Dr. Murai Éva szerk.: Parasitologia Hungarica 16. (Budapest, 1983)

and D. mehrai were regarded to be synonymous with D. amphichrus. AGRAWAL (1966) apparently shared SINGH'

s (1954) opinion, agreeing with his synonymization. MANTER and PRITCHARD (1964) considered D. sinicus as a valid species and they placed D. melanosticti in synonymy with D. sinicus

. MUKHERJEE (1966) due to the minor differences in D. a. mag nus

, D. a. japonicus and D. mehrai from D. amphichrus

, regards the former three species to be synonymous with D. amphichrus. FISCHTHAL and THOMAS (1968), on the basis of African (Ghanian) material, raised SRrVASTAVA's (1934) subspecies to specific rank; and at the same time D. amphichrus of SINGH (1954) and AGRAWAL (1966) were declared as synonyms of D. magnus. In another paper FISCHTHAL (1977), however, came to the conclusion that D. magnus FISCHTHAL et THOMAS, 1968; nec SRIVASTAVA, 1934 is a synonym of D. fischthalicus MESKAL, 1970, a frog amphistome from Ethiopia. YAMAGUTI (1971), after examination of FISCHTHAL'

s African material, pointed out that D. magnus of FISCHTHAL and THOMAS, 1968 does not agree with SRIVASTAVA's sample because the African specimens have a definitive anterior sphincter in the pharynx. NAMA and KHICHI (1973) described the subspecies D. a. brevis and expressed their conviction, to the contrary of MUKHERJEE'

s (1966) opinion, of the validity of the species, synonymized by him. Fig. 20: Diplodiscus subclavatus (Goeze,1782) Fig. 21: Australodiscus megalorchus (Johnston, (original) 1912) nov. comb, (after Johnston, 1912)