Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae

185쪽

they do not differ generically. I approve the erection Os the three sub genera which represent, in the PreSerit case, a Segregation Similar to the Separationos Eo me larger groupS Os Species in the genus SobarocephaIa Without giving them a sub generic rank aS yet. The study of the problem concerning the taxonomio evaluation Os the species included in the genus Hendelia CZERNY Sensu Frey waS necessitate d

published also in 1960, on the Clusiids of Australia. Τhis author describe diwO ne. Species in the ne v genus Parahendelia. In the meantime, I received,

Om Prosessor FREY, the types and paralypes of his ne v Species describe diso in Burina for study, for which Ι express my gratitude alSO in this place Thus, except for the Australiari species, I have had opportunity to examine ali species described hitherio. In the course Os my studies, Ι arrived at the conclusion that the geniiqHendelia CZΕΗΝY, 1903, stili contains the single species beckeri CZER NY, whilethe Six species described by FREY DOm Burma, and the new species describe thereinaster, must be Segregated in a new, distinct genus. Os the three sub genera described by FREY, Ι give the sub genus Prohendelia generic rank, reta ining FREY's sub genera Prohendelia S. Str. , Aristohendelia, und Burmano chorea. Parahendelia MCALPINE, 1960, is also retained as a distinct genus, with the remark, however, that the genus ProhendeIia FREY sensu SOOS is more closely allied with Parahendelia MCALPINE than with Hendelia CZΕΗΝY - indoed, it is sar Do in improbable that, as a conSequence of later inveStigatioris, the genera Prohendelia and Parahendelia Will have to be synonymi

187쪽

untennat bases more than three times greater than that bet ween antennal

188쪽

Drawings e-d have been made ori the basis of the allotype, Alightly reconstructed. sincesome of the cephalic brigiles have broken Oss and were found stiching on the animal. - Alldrawings made by the fame magnification.

190쪽

RAPHIDI OPTEROLOGICA L STUDIES I