IDENTIFICATION

Both sexes have hemispherical eyes situated in a depression, and are distinct from A. variegatum and A. lepidum in possessing very coarse scutal punctations.

Male scutal ornamentation, inside the lateral groove, is like that of A. lepidum except that a small red spot may be present laterally in A. pomposum, but no red color is found on A. lepidum.

The female scutum may be variable in length-width ratio, that of some specimens being only as long as wide, of others longer than wide; its rugosity is very distinct; it may be unornamented but usually has a small white or pale spot in the posterior field. Robinson (1926) stated that go are unornamented. Nevertheless a number of those in the Nuttall collection, which comprised his chief reference material, have ornamented spots on the scutum. These, as well as others similar to them have been observed in different collections.7

Specimens from the Sudan referable to these characteristics should be checked against authoritatively identified specimens from the known range of A. pomposum before this name is applied. Characters provided here are generalized; an exhaustive survey of the subject is precluded by our uncertainty over variability between this species and A. variegatum, as indicated below.

Note

In some large collections of A. variegatum, a few robust male specimens, or, more rarely, a few pygmy male specimens, may be suggestive of A. pompɔsum owing to unusually heavy scutal punctations. Associated females are also more heavily punctate and may have a wider scutum than normal. Jack (1942) referred to similar males from Rhodesia (see REMARKS above). I have collected a few lots of such specimens in the Sudan and in the mountains of Yemen (Arabia). The most distinctive collection in this category is one recently presented to me by Dr. C. B. Philip, who collected it from a herd of cattle near Kabete in the mountains of central Kenya. The single female has a wide scutum and is heavily punc tate but not rugose and the punctations are not confluent. Of

the males, four are slightly more punctate than is usual for A. variegatum, one is slightly more punctate than the first four, and the last two are so heavily punctate that, alone, there would be little question of their identity as A. pomposum. Such spec

imens, in addition to various queries already mentioned, suggest the possibility that A. pomposum is a heavily punctate, mountain or heavy forest subspecies of A. variegatum and that intergradation does occur.

It appears that A. variegatum govurensis of Santos Dias (1950B,1954H) is an intermediate form between the almost nonpunctate A. variegatum and the heavily punctate A. pomposum. Santos Dias' description adds weight to the concept that A. pomposum is actually no more than a variant form or subspecies of A. variegatum. Rearing of progeny from isolated females in lowlands and in highlands and transporting some of their progeny to different altitudinal levels for development under different ecological conditions may solve this question.

Since the above was written, Santos Dias (1953E) paper des cribing A. superbum sp. nov. has appeared. In it, A. variegatum govurensis is placed in synonymy under A. pomposum. A. superbum is considered to differ from both A. variegatum and A. pomposum chiefly on the basis of size, depth, and distribution of puncta tions. Even more recently, the same author (1954H) has reaffirmed the validity of his variety of A. variegatum, with no indication of what he proposes to do about A. superbum.

On ecological grounds, A. superbum (or A. variegatum govurensis) might be a useful niche in which to drop the Sudan specimen and certain other Central African lowland specimens. Variable and confusing series of specimens still confront us. Unfortunately, however, A. superbum does not answer the problems this material poses. No recourse offers itself but to maintain the present systematic status of A. variegatum and A. pomposum, undertake biological studies suggested in the paragraph above, and only then judge the presently considered questionable validity of A. superbum as a real species and the range of variation in A. variegatum and A. pomposum.

Santos Dias (1953E) further refers the Belgian Congo records of A. pomposum by Nuttall and Warburton (1916), Schwetz (1927A), Bequaert (1931) and Schoenaers (1951A) to A. superbum. Since no adequate descriptions for differentiating Congo specimens were provided by these authors, the validity of this proposed synonymy is highly questionable. Belgian Congo specimens that have been seen in British Museum (Natural History) collections, in Museum of Comparative Zoology collections, and in the HH collection are typically A. pomposum by comparison with specimens from everywhere within the range of this species.

In conclusion, one may only belabor the point: the status of heavily punctate specimens morphologically intermediate between A. variegatum and A. pomposum remains to be ascertained by biological studies, not by museum-type studies.

AMBLYOMMA RHINOCEROTIS (de Geer, 1778) (= A. PETERSI Karsch, 1878)

The Sudan Government collection specimens were collected by H. H. King. British Museum (Natural History) specimens were taken by Captain C. M. Stigand.

DISTRIBUTION IN THE SUDAN

Upper Nile: Bor (King 1926).

DISTRIBUTION

A. rhinocerotis occurs in central, eastern, and southeastern Africa apparently wherever the rhinoceros is found.

WEST AFRICA: LIBERIA: LIBERIA: Bequaert (1930A) states that Neumann's (1901,1911) Liberian records of this species, repeated by Bedford and Hewitt (1925) and by Bedford (1932B) are in error. FRENCH EQUATORIAL AFRICA: Neumann (1899) listed A. aureum (a synonym of A. rhinocerotis) from "Ngourou Plains, Zanzibar. It is probable that this locality is actually N'Gourou, Ubangi-Shari, French Equatorial Africa.7

CENTRAL AFRICA: BELGIAN CONGO (Schwetz 1927A. River Misisi,
p.

Bequaert 19113.P. 92, is in Uganda. Tonelli Rondelli 19304.

NOTE: According to Theiler (correspondence), the record for Ruanda Urundi by Santos Dias (1954D) is in error.