SCHIZOPELMA. 29 
this distinct species have been received from Mr. Smith. The form of the palpal bulb 
of the male is evidently very similar to that of Eurypelma striatipes, Auss., though it 
is not likely that the two forms are identical. 
2. Schizopelma macropus. (Tab. I. figg. 10, 10a, ¢.) 
Crypsidromus macropus, Auss. Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien, xxv. p. 179, t. 6. figg. 24, 25 (1875)*. 
Type, ¢, in Brit. Mus., ex coli. Keyserling. 
Hab. Mexico, Orizaba }. 
Under Crypsidromus*, Ausserer included at any rate two forms with tarsus iv. 
divided beneath—C. macropus and C. pernizx—adult males, each of which must be 
referred to a different genus. For the first, the type, having only one spur beneath 
tibia i. at the apex, with dicarinatum, sp. n., I have founded the genus Schizopelma. 
* Crypsipromus, Auss. Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien, xxi. p. 193 (1871). 
Ausserer, in his diagnosis of the genus Crypsidromus, gives no character whereby one may clearly understand 
on what his genus is based. The diagnosis is apparently drawn from a female, though he does not say so. 
The characters given would apply equally well to an immature female of the genus Hurypelma. I have not seen 
the type, C. isabellinus, Auss., and therefore hesitate to refer any species to the genus Crypsidromus, Auss. 
Of the forms in Keyserling’s collection referred by Ausserer to C. pernia and C. macropus, the former 
differs so much from the latter that they cannot be retained in the same genus, and after such a discovery 
one is naturally still more disinclined to refer any particular form to Crypsidromus until the actual type- 
specimen can be examined. 
Crrtosternum, Ausserer, Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien, xxv. p. 176 (1875). 
Type C. cursor, 2, Auss. 
All that Ausserer says of the type is:—“In der Sammlung des Herrn Grafen Keyserling finden sich 
mehrere Weibchen dieser Art aus St. Domingo.” 
The specimens referred to are now before me and are quite distinct generically from the other forms allied 
to Crypsidromus, which fall readily into Cyrtopholis, Sim. (in part) (see Table in Nat. Hist. Araign. éd. 2, 
i. p. 143). This distinction, which Simon appears to have overlooked, lies in the circular convex sternum, as 
Ausserer clearly points out (Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien, xxv. p. 176), “ Das Sternum sehr stark gewélbt, so 
lang als breit.” 
The name Cyrtosternum being preoccupied, however, Simon has renamed the genus, of which C. cursor is 
the type, Cyrtopholis. As regards the identity of Crypsidromus innocuus, Auss., it is not possible to speak 
with certainty; but seeing that Ausserer was fully alive to the character furnished by the sternum of 
Crypsidromus, ‘‘Sternum linger als weit,” compared with that of Cyrtosternwm quoted above, it may be 
inferred that Cyrtopholis cursor (Auss.) is not congeneric with Crypsidromus innocuus, Auss. Why M. Simon 
should conclude that Cyrtosternum cursor, of which he says “‘ ’espéce type m’est inconnue,” is congeneric with 
a form which he identifies as Crypsidromus innocuus, Auss., I cannot suggest, except that he has overlooked 
the chief character given by Ausserer as distinctive of Cyrtosternum, and has seized on another character 
which he regards, probably correctly, as insufficient for a generic distinction. 
