Identification. The original description (Nagel 1941) is informative, with the unique male holotype illustrated as a sketch (reproduced in correct size among the specimens examined by us). Nagel(1941) hesitated to regard his female specimen (actually not A. imitator) as the correct female of this species, therefore his female specimen should not be included into the type material, making the unique male specimen a holotype. This holotype was most probably destroyed. Benesh(1960) incorrectly treated thistaxon as a synonym of A. bidens, overlooking the big size of the holotype (length of body includingmandibles 27mm) and the excised anterior angle of the pronotum. However, Fujita (2010) illustrated amale from Guangxi matching with the holotype in most details. We also examined a small series of specimens from Guangxi and found that the male genitalia of this species are different from those of theother known species. In conclusion, this species is a bona species, with well marked differences in both male and female genitalia from all other species. It seems to be a much larger version of A. kuangtungensis, but with very different genital structures from the latter.