LOCUSTID.E. LOClJSTA. 19 



Antenna clzvatai : • . . . . .9. Qomphocehos. 



filiformes, baud clavatse. 



Thorax postice rotundatus vix productus. 



JE^/^^m plerumque longitudine abdominis . 7- Locusta. 



valde abbreviatis : . .8. Podisjia. 



postice longe productus : i . . 10. Acrydium. 



Genus VII.— LOCUSTA,* Leach. 



Antennae with about twenty-four joints, short, filiform, inserted each in a 

 cavity between the eyes ; head large, mouth conspicuous ; eyes ovate, not 

 prominent; ocelli three, placed triangularly; face tumid, slightly cari- 

 nated; thorax with a central raised line, and mostly with a more or less 

 distinct one on each side, sometimes straight, at others angulated or curved ; 

 the lateral portion deflexed, the hinder margin rounded ; elytra and wings 

 generally as long as the abdomen, the latter solid, subcylindric, with its back 

 occasionally carinated ; the apex in the male recurved, in the female with 

 four horny moveable styles ; legs slightly pilose, the four anterior placed 

 nearly tetragonally, and short; tibia; all with two rows of spines; posterior 

 legs much longer than the body, robust and formed for leaping ; tarsi with 

 a small fleshy cushion between the claws. 



The insects of this genus, familiarly known by the name Grass- 

 hoppers, are well distinguished from Podisma by having the elytra 

 and wings nearly as long as, or longer than, the abdomen ; from Gom- 

 phocerus their slender and simple antennae remove them ; and the form 



* This is one of those genera — like A.mara, &c. — alluded to in the Postscript 

 to vol. V. p. 439, which I would, if consistent with the plan of my work, have 

 passed over temporarily, but being compelled to proceed in a given track, I 

 must endeavour to discriminate and describe the species ; and I believe that I 

 am correct in asserting that amongst the very numerous collections of indi- 

 genous insects that it has fallen to my lot to examine, not one has the species 

 of this genus named, or even divided from each other; and, as my own 

 specimens alone have been my guide, it is possible that some species may be 

 omitted, or that, from the peculiarities amongst some of them in a dried state, 

 I may have decided improperly in some instances. In reference to one remark 

 in the Postscript above referred to, I have to observe, that my object was not 

 to disparage the accuracy of the Monographia Apum Angliae — far from it — 

 my intention there being merely to show that without the authentic typical 

 specimens beit)g at hand, it is not always possible to determine whether other 

 specimens in a different state of perfection are identical therewith, and which 

 is the sense in which Mr. Shuckard intends his remarks, as quoted by me : — 

 and, as regards the insects described in this work from my own collection, I 

 invite a comparison with my specimens, which are open to inspection every 

 Wednesday evening. 



C2 



