the rodents, for example, most "full species" have at least five supposed subspecies, if not more. Peromyscus maniculatus is credited with forty- five subspecies. Since the Anoplura from Peromyscus seem not even to discriminate among species, it becomes, from the point of view here held, merely pretentious nonsense solemnly to list the parasites according to the subspecies of the host. In the following list the arrangement of the higher categories of the mammals is in accord with that presented by Simpson, but the families, sub¬ families, tribes, and genera are arranged alphabetically under the next higher category. From the writer's point of view nothing is to be gained in such a list by attaching the names of the authors of mammalian names. They are there¬ fore omitted. Class MAMMALIA Subclass IHERIA Infraclass EUTHERIA Order INSECTIVORA Superfamily MACROSCELI DI DAE Family Macroscelididae Elephantulus pulcher and rufescens Neolinognathus praelautus Ferris Elephantulus rupestris Neolinognathus elephantuli Bedford Nasilio brachyrhynchus Neolinognathus elephantuli Bedford Petrodromus tetradactylus Neolinognathus elephantuli Bedford Super family SORI COIDEA Family Soricidae Subfamily Soricinae Sorex araneus Polyplax reclinata (Nitzsch) Subfamily Crocidurinae Crocidura aranea (see Sorex) Crocidura coerulea Polyplax asiatica Ferris Crocidura horsfieldi Ancistroplax crocidurae Waterston Crocidura leucodon Polyplax reclinata (Nitzsch) Pachyura luzonensis Polyplax reclinata (Nitzsch) Scutisorex congicus Polyplax reclinata (Nitzsch) Suncus coeruleus Polyplax reclinata (Nitzsch) Family Talpidae Subfamily Scalopinae Parascalops brewer i Haematopinoides squamosus (Osborn) Scalopus aquaticus Haematopinoides squamosus (Osborn) Order DERMOPTERA Family Qynocepalidae Qynocephalus sp. (-variegatus, ac¬ cording to Hopkins) Hamophthirius galeopitheci Mjoberg Galeo pith ecus sp .=Qynocephalus 288 Order PRIMATES Suborder PKDSIMII 1 Hi niorder LEMUR I FORMES Super family LEMUKOLDEA Family ludridae Prop i the cus diadema Phthirpediculus propitheci Ewing Propithecus edwardsi. diadema Super family TUP AIO IDEA Family Tupaiidae Subfamily Tupaiinae Anathana ellioti Docophthirus acinetus Waterstou Infraorder L0R1S1F0RMES Family Lorisidae Subfamily Galaginae Cheirogaleus sp. Lemurphtbirus verruculosus Ward Galago demidovii Lemurphtbirus galagus Bedford Galago moholi Lemurphthirus galagus Bedford Galagus-misspelling of Galago Mouse lemur (-Cheirogaleus) Suborder ANTHROPOIDEA Superfamily CEBOIDEA Family Cebidae Subfamily Pithecinae Cacajo rubicundus Pediculus subhumanus Ewing Pi thee is monacha Pediculus pseudohumanus Ewing Subfamily Alaouttinae Alouatta palliata Pediculus mjobergi Ferris Subfamily Cebinae Cebus capuchinus Pediculus atelophilus Ewing Pediculus chapini Ewing Subfamily Atelinae Ateles ater Pediculus chapini Ewing Ateles geoffroyi Pediculus atelophilus Ewing Pediculus chapini Ewing Ateles dariensis Pediculus atelophilus Ewing Ateles hybridus Pediculus atelophilus Ewing Ateles pan Pediculus atelophilus Ewing Ateles paniscus Pediculus lobatus Fahrenholz Ateles vellerosus (recorded as rel- lerosus) . This name apparently has been applied to Ateles beelzebul and Ateles pan. Pediculus lobatus Fahrenholz Lagothrix sp. Pediculus pseudohumanus Ewing Subfamily Callithricidae Leontocebus nigricollis Pediculus lobatus Fahrenholz Superfamily CERC0PITHEC01DEA In speaking of this group Simpson (1945, page 185 and following) refers to the "confusion bequeathed to us by swarms of students, of all degrees of competence and shades of judgment," and further remarks "the macaques have been placed in at least twenty-five different genera or subgenera, yet it is the present consensus that all be¬ long to one genus with perhaps three subgenera, requiring a total of three names, only one of generic (and hence also subgeneric) rank." It is hope¬ less for an entomologist to try to untangle all of this. Consequently, records are cited as they were given, with such accompanying notes as are possible. There is always the possi¬ bility that in trying to do even this many new errors have been added. Al¬ so probably many of the host names are misidentifications. Cercopithecus aethiops (synonyms griseoviridis and pygerythraeus) Pedicinus obtusus Cercopithecus albogularis=mitis Cercopithecus cynomolgus-Macaca cynomolgus Cercopithecus diana Pedicinus obtusus Cercopithecus griseoviridis-aethiops Cercopithecus kolbi-mitis Cercopithecus martini-nictitans 289 Cercopithecus mona Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Pedicinus eurygaster (Burmeister) Cercopithecus mitis Pedicinus patas (Fahrenholz) Cercopithecus patas- Erythrocebus patas Cercopithecus pruinosus, apparently -Pygathrix cristata Cere o p i th ec us py ge ry thr aeus-ae th i ops Comop ithecus hamadryas Pedicinus hamadryas MjOberg Qynocephalus-Papio Cynomolgus-Macaca Erythrocebus patas Pedicinus patas (Fahrenholz) Erythrocebus whitei Pedicinus patas (Fahrenholz) Guenon. Perhaps an Erythrocebus Hamadryas, as a generic name this ap¬ pears to =Comopithecus Innuus nemestrinus=Macaca nemestrina Innuus sinicus=Macaca sinica Lasiopyga*=Cercopithecus, under which genus all names are listed. Macaca. Frequently spelled Macacus. Includes Silenus and Rhesus. Macaca adusta Pedicinus eurygaster (Burmeister) Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Macaca albibarbata Pedicinus eurygaster (Burmeister) Macaca andamensis Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Macaca arctoides-speciosa Macaca cynomolga. Probably -Macaca fascicularis, although according to Elliot the name was long mis¬ applied to Macaca ira. Macaca ery thraea-rhesa Macaca fascicularis, possibly', for records under the name Macacus cynomolgus. Pedicinus eurygaster (Burmeister) Macaca innuus, most probably Macaca sylvana. Macaca ira, possibly for records under Macacus cynomolgus. Pedicinus eurygaster (Burmeister) Macaca mindanensi-philippinensis Macaca mindora Pedicinus eurygaster (Burmeister) Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Macaca nemestrina, recorded as Innuus nemestrinus Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Macaca philippinensis Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Macaca rhesa Pedicinus eurygaster (Burmeister) Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Macaca silena. Apparently -Macaca albibarbata. Macaca sinica Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Macaca speciosa Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Macaca sylvana Pedicinus albidus (Rudow) Papio. Includes Qynocephalus. Papio sp. Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Papio griseipes Pedicinus hamadryas Mjoberg Pithecus-Macaca ; all names attributed to it will be found under the lat¬ ter, except as listed. Pithecus patas. Is probably Erythro¬ cebus patas. Simia sylvanus-Macaca sylvana Subfamily Colobinae Colobus cauda tus- Colo bus polykomos Colobus polykomos Pedicinus pictus Ferris Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Nasalis larvalis, error for larvatus. Nasalis larvatus Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Presbytis. Includes all records un¬ der Semnop ithecus Presbytis cristata Pedicinus ancoratus Ferris Presbytis entellus Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Presbytis germaini Pedicinus ancoratus Ferris Presbytis pullata. Regarded by Elliot as a subspecies of cristata Presbytis rubicunda Pedicinus ancoratus Ferris Presbytis sanctorum Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Presbytis schistaceus Pedicinus ancoratus Ferris Pygathrix aurata Pedicinus obtusus (Rudow) Pygathrix priamus Pedicinus ancoratus Ferris Rhinopithecus concolor. Presumably is Simias concolor. Simias concolor Pedicinus eurygaster (Burmeister) Semnopithecus entellus. Here placed as =Presbytis entellus. 290 Semuopithecus inaurus. Apparently Ochotona danurica -Presby tis aumta. Hoplopleura ochotonae Ferris Semuopithecus pruinosus. Here placed Ochotona roylei as -Presby tis cristatus. Hoplopleura ochotonae Ferris Ochotona thibetana Super tamily H0M1N0IDEA Hoplopleura ochotonae Ferris Family Pongidae Subfamily Hylobatinae Order R0DENT1A Hylobates syndactylus Pediculus humanus Linnaeus Symphalanges syndacty lus=Hy lotates syndactylus Subfamily Ponginae Gorilla berengeri Phthirus gorillae Ewing Pan sp. Pediculus sch&ffi Fahrenholz Phthirus pubis (Linnaeus) Family Hominidae Homo sapiens Pediculus humanus Linnaeus Pediculus subhumanus Ewing Phthirus pubis (Linnaeus) Cohort GL1RES Order LAGOMORPHA Family Leporidae Lepus arcticus Haemodipsus lyriocephalus (Bur- meister) Haemodipsus setoni Ewing Lepus cal i torn icus Haemodipsus setoni Ewing Lepus europaeus Haemodipsus lyriocephalus (Bur- meister) Lepus glacialis-arcticus Lepus saxatilis Haemodipsus africanus Bedford Lepus townsendi Haemodipsus setoni Ewing Lepus zuluensis=saxatilis Oryctolagus cuniculus Haemodipsus ventricosus (Denny) Rabbit, domestic Haemodipsus ventricosus (Denny) Sylvilagus sp. Haemodipsus setoni Ewing Family Ochotonidae Ochotona cansus- thibetana The arrangement here followed is strictly according to El ierman, except that his ending oldae for the super- family is altered to ouiea in accord with more generally accepted pi'actice and families are arranged alphabeti¬ cally under super lami 1 i es, subfam¬ ilies alphabetically under families, and genera alphabetically under suit- families. Superfamily BATHYERG01DEA Family Bathyergidae Bathyergus maritimus Eulinognathus lawrensis (Bedford) Geo rhyc hus hotten Lotus- Cry p tomy s hottentotus Cryptomys hottentotus Eulinognathus hiili (Bedford) Super family HYSTK1C0IDEA Family Chinchillidae Lagidium inca-peruanum Lagidium peruanum Lagidiophthirus parvus (Kellogg and Ferris) Family Echimyidae Subfamily Abrocominae Abrocoma cinearea Neohaematopinus longus Wemeck Subfamily Echimyinae Cercomys cunicularius Ctenophthirus cercomydis Ferris Cercomys sosteri-cunicularius Proechimys cayennensis Pterophthirus audax (Ferris) Proechimys oris=cayennensis Proechimys semispinosus-cayennensis Subfamily Octodontinae Ctenomys b nasi liens is Eulinognathus americanus Ewing 291 Ctenomys sericeus Eulinognathus americanus Ewing Octodontomys gliroides Hoplopieura disgrega Ferris Octodontomys simonsi-gliroides Subfamily Petromyinae Petromus typicus Scipio tripedata Ferris Petromys-Petromus Subfamily Thryonomyinae Aulacodus-Thryonomys Tbryonomys aulacodus-swinderianus Thryonomys gregor=gregorianus Thryonomys gregorianus Scipio longiceps Ewing Proend erleinellus calva (Waterston) Thryononys swinderianus Scipio aulacodi (Neumann) Scipio breviceps Ferris Superfamily CAVIODEA Family Caviidae Cavia apearea Pterophthirus imitans Werneck Caviella australis Pterophthirus alatus (Ferris) Galea leucoblephara=musteloides Galea musteloides Galeophthirus caviae (Werneck) Kerodon australis apparently- Caviella australis Superfamily SCIUROIDEA Family Sciuridae Ellerman recognizes no subfamilies in this family^, but employs the terms "group" and "section. " These are here arranged alphabetically. Pteromys group Glaucomys sabrinus Hoplopieura trispinosa Kellogg and Ferris Microphthirus uncinatus (Ferris) Neohaematopinus sciuropteri (Osborn) Glaucomys volans Hoplopieura trispinosa Kello^ and Ferris Neohaematopinus sciuropteri (Osborn) Petaurista batuana-petaurista Petaurista inornata Neohaematopinus petauristae Ferris Petaurista petaurista Neohaematopinus batuanae Ferris Pteromys volans Enderleinellus replicatus Redikorzey Sc iur op terns -Pteromys in part and Glaucomys in part. Sciurus group Lariscus section Lariscus diversus=insignis Lariscus insignis Enderleinellus larisci Ferris Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjdberg) Lariscus obscurus- insignis Menetes berdmorei Enderleinellus menetensis Ferris Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjdberg) Marmota section Ammo sp ermo ph i lus sp . Neohaematopinus patiki Rubin Callospermophilus-Citellus Cite llus adocetus Neohaematopinus traubi Rubin Citellus barrowensis=parryi Citellus beecheyi Enderleinellus osborni (Kellogg and Ferris) Neohaematopinus laeviusculus (Grube) Citellus beldingi Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn) Neohaematopinus laeviusculus ( Grube) Citellus buckleyi-variegata Citellus buxtoni-eversmanni Citellus castanurus- lateral is Citellus chrysodeirus-lateralis Citellus columbianus Neohaematopinus laeviusculi (Grube) Citellus dauricus Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn) Citellus douglasii-beecheyi Citellus elegans-richardsoni Citellus eversmanni Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn) Neohaematopinus laeviusculus (Grube) 292 Cite 11 us trank 1 ini i Enderleinellus sutumlis (Osboni) Neohaematop inus laeviusculus (Grube) Citellus liarrisi Neohaematopinus citeilinus Ferris Citellus grummurus*variegatus Citellus lateralis Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn) Neohaematop inus laeviusculus (Grube) Citellus leptodactylus, belongs to Spermophilopsis Citellus madrensis Enderleinellus occideutalis Rellogg and Ferris Citellus mexicanus Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn) Citellus mol lis= towns end i Citellus mongolicus-dauricus Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn) Citellus nelsoni Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn) Citellus oregonus^beldingi Citellus osgoodi Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn) Neohaematop inus laeviusculus (Grube) Citellus parry i Neohaematopinus laeviusculus (Grube) Citellus plesius=parryi Citellus richardsoni Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn) Neohaematopinus laeviusculus (Grube) Citellus rufescens Neohaematopinus laeviusculus (Grube) Citellus spilosoma Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn) Neohaematopinus citeilinus Ferris Neohaematopinus laeviusculus (Grube) Neohaematopinus marmotae Ferris Citellus tereticaudus Enderleinellus osborni Rellogg and Ferris Neohaematopinus citeilinus Ferris Citellus towns end i Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn) Citellus tridecemlineatus Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn) Neohaematopinus laeviusculus (Grube) Citellus variegatus Enderleinellus osborni Rellogg and Ferris Neohaeina top inus m&thesoni Kubiu Qynomys guunisoni Enderleinellus suturalis (Osborn) Qyuoiqys leucurus Enderleinellus sutumlis (Osboni) Neohaematopinus laeviusculus (Grube) Qynomys lucovicianus Neohaematopinus marmotae Perris Marmota aurea 7 Neohaematop in us marmotae Ferris Marmota flaviventer=flaviventris Maniiota llaviventris Neohaematopinus marmotae Ferris Manuota monax Enderleinellus marmotae Ferris Paraxerus section Indicated by Ellerman merely as section D, without name, but for our purposes it may be listed as the Paraxerus section. Ueliosciurus daucinus=gambianus Heliosciurus gambianu^ Enderleinellus heliosciuri Ferris Neohaematopinus keniae Ferris Heliosciurus keniae=gambianus Heliosciurus multicolor=gambianus Heliosciurus palliatus-Paraxerus palliatus Heliosciurus rufobrachiatus=gambianus Heliosciurus ruwenzorii Enderleinellus heliosciuri (Ferris) Neohaematopinus keniae Ferris Ueliosciurus undulatus=gambianus Parasciurus=an error for Paraxerus Parasciurus animosus^Paraxerus ochraceus Paraxerus jacksoni=capitis Paraxerus ochraceus Werneckia minuta (Werneck) Neohaematopinus heliosciuri Cummings Neohaematopinus suahelicus Ferris Paraxerus palliatus Neohaematopinus heliosciuri Cummings Neohaematopinus suahelicus Ferris Werneckia paraxeri (Werneck) Protoxerus stangeri Enderleinellus heliosciuri Ferris Sciurus section Callosciurus benticanus=caniceps Callosciurus borneoensis=prevosti 293 Callosciurus caniceps Elide rleinellus malaysianus Ferris Hoplopieura erismata Ferris Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjdberg) Callosciurus davisoni=caniceps Callosciurus domelanus, misspelling ior domelicus—caniceps Callosciurus ferrugineus Hoplopieura erismata Ferris Neohaematopinus sciurinus (MjoLerg) Callosciurus fin lay son i Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjoberg) Callosciurus juvencus Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjoberg) Callosciurus lancavensis—caniceps Callosciurus lucas=caniceps Callosciurus maclellandi hoplopieura erismata Ferris Callosciurus prevosti Enderleinellus malaysianus Ferris Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjoberg) Callosciurus procerus Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjoberg) Callosciurus vestitutus Hoplopieura distorta Ferris Funambulus species (recorded as palmarum) Hoplopieura maniculata (Neumann) Neohaematopinus echinatus (Neumann) Funambulus palmarum Enderleinellus platyspicatus Ferris Neohaematopinus ceylonicus Ferris Funambulus tristriatus (presumably= palmarum) Hoplopieura maniculata (Neumann) Microsciurus mimilus Enderleinellus microsciuri Wemeck Sciurus aberti Enderleinellus longiceps Kellogg and Ferris Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjoberg) Sciurus aestuans Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjdberg) Sciurus alleni Enderleinellus longiceps Kellogg and Ferris Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjdberg) Sciurus anomalus Enderleinellus nitzschi (Burmeister) Neohaematopinus syriacus Ferris Sciurus apache Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjdberg) Sciurus arizonensis Hoplopieura sciuricola Ferris Sciurus aureogaster Enderleinellus extremus Ferris Neohaematolinus sciurinus (Mjdberg) Sciurus bentincanus-Callosciurus Sciurus borneoensis=Chllosciurus Sciurus carolinensis Enderleinellus longiceps Kellogg and Ferris Hoplopieura sciuricola Ferris Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjoberg) Sciurus colliae Enderleinellus mexicanus Weraeck Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjdberg) Sciurus deppei Enderleinellus extremus Ferris Sciurus domele ns is= Callosciurus Sciurus douglasi=Taroiasciurus Sciurus f remonti=Tamiasciurus Sciurus lerrugineus=Callosciurus Sciurus gerrardi Enderleinellus venezuelae Werneck Hoplopieura sciuricola Ferris Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjdberg) Sciurus goldmani=variegatoides Sciurus griseoflavus Enderleinellus extremus Ferris Sciurus griseogena Enderleinellus venezuelae Werneck Hoplopieura sciuricola Ferris Sciurus griseus Enderleinellus kelloggi Ferris Hoplopieura sciuricola Ferris Neohaematopinus griseicolus Ferris Sciurus ignitus Hoplopieura sciuricola Ferris Sciurus kaibabensis Enderleinellus longiceps Ferris Sciurus lancavensis= Callosciurus Sciurus lucas=Callosc iurus Sciurus melania-variegatoides Sciurus meridensis=griseogena Sciurus nayaritensis Enderleinellus longiceps Ferris Sciurus negligens Enderleinellus extremus Ferris Sciurus nelsoni Enderleinellus mexicanus Wemeck Sciurus nesaeus Enderleinellus insularis Werneck Hoplopieura sciuricola Ferris Sciurus niger Enderleinellus longiceps Kellogg and Ferris Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjdberg) Sciurus oculatus Enderleinellus longiceps Kellogg and Ferris Sciurus poliopus Enderleinellus extremus Ferris Sciurus syriacus«-anomalus Sciurus truei Enderleinellus mexicanus Werneck 294 Sciurus variabi 1 is-gerrardi Sciurus vulgaris Enderleinellus nitzschi (Burmeister) Neohaematopinus sciuri Jan eke Sciurus vuLp inus-niger Uro sciurus- Sciurus Tam Las section Kutamias is retained by Ellerman soLeiy for certain Asiatic species, whi Le the North American forms common¬ ly referred to it are placed by him under the genus Tam i as. Sciurotamias davidianus Enderleinellus sciurotamiasis Ferris Hoplopleura emarginata Ferris Tamias alleni Hoplopleura arboricola Kellogg and Ferris Neohaematopinus paci ficus Kellogg and Ferris Tamias alpinus Neohaematopinus paci ficus Kellogg and Ferris Tamias amoenus Hoplopleura erratica (Osborn) Tamias hindsi-townsendi Tamias merriami Hoplopleura arboricola Kellogg and Ferris Tamias quadrivittatus Hoplopleura arboricola Kellogg and Ferris Neohaematopinus paci ficus Kellogg and Ferris Tamias speciosus-quadrivittatus Tamias striatus Enderleinellus tamiasis Fahrenholz Hoplopleura erratica (Osborn) Tamias townsendi Hoplopleura arboricola Kellogg and Ferris Neohaematopinus paci ficus Kellogg and Ferris Tamiasciurus douglasi Enderleinellus nitzschi Fahrenholz Hoplopleura sciuricola Ferris Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjoberg) Tamiasciurus fremonti Enderleinellus nitzschi Fahrenholz Tamiasciurus hudsonicus Enderleinellus nitzschi Fahrenholz Hoplopleura sciuricola Ferris Neohaematopinus sciurinus (Mjoberg) Xerus section Atlautoxerus getulus Neohaematopinus pectinifer (Neumann) Euxerus microdon-Xerus erythropus Geo sc i uru s-Xe ru s Spemophilopsis leptodact} lus Neohaematopinus cite lli (Cummings) Xerus capensi s-inauris Xerus erythropus Enderleinellus euxeri Ferris Xerus inauris Neohaematopinus faurei (Bedford) Superfamily GE0MY01DEA Family Heteronyidae Dipodomys califoruicus-heermanni Dipodomys deserti Fahrenholzia piunata Kellogg and Ferris Dipodomys heermanni Fahrenholzia pinnata Kellogg and Ferris Dipodomys merriami Fahrenholzia pinnata Kellogg and Ferris Dipodomys ordi Fahrenholzia pinnata Kellogg and Ferris Dipodomys ornatus Fahrenholzia pinnata Kellogg and Ferris Dipodomys phillipsi Fahrenholzia pinnata Kellogg and Ferris Heteronys goldmanni Fahrenholzia microcephala Ferris Heteronys pictus-Liomvs Liomys irroratus Fahrenholzia microcephala Ferris Liomys pictus Fahrenholzia microcephala Ferris Liomys texensis- irroratus Microcipodops polionotus Fahrenholzia pinnata Kellogg and Ferris Pero dip us- Dipodomys Perognathus californicus Fahrenholzia tribulosa Ferris Perognathus formosus Fahrenholzia reducta Ferris Perognathus hispidus Fahrenholzia zacatecae Ferris 29^ Perognathus parvus Fahrenholzia pinnata Kellogg and Ferris Perognathus sp. Fahrenholzia pinnata Ferris Superfamily PEDETOIDEA Family Pedetidae Pedetes cafer Eulinognathus denticulatus Cummings Pedetes larvalis=surdaster Pedetes surdaster Eulinognathus denticulatus Cummings Super family DIPODOIDEA Family Dipodoidea Subfamily Dipodinae Allactaga mongolica-sibirica Allactaga sibirica Eulinognathus aculeatus (Neumann) Dip od ipus= Di pus Dipus sp. Probably a species of Jaculus Eulinognathus aculeatus (Neumann) Dipus sagitta Eulinognathus biuncatus Ferris Superfamily MUROIDEA Family Lophiomyidae Lophiomys ibeanus=imhausi Lophiomys imhausi Eulinognathus lophiomydis Ferris Lophiomys thomasi* imhausi Family Muridae Subfamily Cricetinae Ellerman remarks concerning this subfamily that the South American mem¬ bers are "an appalling chaos." For¬ tunately, from a nomenclatorial point of view, very few Anoplura are known from the South American species. Akodon arenicola Hoplopleura affinis (Burmeister) Akodon arviculoides Hoplopleura affinis (Burmeister) Akodon aerosus Hoplopleura affinis (Burmeister) Akodon aurosus=misspeiling of aerosus Akodon cursorvarviculoides Akodon mollis Hoplopleura affinis (Burmeister) Akodon pulcherrimus Hoplopleura affinis (Burmeister) Cricetulus andersoni=longicaudatus Cricetulus incanus=triton Cricetulus longicaudatus Polyplax dentaticornis Ewing Cricetulus migratorius Neohaematopinus citelli (Cummings) (Probably an error) Eligmodontia collisae, misspelling of specific najne=Hesperomys callosus Euneomys pictus=Phyllotis pictus Graomys griseoflavus Hoplopleura affinis (Burmeister) Hesperomys. In part=Peromyscus Hesperomys callosus Hoplopleura hesperomydis (Osborn) Hesperomys venustus Hoplopleura nesoryzomydis Ferris Hodomys alleni Neohaematopinus neotomae Ferris Holochilus balnearum Hoplopleura nesoryzomydis Ferris Holochilus sciureus Hoplopleura nesoryzomydis Ferris Holochilus squamipes=Nectomys squamipes Holochilus vulpinus Hoplopleura nesoryzomydis Ferris Nectomys palmipes=Nectomys squamipes Nec tone's squamipes Hoplopleura quadridentata (Neumann) Neotoma albigula Neohaematopinus neotomae Ferris Neotoma cinerea Neohaematopinus inornatus Kellogg and Ferris Neotoma fuscipes Neohaematopinus neotomae Ferris Neotoma micropus Neohaematopinus neotomae Ferris Neotoma streatori- fuscipes Neotomodon allstoni Polyplax auricularis Fello^r and Ferris Nesoryzomys-Oryzonrys Nesoryzomys defessus=Oryzomys indefessus Onychonys leucogaster Hoplopleura hesperomydis (Osborn) Polyplax auricularis Kellogg and Ferris Onychomys torridus Hoplopleura hesperomydis (Osborn) Polyplax auricularis Kellogg and Ferris Oryzomys angouya Hoplopleura nesoryzomydis Ferris 296 Oryzomys chap ureas is Hop lop leant hesperomydis (Osbora) Oryzomys eliurus Hoplopleara affinis (Burmeister) Oryzomys flavescens Hoplopleura travassosi Werueck Oryzomys fulvescens Hoplopleura hesperomydis (Osbora) Oryzomys indefessus Hop lop Leara aesoryzomydis Ferris Oryzomys narboroughi HoplopLeura aesoryzomydis Ferris Oryzomys rat ti ceps Hoplopleura quadrideotata (Neumann) Oryzomys rostratus HoplopLeura quadridentata (Neumann) Oryzomys xantheolus Hoplopleura aesoryzomydis Ferris Peromyscus boylei Hoplopleura hesperonydis (Osbora) Peromyscus californicus Polyplax auricularis Kellogg and Ferris Peromyscus leucopus HoplopLeura hesperomydis (Osborn) Peromyscus maniculatus Hoplopleura hesperomydis (Osborn) Polyplax auricularis Kellogg and Ferris Peromyscus sitkensis Polyplax auricularis Kellogg and Ferris Phyllotis arenarius Hoplopleura affinis (Burmeister) Phy llotis boliviensis Hoplopleura affinis (Burmeister) Phyllotis domorum-Graorays griseo- flavus Phyllotis micropus Hoplopleura affinis (Burmeister) Hoplopleura reducta Ferris Phyllotis pictus Hoplopleura af finis (Burmeister) Phyllotis ricardulus Hoplopleura af finis (Burmeister) Reithrodon cuniculoides Hoplopleura affinis (Burmeister) Reithrodon hatcheri-cuuiculoides Reithrodontomys raexicanus Polyplax auricularis Kellogg and Ferris Rhipidomys leucodactylus Hoplopleura angulata Ferris Rhipidomys venezuelae Hoplopleura angulata Ferris Rhipidomys venustus Hoplopleura angulata Ferris Hoplopleura hirsuta Ferris Sigmodou hispidus Hoplopleura hirsuta Ferris Sigmodou ochrognathus Hoplopleura hirsuta Ferris Si.Tnodon peruanus Hoplopleura hirsuta Ferris Thoinasomys cinereus Hoplopleura angulata Ferris Xeuomys nelsoni Hoplopleura hirsuta Ferris Subfamily Dendromyinae Dendromus mesomelas Hoplopleura intermedia Kellogg and Ferris Subfamily Gerbilliuae Gerbilius indica-Tatera indica Gerbillus pyramidum Polyplax gerbilli Ferris Meriones auceps=meridianus Meriones ineridianus Polyplax chinensis Ferris Hoplopleura merionidis Ferris Meriones psammophilus=meridi anus Pachyuromys duprasi Polyplax werneri ( Glinkiewi csz) Tatera angolae Hoplopleura biseriata Ferris Tatera boehmi Hoplopleura veprecula Ferris Tatera brantsi Hoplopleura biseriata Ferris Polyplax biseriata Ferris Tatera indica Polyplax stephensi (Christophers and Newstead) Tatera joanae Hoplopleura biseriata Ferris Tatera liodon Polyplax taterae Bedford Tatera lobengulae Hoplopleura biseriata Ferris Polyplax biseriata Ferris Tatera nigricauda Polyplax neumanni Fahrenholz Tatera vicina Polyplax taterae Ferris Taterillus emini Polyplax taterae Ferris Subfamily Hydromyinae Chrotomys whiteheadi Hoplopleura chrotomydis Ferris Hydromys chry sogaster Hoplopleura bidentata (Neumann) 297 Subfamily Microtinae Arvicola-Microtus in large part Arvicola anphibius Polyplax spiniger (Burmeister) Clethrionomys gapperi Hoplopleura acanthopus (Burmeister) Clethrionomys nivarius Hoplopleura acanthopus (Burmeister) Clethrionomys rufocanus Polyplax alaskensis Ewing Clethrionomys rutilus Hoplopleura edentulus Fahrenholz Dicrostonyx torquatus Hoplopleura acanthopus (Burmeister; Lagurus intermedius Polyplax abscisa Fahrenholz Lemmus alascensis Hoplopleura acanthopus (Burmeister) Lemmus obensis Hoplopleura hispida (Grube) Microtus agrestis Hoplopleura acanthopus (Burmeister) Microtus arvalis Hoplopleura acanthopus (Burmeister) Microtus californicus Polyplax abscisa Fahrenholz Microtus constrictus-californicus Microtus mordax Polyplax abscisa Fahrenholz Microtus nivalis Hoplopleura acanthopus (Burmeister) Microtus pennsylvanicus Polyplax abscisa Fahrenholz Microtus sp. Polyplax alaskensis Ewing Phaiomys blythei=leucurus Phaiomys leucurus Hoplopleura phaiomydis Ferris Phenacomys longicaudus Polyplax spinulosa (Burmeister) Pitymys pinetorum Hoplopleura acanthopus (Burmeister) Pitymys savii Hoplopleura acanthopus (Burmeister) Pitymys subterraneus Hoplopleura aequidentis Fahrenholz Subfamily Murinae Acomys cahirinus* Symoca brachyrrhyncha (Cummings) Polyplax oxyrrhynchus Cummings Acomys hystrella Polyplax oxyrrhyncha Cummings Symoca brachyrrhyncha (Cummings) Acomys percivali Polyplax oxyrrhyncha Cummings Symoca brachyrrhynchus (Cummings) Acomys sp. (Probably) Polyplax miacantha Speiser Aethomys chrysophilus Polyplax cummingsi Ferris Apodemus agrarius Polyplax affinis (Burmeister) Apodemus insignis Hoplopleura apomydis Ferris Apodemus speciosus Polyplax serrate (Burmeister) Apodemus sylvaticus Polyplax spinulosa (Burmeister) ( questionable) Polyplax serrate (Burmeister) Hoplopleura affinis (Burmeister) Apodemus bardus-insignis Arvicanthis abyssinicus Polyplax abyssinica Ferris Arvicanthis niloticus Polyplax abyssinica Ferris Arvicanthis pumilio=Rhabdomys pumilio Arvicanthis univittatus-Hybomys uni- vittatus Bandicota bengalensis Polyplax spinulosa (Burmeister) Bandicota malabarica Polyplax asiatica Ferris Cricetomys cosensi Proenderleinellus calvus (Waterston) Criceton^'s emini Proenderleinellus calvus (Waterston) Cricetomys gambianus Proenderleinellus calvus (Waterston) Dasymys incomtus Hoplopleura oenomydis Ferris Hoplopleura somereni Waterston Polyplax cummingsi Ferris Dasymys helukus-dncomtus Epimys-rattus Eropeplus canus Polyplax eropepli Ewing Grammomys i be an us Polyplax phthisica Ferris Grammomys surdaster Hoplopleura oenomydis Ferris Gunomys= Bandicota Hybomys univittatus Hoplopleura laticeps Ferris Lemni scones barbarus Hoplopleura enormis Kellow and Ferris Lemni sconrys griselda Hoplopleura enormis Kellog.r and Ferris 298 Lemni scomys quiche L l us~striatus Lemiiiscomys striatus Hoplopleura pelomy dis Kerris Limnomy s mearnsi HopiopLeuru oeuomydis Ferris Lop hu romy s sikapusi Poiypiax phthisica Kerris Lophuromys*squi Lus Poiypiax phthisica Ferris Lophuromys zena=aquiius Mastomy s«Rattus Micromys minutus HopiopLeura longula Fahrenhoiz Poiypiax ^raciLis Fahrenhoiz Mus coucha=Rattus coucha Mus chrysoph i lus-Aethomy s chrysophilus Mus decumauus= Rattus decuinanus Mus gansus, error for gansuensis= musculus Mus ininutus-Micromys minutus Mus musculus Hoplopleura acanthopus (Burmeister) HopiopLeura hesperomy dis (Osborn) Poiypiax serrate (Burmeister) Mus spicilegus=musculus Mus triton Hoplopleura rukenyae Ferris Mus wagneri=musculus Mylomys cuninghamei Hoplopleura mylomydis Ferris Mylomys roosevelti=cuninghamei Nesokia indica Poiypiax asiatica Ferris Nesokia hardwickei- indica Oenomys hypoxanthus Hoplopleura oenonydis Ferris Pelomy s fall ax Hoplopleura pelomydis Ferris Praomys=Rattus Praomys namaquensis= Thallomys Rattus calcis Hoplopleura oenomvdis Ferris Poiypiax spinulosa (Burmeister) Rattus coucha Hoplopleura intermedia Kellogg and Ferris Poiypiax praecisa (Neumann) Eulinognathus denticulatus Cummings Rattus culmorum Poiypiax spinulosa (Burmeister) Rattus exulans Hoplopleura oenomvdis Ferris Rattus hawai iensis Hoplopleura oenomvdis Ferris Rattus migricaudus- Thallomys Rattus norvegicus Poiypiax spinulosa (Burmeister) Hoplopleura oenomvdis Kerris Eulinognathus denticulatus (Cummings) Rattus rattus Rattus sabanus Hoplopleura mainysiana Ferris Poiypiax insulsa Rattus stridens Poiypiax spinulosa (Burmeister) Rattus surifer Hoplopleura pectinata (Cummings) Rattus tullbergi Hoplopleura intermedia Kellogg and Kerris Poiypiax waterstoni Bedford Rattus vor.iferans lloplopleum malaysiana Ferris Rhabdomys pumilio Poiypiax arvi can this Bedford Saccostomus campestris Poiypiax jonesi Kellogg and Kerris Thallomys moggi Hoplopleura affinis (Burmeister) Poiypiax spinulosa (Burmeister) Thallomys namaquensis Poiypiax praomydis Bedford Thallomy's nigricauda Hoplopleura affinis (Burmeister) Thamnomy s=Grammomys Zelotomys hildegardae Hoplopleura intermedia Kellogg and Ferris Subfamily Otonyinae Otomys angoniensis Poiypiax otomydis Cummings Otomys brantsii=Parotorays brants ii Otomys irroratus PolyplaLX otomydis Cummings Otomys irroratus tropical is= tropicalis Otomys tropicalis Polyp lax otomydis Cunmings Parotomys brants ii Poiypiax otomydis Cummings Family Muscardinidae Subfamily Graph iur in ae Graphiurus alticola Schizophthirus graphiuri Ferris Graphiurus murinus Schizophthirus graphiuri Ferris Graphiurus nanus Schizophthirus graphiuri Ferris Graphiurus raptor-murinus 299 Subfamily Muscardininae Dryomys nitedula Schizophthirus pleurophaeus (Burmeister) Dryomys pallidus=nitedula Eliomys pallidus=Dryomys nitedula Eliomys quercinus Schizophthirus pleurophaeus (Burmeister) Muscardinus avellanarius Schizophthirus pleurophaeus (Burmeister) Cohort FERUNGULATA Superorder FERAE Order CARNIVORA Suborder FISSIPEDA Superfamily CANOIDEA Family Canidae Subfamily Caninae Alopex lagopus Linognathus setosus (von Olfers) (blue fox and arctic fox-pre- sumably Alopex lagopus) Canis aureus Linognathus setosus (von Olfers) Canis brasiliensi^Dusicyon Linognathus taeniotrichus Werneck Canis cupus, misprint for lupus Canis lupus Linognathus setosus (von Olfers) Canis mesomelas Linognathus setosus (von Olfers) Domestic dog Linognathus setosus (von Olfers) Du si cy on fulvipes Linognathus taeniotrichus Werneck Dusicyon thous Linognathus taeniotrichus Werneck Vulpes fulva Linognathus setosus (von Olfers) Vulpes vulpes Linognathus setosus (von Olfers) Suborder PINNIPEDIA Family Odobenidae Odobenus obesus Antarctophthirus trichechi (Bohemann) Odobenus rosmarus Antarctophthirus trichechi ( Bohemann) Family Otariidae Callorhinus alascanus Antarctophthirus callorhini (Osborn) Proechinophthirius fluctus (Ferris) Eumetopias jubata Antarctophthirus microchir (Trouessart and Neumann) Otari a hookeri Antarctophthirus microchir (Trouessart and Neumann) Pho care to s«0 1 ari a Zalophus californianus Antarctophthirus microchir (Trouessart and Neumann) Family Phocidae Subfamily Phocinae Greenland seal Echinophthirius horridus (von Olfers) Halichoerus grypus Echinophthirius horridus (von Olfers) Phoca foetida*=hispida Phoca groenlandica Echinophthirius horridus (von Olfers) Phoca hispida Echinophthirius horridus (von Olfers) Phoca richardii Echinophthirius horridus (von Olfers) Phoca sibirica Echinophthirius horridus (von Olfers) Phoca variegata Echinophthirius horridus (von Olfers) Phoca vitulina Echinophthirius horridus (von Olfers) Subfamily Lobodontinae Hydrurga leptonyx Antarctophthirus ogmorhini Enderlein Leptonychotes weddelli Antarctophthirus ogmorhini Enderlein Lobodon carcinophagus Antarctophthirus lobodontis Enderlein Ogm o rh i n u s-Hy d r u rga Ommatophoca rossi Antarctophthirus mawsoni Harrison Subfamily- Oystophorinae Qystophorus cristata Echinophthirius horridus (von Olfers) Macro rhinus-Mirounga Mirounga leonina Lepidophthirus macrorhini Enderlein 300 Superorder PROTON GULATA Order TOBULLDENTATA Family Oi'ycteropodidae Orvcteropus a t er ily bophUi i rus notophallus (Neumann) Orvcteropus capeusis Hybophthirus uotophalLus (Neiuitann) Order HYRACOIDEA Family Procaviidae There seems to be considerable dis¬ agreement concerning the species of this group. They are listed here ac¬ cording to Lyddeker, 1916, merely as a standard point of reference. Procavia bouahioli=ruficeps Procavia Lrucei=ruficeps Procavia capensis Prolinognathus aethiopicus Fahrenholz Prolinognathus caviae-capensis (Pallas) Procavia coombsi=capensis Procavia natalensis=capensis Procavia rufescens=misspelling for ruficeps .Procavia ruficeps Prolinognathus foleyi Fahrenholz Procavia shoana (properly sciona)- habessinica Procavia habessinica Prolinognathus aethiopicus Fahrenholz Prolinognathus arcuatus Fahrenholz Heterohyrax syriacus Prolinognathus leptocephalus (Ehrenberg) Superorder MESAXONIA Order PERISSODACTYLA Suborder HIPPOMORPHA Family Equidae Equus asinus Haematopinus asini (Linnaeus) Ratemia squamulata (Neumann) Equus burchelli Raenatopinus acuticeps Ferris Haematopinus asini (Linnaeus) Ratemia squamulata (Neumann) Equus caballus Haematopinus asini (Linnaeus Superorder PAKAGONIA Order ARTIODACTYLA Suborder SU1F0RMES Intraorder SU1NA Family Suidae Subfamily Suinae Koiropotamus choeropotamus apparent- ly-Potomoclioerus choeropotamus Phacochoerus aeJ iani-aethiopicus Phacochoerus aethiopicus Haematopinus phacochoeri Euderleiu Phacochoerus sundevali i-aethiopicus Potamoclioerus affinis (unable to trace) Haematopinus latus Neumann Po tamocho e rus a f r i can us- larva tus Potamochoerus choeropotamus Haematopinus latus Neumann Sus cristatus Haematopinus suis (Linnaeus) Sus scrota Haematopinus apri Goureau Sus vittatus Haematopinus suis (Linnaeus) Domestic swine Haematopinus suis (Linnaeus) Family Tayassuidae Subfamily Tayassuinae Dicoty-les-Tayassu Pecari-Tayassu Pecari javalii-Tayassu angulatus Tayassu javalii Pecaroecus javalii Babcock and Ewing Infraorder 0RE0D0NTA Suborder TYLOPODA Family Camelidae Auche n i a-- Lama Auchenia lama=Lama glama Camelus dromedarius Haematopinus tuberculatus (Burmeister) Microthoracius cameli (Linnaeus) Lama glama Microthoracius mazzai kerneck Microthoracius minor Werneck Microthoracius praelongiceps (Neumann) Lama huanaca-glama Lama pacos=glama 301 Suborder RUMINANTIA Infraorder PEOORA Super family CERVOIDEA Family Cervidae Subfamily Cervinae Cervus elaphus Solenopotes bunneisteri Fahrenholz Cervus nippon unnamed species of Solenopotes Cervus unicolor Haematopinus longus Neumann Subfamily Muntiacinae Muntiacus muntjak Solenopotes muntiacus Thompson Subfamily Odocoileinae Capreolus capreolus Solenopotes capreoli Freund Coass us— Mazama Mazama rondoni Solenopotes binipilosus (Fahrenholz) Mazama simplicicornis Solenopotes binipilosus (Fahrenholz) Odocoileus chiriquiensis=rothschildi Odocoileus columbianus Solenopotes ferrisi (Fahrenholz) Odocoileus couesi Solenopotes binipilosus (Fahrenholz) Odocoileus hemionis Solenopotes ferrisi (Fahrenholz) Rangifer tarandus Solenopotes tarandi (Mjoberg) Super family GIRAFPOIDEA Family Giraffidae Giraffa Camelopardalis Linognathus brevicornis (Giebel) Superfamily BOVOIDEA Family Bovidae Subiamily Antilopinae Tribe Antilopini Aepyceros melampus Linognathus aepyceros Bedford Antidorcas marsupialis Linognathus bedfordi Ferris Linognathus tibialis (Piaget) Anti lope cervicapra Linognathus cervicaprae (Lucas) Linognathus pithodes Cummin rs Antilope euchore-Antidorcas marsu¬ pialis Antilope maori (as recorded by Piaget. The name does not ap¬ pear in available lists). Linognathus tibialis (Piaget) Antilope subgutturosa Linognathus tibialis (Piaget) "Antilope" Linognathus tibialis (Piaget) "Antilope, North African" Linognathus petasata Ferris Gaze 11a (possibly either a misidenti- fication or owing to straggling) Linognathus gazella Mjoberg Gaze 11a thorns on i Linognathus lewisi Bedford Oreotragus saltator-oreotragus Oreotragus oreotragus Linognathus africanus Kellogg and Paine Raphicerus campestris Linognathus tibilais (Piaget) Tribe Bovini Bison americanus=bison Bison bison Haematopinus tuberculatus (Burmeister) Bos grunniens haematopinus tuberculatus (Burmeister) Bos indicus Haematopinus eurysternus (Nitzsch) Bos taurus Haematopinus eurysternus (Nitzsch) Linognathus vituli (Linnaeus) Solenopotes capillatus Enderlein Bubalus bubalis Haematopinus tuberculatus (Burmeister) Syncerus cafer Haematopinus bufali (de Geer) Tribe Strepsicerotini According to Simpson the generic name Strepsiceros antedates Tra^ela- phus and Limnotra$us should be regar¬ ded as a subgenus of the former. There seems to be some question here, however, and the latter names are re¬ tained for this list. Also, there seems to be confusion concerning Rose laphus. The name has been used for Taurotraius, but seems to apply to an entirely different animal. 302 Boselaphus oreas»Tauro tragus oryx Limno tragus gratus Linognathus limuotragi Cumrn i ngs Tiiuro tragus oryx Haematopiuus tauro tragi Cummings Linognathus taurotragus Bedford Tragelaphus scriptus Linognathus Iractus Ferris Linognathus limno tragi Cummings Tragelaphus syivaticus-scriptus Subfamily Caprinae Tribe Capriui Capra hi reus Liuognathus africanus KelLogg and Paine Linognathus stenopsis (Burmeister) Capra ibex Linognathus stenopsis (Burmeister) Capra manifricus (no such name in any list) Linognathus oviformis (Kudow) Caprella rupicapra=Rupicapra Domestic goat=Capra hi reus Ovis aries Linognathus africanus Kellogg and Paine Linognathus ovillus (Neumann) Linoguathus pedalis (Osborn) Ovis longipes Linognathus ovillus (Neumann) Rupicapra rupicapra Linognathus stenopsis (Burmeister) Subfamily Cephalophinae Tribe Cephalophini Cephalophus grimmi=§ylviacapra grimmi Cephalophus inaxwelli Linognathus breviceps (Piaget) Cephalophus natalensis Linognathus breviceps (Piaget) Cephalophus nigri Irons Linognathus angulata (Piaget) Philautomba. At times used lor some species generally referred to Cephalophus. Sylviacapra grimmi Linognathus breviceps (Piaget) Subfamily Hippotraginae Tribe Alcelaphini Connochaetes gnu Linognathus gnu Bed lord Damaliscus alii Irons Linognathus damaliscus Bedford Damaliscus dorcas*. Damaliscus pygargus Damaliscus korrigum Linoguathus damaliscus Bed lord Damaliscus pygargus Linognathus damaliscus Bed lord Gorgon taurinus Linognathus gnu Bedford Linoguathus hologastrus toerneck Linognathus spicatus Ferris Tribe Hippotragiui tlippotragus niger Linognathus hippotragi Ferris Tribe Reduncini Cervicapra-Redunca Pelea capreolus Linognathus peleus Bedford Redunca arundinum Linognathus fahrenholzi Paine Redunca fulvorufula Linognathus fahrenholzi Paine Redunca redunca Linognathus fahrenholzi Paine 303 CHAPTER VIII The Distribution of the Anoplura The problems associated with the spatial distribution of plants and ani- JTfipH 7 a,t,tract1ed a ™st amount of attention and have come to represent ™nhvid tk the^?e11Je? whlch 1S gathered under the general title of biogeo r- k-k' + k 11)13 tle,ld lmpin®es upon other fields of inquiry in relation to w ich there may be a high degree of reciprocal agreement and support, or conversely, an equal degree of entertaining disagreement. Thus, the geo¬ logical concept of continental drift may on the one hand be supported by conclusions drawn from biogeography or on the other hand he exposed to most vigorous criticism from the same source. The strictly practical field of economic entomology may find a utilitarian aid since it may employ the Geo¬ graphical distribution of insect pests for which the discovery of their na- tural enemies is desirable. The purely philosophical aspects of biolo.ry and geography may be concerned with the problems of the spread of naturS populations and the light that present-day distribution of plants and ani- malsnmy throw upon the distribution of ancient land masses. The distribution of parasitic forms is a specialized aspect of bio'?eo *- raphy and is one of special philosophical interest. It is a matter of* com¬ mon biological knowledge that in the evolution of their parasitic habit many or^msms— whether piant or animal— are very closely adjusted, both p >sicaliy and physiologically, to the environment of a single host or host 7? Aaoplura there is a general adjustment°to the environ- ment afforded by the hair of the hosts. This involves the loss of the ngs, the reduction or loss of the eyes, the modification of the le rs for lasping the hairs, and the alteration of the ovipositor for the lavin r of eggs attached to the hairs of the host. Obviously, this physical ‘adjust¬ ment has been carried still farther into an adjustment to a particular iTr.’ Anopluran which can grasp the delicate hairs of a mouse would be completely helpless among the huge bristles of a pig. But beyond such obvious adjustments as these, there seems also to bean adjustment to ^e ot the host. There are indications that a sucking louse trans- } j ™ lts n?rmal {iosb to one of a very different kind may find the h«vp hpL 6 DZ physiologically unsuited. One may surmise that we ha e here something analagous to the allergies which at least make life miserable tor many people. These factors seem to apply rather generally among many kinds of parasites and they appear very strongly to influence the distribution of the parasites. uce Nor is this all. The adjustment of the parasite may be so delicate that it cannot pass from one host to another of the same species except under a t", ?°ndiiio;s I*™' in the Aa°p^a thePmodificaUons of [he for clasping the hairs of the host have proceeded so far that the louse is unable to move about effectively when detached from its host Shpne?hpDhlyt SUCh aniJ)ial can pass readi1}' from one host to another only when the hosts are in contact and a bridge of hair is available. The outcome ol all these factors is that one might expect to find a par¬ ticular louse species confined to a particular species of host. 4t times this is true, but usually the distribution of the louse species is broader IpK1pT[ SpcciesT;,a>- and very frequently does, occur on various closed related hosts. It seems to be a quite tenable assumption that the louse bpecies has been inherited from the common ancestor of the various host KST ^ that hG 1106 haVe evoived somewhat more slowly than have the 304 It this hypothesis be pursued lurther iu its implications, it may very well be utilized to account for the occurrence of related species of lice upon related hosts, such as the occurrence ol species of the louse ,'enus Knderlatnel lua upon rodents of the family Sciuridae throughout the world and ot other instances that can be cited. Now, the question arises as to how far this hypothesis may be pursued. Can it be that the phylogeny of the lice has paralleled the phylogeny of the hosts back to the time when the ancestors of the lice first became es¬ tablished on the ancestors ot the mammals? It is most tempting to surest that the c lassi t ication ot the lice, which are a small and compact group, mit^ht be utilized to throw light upon the phytogeny of the much larger and mote diverse group ot ttie mammals. These are most intriguing speculations tor the expression ot hypotheses. But betore we convert speculations into hypotheses and hypotheses into expressions of opinion we need to inquire into all the available tacts and to take into consideration all the various pitfalls that may be encountered. Before the student of lice presumes to offer advice to the mammalogist concerning moot points in mammal classifi¬ cation he should first be sure that the classification of the lice is placed upon a sound basis and that he genuinely knows whereol he speaks. In considering such matters, it should be emphasized at the outset that at the present time we know probably only about hall' the species of Ano- plura that may be expected to occur in the world and that until we know substantially the whole fauna we are scarcely justified in devising a clas¬ sification of the Anoplura that may be regarded as approaching finality. At the moment, as is emphasized elsewhere, we do not have a satisfactory classification of the Anoplura as a whole. Most of the genera are relati¬ vely clear, but the way in which these genera may be assembled into genu¬ inely significant higher categories is not yet so. Tribes, subfamilies, families, superfamilies, these elements in any classificatory system that will be biologically sound, remain still to be elucidated. A lew things, however, appear to be reasonably clear. First, it appears that the Anoplura are confined to the mammals. Next, it appears that they are confined to the Eutheria, although it is still possible that they may be found upon the Monotremata which have not yet been adequately examined. No evidence exists that they occur on the Metatheria (the Marsupials) although biting lice are known from this group. Then it appears that they do not occur on certain large groups of the Eutheria. They seem definitely not to be included among the weird assort¬ ment of parasites that occur on the bats. Among the Ferungulata, which in¬ cludes the living Orders Carnivora and Pinnipedia, the Carnivora seem to have no Anoplura — with the exception of two species — although they are well supplied with Mallophaga. The Pinnipedia, on the other hand, seem to pos¬ sess only Anoplura. Further it appears that there are groups of Anoplura which are definite¬ ly restricted to groups of related hosts, so much so that if any Anopluran specimen of one of these groups came to hand with no host data it would be possible to predict with a high degree of probability the family of mammals from which it came. But not always I There are enough discrepancies to in¬ troduce the possibility of error into such a prediction. Some of these discrepancies are very strange and at the moment admit of no logical solu¬ tion on the basis of present evidence. Thus, we have the Anopluran genus Linoinathus, with about 30 included and apparently evidently related species, which is restricted absolutely to hosts of the Order Artiodactyla, with two strange exceptions. One species occurs on the domestic dog and the arctic fox and another species occurs on a wild dog of South America. These are all the Anoplura that are known from the terrestrial Carnivora. There is also the genus Polyplax, with about 30 included species, which occurs on rodents of the family Muridae, except that two species — clearly belonging to this genus— occur on shrews of the family Soricidae. But apart from such glaring exceptions, the species of the various gen¬ era of Anoplura are as tar as known rather generally restricted to host groups among which some degree of relationship is commonly recognized. Thus the genus Enderleinellus with about 28 species is, as at present known, restricted to rodents ot the tamily Sciuridae. The genus Neohaema- topinus with 25 known species is restricted to the same family, except for two species which occur on members of the family Muridae. The" ^enus fficro- thoracius, with four known species, is restricted to the family0 Camelidae, occurring in both South America and the Old World. The peculiar genus Heo- l inognathus , with two known species, is confined to the elephant shrews of the family Macroscel ididae . The genus Prol inognathus , with at least five apparently distinct species, is confined to the Hyracoidea. The renera Antarctophthirius and Echinophthirius are confined to the Pinnipedia! The oenus Schtzophthirus, with two included species, is confined to the rodent family Muscardinidae. The genus Fahrenholzia , with about five known spe¬ cies, is contined to the rodent iamily Heteromy idae . The genus Pedicinus with seven included species is confined to the monkey group Ce°rcop i the co idea. These instances are clear enough. It matters not at all if there be diife rences ot opinion concerning whether these Anopluran groups be called genera or are broken each into more than one genus. The group — submenus genus, supergenus, tribe, or whatever it may be called — as a whole is asso¬ ciated with a particular group of mammals. Up to this point everything works out nicely. The hypothesis that the phytogeny of the lice and the phylogeny of the Anoplura are correlated is entirely tenable. But beginning with these instances we must proceed in two directions. On the one hand, how much farther does the correlation 301 Oryclol01^115* 291 Oryzomys> 296 Otaria, 300 Otariidae, Family, 300 Otonyinae, Subfamily, 299 Otomys, 299 Ovis, 303 Pachyura, 288 Pachyuromvs, 297 Pan, 291 Papio, 290 Paragonia, Superorder, 301 Parascalops, 288 Parasciurus, 293 Paraxerus, 293 Paraxerus section, 293 Parotomys, 299 Pecari, 301 Pecora, Infraorder, 302 Pedetes, 296 Pedetidae, Family, 296 Pedetoidea, Superfamily, 296 Pelea, 303 Pelonys, 299 Perissodactyla, Order, 301 Perodipus, 295 Perognathus, 295 Peromyscus, 295 Petaurista, 292 Petrodromus, 288 Petromus, 292 Petromyinae, Subfamily, 292 Petronys, 292 Phachochoerus, 301 Phaionys, 298 Phenacomys, 298 Philantomba, 303 Phoca, 300 Phocarctos, 300 Phocidae, Family, 300 Phocinae, Subfamily, 300 Phyllotis, 297 Pinnipedia, Suborder, 300 Pithecis, 289 Pithecinae, Subfamily, 289 Pithecus, 290 Pitynys, 298 Pongidae, Family, 291 Ponginae, Subfamily, 291 Potamochoerus, 30 1 Praomys, 299 Presbytis, 290 Primates, Order, 289 Procavia, 301 Procaviidae, Family-, 301 Proechinys, 291 Propithecus, 289 Prosimii, Suborder, 289 Protoxerus, 293 Protungulata, Superorder, 301 Pteromys, 292 Pteromys group, 292 Pygathrix, 290 Rangifer, 302 Rattus, 299 319 Redunca, 303 Reduncini, Tribe, 303 Rei thro don, 297 Reithrodontomys, 297 Rhabdomys, 299 Rhinopithecus, 290 Rhipidomys, 297 Rodentia, Order, 290 Ruminantia, Suborder, 302 Rupicapra, 303 Saccostomus, 299 Scalopinae, Subfamily, 2® Scalopus, 288 Sciuridae, Family, 292 Sciuroidea, Superfamily, 292 Sciuropterus, 292 Sciurotajriias, 29 5 Sciurus, 294 Sciurus ^roup, 292 Sciurus section, 293 Scutisorex, 288 Semnopithecus, 290 Si ^rnodon, 297 Simia, 290 Simias, 290 Sorex, 288 Soricidae, Family, 288 Soricinae, Subfamily, 288 Soricoidea, Superfamily, 288 Spermophilus, 29-5 Strepsiceros, 302 Strepsicerotini, Tribe, 302 Suidae, Family, 301 Sui formes. Suborder, 301 Suina, Infraorder, 301 Suinae, Subfamily, 301 Suncas , 288 Sus, 301 Sylviacapra, 302 Sylvilajus, 291 Symphalanjes, 291 Syncerus, 302 Talpidae, Family, 288 Tamias, 299 Tamias section, 295 Tamiasciurus, 295 Tatera, 297 Taterillus, 297 Taurotra^us, 303 Tayassu, 301 Tayassuidae, Family,. 301 Tayassuinae, Subfamily, 301 Tballomys, 299 Thamnoinys, 299 Theria, Subclass, 288 Thomasomys, 297 Thryonomyinae, Subfamily, 292 Thryonomys, 292 Tubulidentata, Order, 30 1 Tupaiidae, Family, 289 Tupaiinae, Subfamily, 289 Tupaioidea, Superfamily, 289 Tylopoda, Suborder, 301 Urosciurus, 295 Yulpes, 300 Xenomys, 297 Xerus , 29 5 Xerus section, 295 Zalophus, 300 Zelotomys, 299 320 T : ; D £HH? iilHl ti ili c HsHHHSSjfli SgsHggU 5S§gfgKa«gl|ISg5?H rrr.n;::'.--**:* . ;:•*• :rrrrr~ it s? r.xy.r.r^: :Iu*ltHIur3u