RHINOCRICUS. 69 
_ As remarked above (p. 64) this species was based upon a large number of indi- 
viduals. The antenne are described as very short (“brevissime”) and strongly 
compressed. ‘The body is smooth, shining, finely shagreened or rather striolate. The 
transverse sulcus is strongly marked. 
Number of segments 55 to 58. Length 63, width 6 millim. 
16. Rhinocricus zapotecus. 
Julus zapotecus, Sauss. Mém. Soc. Phys. Genéve, xv. p. 559, fig. 30 (1860). 
Hab. Mexico. 
According to de Saussure, this species inhabits the same localities in Mexico as 
R. aztecus, to which it is so closely allied that the distinctness of the two was, to the 
describer, a matter of doubt. It was described as being more attenuated anteriorly, 
R. aztecus being parallel-sided, and larger, the total length being 93 millim., as 
compared with 65. 
17. Rhinocricus totanacus. 
Julus totanacus, Sauss, Mém. Soc. Phys. Genéve, xv. p. 561, fig. 31 (1860). 
Hab. Mexico, Orizaba. 
Described as very nearly allied to &. aztecus, but larger and smoother, with a 
distinct though short caudal process and the transverse sulcus on the segments feeble 
and ornamented with close-set punctures. In both of these features it approaches 
£. smitht and &. aurocinctus, described above, but apparently differs from both in its 
more slender and cylindrical shape. 
Number of segments 60. Length 100, width 8 millim. 
18. Rhinocricus chichimecus. 
Julus chichimecus, Sauss. Linn. Ent. xiii. p. 831° (1859) ; Mém. Soc. Phys. Genéve, xv. p. 562, 
t. 5. fig. 82 (1860). 
Spirobolus chichimecus, Sauss. & Humb. Miss. Sci. Mex., Myr. p. 82. 
Hab. Mexico. 
Allied to &. aztecus, but very much larger, and with the inferior strie restricted to 
the area just above the base of the legs. 
Number of segments 49-50. Length 120, width 13 millim. 
19. Rhinocricus brevicollis. 
Spirobolus brevicollhis, Voges, Zeitschr. wissen. Zool. xxxi. pp. 191, 192. 
Hab. Mexico, * Mazatlan *, 
Compared with &. zapotecus (Sauss.). The transverse sulcus of the segments is strong, 
* The locality is given as “ Misatlan,” probably in mistake for Mazatlan or Misantla. 
