DIRHABDOPHALLUS. 161 
Key to the Central-American Genera. 
a. Upper surface of metazonites with a deep transverse sulcus, behind which 
the integument is ornamented with two rows of smooth or tubercular 
areas; 5th segment of legs much longer than 4th and almost as long as 
6th (at least in the type species) . . . . . . . . .. . . . Evrypornacuis. 
a’. Upper surface of metazonites with at most a shallow sulcus, the area 
behind it not differently sculptured from that in front of it. 
6. Terminal segment of legs short, its proximal extremity supported beneath 
by a pad-like process from the penultimate segment. 
c. Phallopod forming a simple twisted rod with at most very small 
accessory branches. . . . . 2... . ee ee ee) CC ¥CLORHABDUS. 
c’. Phallopod short, stout, and complicated . . . 2)... .) ).) OPuybactopHaLuvs. 
6*. Terminal segment of legs long, much longer than the penultimate and 
not supported beneath in either sex by a pad projecting forwards | 
from the penultimate. . . . . . 1... . 0 CDRH ABDOPHALLUS. 
DIRHABDOPHALLUS, gen. nov. 
Bady as wide anteriorly as in the middle. eels high, horizontal, and moderately well developed. Pores 
normal in number and very commonly, at all events, carried upon tuberculiform excrescences projecting 
from the lateral edge. Caudal process conical with truncate apex. Legs with terminal segments long, 
much longer than the penultimate (Sth) segment, which is only a little longer than the 4th segment. 
No arthrodial pad at the joint of the 5th and 6th segments beneath. Phallopods simple, consisting of 
two branches projecting straight forwards and not bent upwards at the tip; the inferior branch of the 
seminal stile sickle-shaped, with concavity looking inwards and geniculate at the base, the superior 
auxiliary branch wider and longer than the other, protecting it from above and forming a partial sheath 
over it. 
Type, D. montanus. 
Distribution. Central and South America. 
Brélemann (Ann. Soc. Ent. France, Ixvii. p. 284, 1898) stated that the genus 
Leptodesmus, Saussure, was based upon L. sallei, Sauss., and added that I replaced 
the name with Odontopeltis, without giving reasons for the change. This paragraph 
contains three mistakes due to neglect to consult the original bibliographical sources 
of the names. In the first place, I proposed Qdontopeltis as a substitute, not for 
Leptodesmus, but for Rhacoyhorus, C. Koch. In the second place, I gave as my 
reasons for the change the fact that Rhacophorus was preoccupied (Journ. Linn. Soc., 
Zool. xxiv. p. 509, 1893). In the third place—and this is a much more serious 
question,—Leptodesmus was not based upon L. sallei *, but upon five species described 
by Saussure as granulosus, subterraneus, carneus, aztecus, and yavanus (Linn. Ent. xiii. 
pp. 3823-324, 1859). JL. sallei, therefore, which was not added to the group until its 
revision by Saussure in 1860 (Mém. Soc. Phys. Genéve, xv. pp. 299-304), cannot be 
* T am glad to be able to share with Brélemann the responsibility for this error, since in the paper above 
cited I stated that L. sallec ‘‘ appears to be the type” of Leptodesmaus. 
BIOL. CENTR.-AMER., Diplop., December 199. 
