66 REPORT ON THE CENTIPEDES AND MILLIPEDES OBTAINED BY 



Family. Eucratonychidae, nov. 

 Eucratonyx, gen. nov. 

 PL VI, Figs. 2— 2 c. 



Antennae broad at the base, attenuated apicaHy. 



Head covering maxillipedes, frontal plate distinct, suture weak ; basal segment 

 almost as wide as the head, but not covering the pleurae of the maxillipedes ; pre- 

 basal plate either concealed by the head or appearing as a transversely linear sclerite. 



Labrum not coalesced, undivided, appearing as a broad transverse plate the edge 

 of which is sinuous, slightly convex at the sides, broadly and shallowly emarginate in 

 the middle ; armed with about thirty spinules, horny and close-set in the middle, 

 transparent and directed inwards at the sides. (Fig. 2.) 



Mandibles with the cutting edge toothed anteriorly (internally), pectinate posteriorly 

 (externally) [apparently with only one pectinate and one dentate lamella]. (Fig. 2 a.) 



Maxillae with external branch two-jointed : internal branch large and lobate. (Fig. 2 6.) 



Maxillipedes of 1st pair with their coxae united by a narrow bridge ; claw strong 

 and pectinate. Coxal plate of second maxillipedes about twice as wide as long; chitinous 

 lines distinct, 



Tergites strongly bisulcate. Sternites with pores arranged in an irregular posterior 

 transverse series, a few scattered pores in the middle and fore part of the plates. 

 Stigma-bearing sclerite in contact with tergite. 



Anal pleurae moderately inflated, covered but not closely with fairly large pores; 

 anal legs long, moderately thick, clawless. 



Type, Eucratonyx meinerti (Poc). 



This species was described originally under the genus Himantarium (Journ. Linn. Soc. 

 xxi., p. 289, pi. xxiv., fig. 1; also Ann. Mus. Genova, xxx., p. 42, 1891). It certainly, 

 however, differs in many important characters from H. gabrielis, the type of the last-named 

 genus. Nor am I able to bring it into line with any of the families of Geophilomorpha 

 established by Mr Cook. I am consequently compelled to create a new family for its 

 reception. Tested by Cook's analytical table of the families of this group the Eucra- 

 tonychidae fall alongside the Schendylidae under section D, but the size of the head 

 and basal plate as compared with the prehensors (2nd maxillipedes), the distribution 

 of the sternal pores, etc., seem to prohibit such a reference. 



(12) Eucratonyx hamatus, sp. n. 

 PI. VI, Fig. 2 c. 



This species and E. meinerti may be distinguished as follows : 



(a) Pleurae of the prehensorial maxillipedes showing very visibly at the sides of 

 the basal plate ; claws of legs in anterior half of the body weaker and but 

 little curved. Number of legs from 103 (<?) up to 119 (?); length of % up 

 to 112 mm meinerti, Poc. Burmah, etc. 



