Orthoptera in the British Museum. 121 
lobes in male nearly quadrate with inner margins arched and inter- 
space 24 times as long as wide in its middle; in the female the said 
lobes are of the same form, with interspace twice as long as its width 
in the middle; metasternal lobes contiguous in male and distant 
in female. Male anal plate lanceolate, rotundate at the apex; 
cerci longer than this plate, compressed laterally, with parallel sides 
and acute apex, incurved at their middle and bent downwards 
before apex; subgenital plate short, but longer than cerci, very 
obtuse, hairy. Fore and middle femora thickened in male. Hind 
femora narrow, slender, with one series of bracket-shaped black 
spots both on outer and inner side. Hind tibiae slightly widened 
towards apex, with rounded keels, armed with 9-11 spines outwardly 
and 9-10 inwardly, without outer apical spine. Hind tarsi with 
second joint very short. 
Genotype: Cyrtacanthacris pictipes Wall. 
1, Jucundacris pictipes Walk. 
1870. Cyrtacanthacris pictupes Walker, Cat. Derm. Salt. 
B.M., iii, p. 575, no. 51. 
1907. [Acridium] pictipes Finot, Ann. Soc. Ent. Fr., [xxvi, 
p. 328, no. 56. 
1910. Eluprepocnemis] pietupes Mrbys Syn. Cat. Orth., 
i, p. 561, no. 9. 
1914. Thisoecetrus jucundus Carl, Rev. Suisse Zool., 24, 
p. 496, pl. 2, fig. 15. 
1914. Thisoecetrus hottentotus, I. Bolivar, Trab. Mus. 
Madrid, ser. Zool., N 20, p. 29. 
This handsome insect has been recently described by 
Bolivar and by J. Carl (1. c.); the latter author mentions 
some of its striking characters which give it a rather isolated 
position amongst species of T'hisorcetrus, where he placed 
it. The structure of antennae and sternum shows clearly 
that it is nearer to Huprepocnemis, but the peculiar shape 
of the male cerci, the type of coloration of the hind femora, 
as well as the form of the inner margins of the mesosternal 
lobes, are characteristic enough to base a new genus on 
them. The description of the species given by Carl is 
so precise that it allows me undoubtedly to conclude that 
his 7. jucundus is identical with Walker’s Cyrtacanthacris 
pictipes ; the probability of such identity has been supposed 
by Dr. Carl himself, though with some doubt; this is quite 
easy to understand in view of the recognised unsatisfactory 
character of Walker’s descriptions. The small difference 
