The Male Genital Armature of the Dermaptera. 439 



dorisB Dubr. a little longer than, the metaparameres (PI. VIII. 

 figs. 6 and 7). 



I maintain firmly the conviction that I have expressed else- 

 where, that Gonolahidura colzi Zacher is identical with G. piligera 

 Bonn., and that Allosthetella (which should be written Allodethella) 

 malayana Zacher and A. nitens Zacher are but familiar colour- 

 variants of A. doritv Dubr. 



Gonolahidura astruei Burr, the first Allostethid recorded from 

 India, has the genitalia typical of the group, but noteworthy is 

 the narrow double chitin-plate in the apex of the preputial 

 sac. 



I cannot understand why Zacher brings the names Gonolabis 

 and Usphalmenus into discussion under this sub-family. He im- 

 plies that I have suggested at some time a relationship between 

 those genera and the Allostethidm, of which I am entirely 

 innocent. 



The female has two pairs of gonapophyses, the first pair broad 

 and rounded, delicate and membranous, the second pair narrower. 

 I cannot find any mention of them either in Verhoeff nor in 

 Zacher. 



In A. indicum, the manubrium is rather narrow, distinctly 

 longer than broad, almost parallel-sided, and rounded at the tip 

 (PI. VIII. fig. 10). 



Sub-Family 7. Pyragrin.e. 



This group was practically unknown to Zacher, so that he 

 confines himself to a statement as to the reduction of the female 

 gonapophyses. 



Unfortunately I have had no fresh or spirit material to 

 examine, and so have been obliged to content myself with the 

 preparation of very old and dry specimens, in none of which 

 is the virga discernible, but the form of the parameres is quite 

 distinct. The metaparameres are much shorter than the pro- 

 parameres, and are socketed in with a distinct hinge. The 

 metaparameres are convex on the outer margin, narrowed at the 

 tips, concave on the inner margin in the apical half, with a blunt, 

 rounded projection in the basal half, which corresponds to the 

 inner basal tooth in the Echinosomatinse, which are undoubtedly 

 related to the Pyragrinx. 



I can detect no difference between the genitalia of Pyragra 

 fuscata Serv. and P. dohrni Scudd (PL VIII. figs. 11 and 12). 



Of the allied genus Pyragropsis Bor. (= Propyragra Burr), in 

 P. paraguayensis Bor., the parameres are exactly the same in form, 

 only a little smaller (PI. VIII. fig. 13). 



But in P. thoracica Serv. there is a well-marked difference ; the 



