Cteniform Spiders of Ceylon, Burmah, &e. 333 
forms now before me. The second example, the smaller, 
appears to be a dwarf form, in which the vulva is not so well 
developed. Should this form occur in any number and the 
males accompanying them offer any decided difference from 
males accompanying the larger form, it will probably have 
to be described as a new species. 
The example of whose vulva I give a figure is not really 
closely allied to valvularis, fungifer, javanus, &e. The form 
of the vulva renders it very distinct from either, though of 
course in general characters all the forms described, except 
denticulatus, are very similar. 
1887. Ctenus ramosus, Thor. ¢ ad., 138} mm. Ann. Mus. 
Genov. ser. 2a, vol. v. May 31-Oct. 7, p.291. Bhamd, 
Burmah. 
1895. Ctenus ramosus, Thor. Spid. Burma, p. xxvii. 
3. Tib. 1.5 pair spines beneath; antice 1, postice 1—1, 
supra 1—1—1. Tib. iii. and iv. supra 1—1—1.  Protarsi 
i. and ul. beneath with 3 pair spines. 
Measurements.—Tot. len. 13°5 mm., carap. 7°5, ant. marge. 
2°03 legsi. 26°25, 11. 24°25, ui. 20, iv. 28°5; pat.+tib. iv. 9:5, 
Tibia of pedipalp. “x apice hujus procursus, e basi 
communi latiore, exeunt alii procursus gracillimi cornei fusci 
duo, quorum alter spinam levissime incurvam, ipso apice in 
trianoulum minutum dilatam, anteriora versus directam 
format, alter paullo fortior, deorsum et paullo intus directa 
est, fere in medio subito intus fractus et hoe loco extus 
dente toras directo armatus.’”’—“ Bulbus a latere visus partem 
longam crassam nitidam cylindratam a basi bulbi anteriora 
versus protensam ostendit, cujus apex subacuminatus deorsum 
curvatus est.”—“ Venter niger.’”—“ Hxemplum singulum 
adultum ad Bhamd invenit Fea. Marem preecedentis hane 
alaneam credere non possum, presertim quum pedes plane 
alio modo aculeatos habeat.” 
The fact that the legs in this male present a different 
spinulation to that of ‘ trabifer, 9 ,”” need not, of itself, afford 
evidence of a specific distinction as Thorell sug vests, In 
C. ceylonensis, sp. n., the difference in spinulation between 
the sexes is precisely as Thorell describes in ramosus, ¢, as 
contrasted with ¢trabéfer, 9 ; while the males of all ‘the 
Ctenine of the New World, so far as I have had experience 
of them, present the same difference. A male in Mr. Hose’s 
collection from Borneo also presents similar differences from 
the females. From Thorell’s description the tibia of the 
pedipalp in ramosus would seem to bear a general resemblance 
to that of ceylonensis, but certainly is not ‘identical with ifs 
