396 ME. E. I. POCOCK ON THE 



rrom D. WTiitei, Gervais, a Mexican form, it differs in being 

 smaller, in Laving fewer pectinal teeth, the inferior caudal keels 

 not granular, the last abdominal sternite not costate, and slightly 

 also in the shape of the external surface of the hand. 



From B. mexicanus, Peters, which is possibly the male of 

 D. WJiitei, it also differs in not having the first four caudal 

 segments furnished with 10 keels. 



19. DiPLOCENTEFS SCABEE, Sp. n. 



$ . Colour fusco-ochraceous, palpi ferruginous. 

 Carapace finely granular throughout, the area between the 

 tubercle and the anterior excision not mesially sulcate. 

 The tergites also finely granular throughout. 

 The last sternite with four distinct, granulate, abbreviated 

 keels. 



Tail about the same relative length as in D. antillaoius, with 

 the intercarinal spaces finely granular and the keels distinctly 

 crenulate or granular ; the four anterior segments furnished 

 with 10 keels each. 



The palpi resembling those of D. antillaoius in form ; but the 

 " hand-back" bounded by two distinct smooth keels, one starting 

 from the upper and the other from the lower articular facet of 

 the movable digit and passing backwards to the posterior border 

 of the external surface of the hand. 

 Legs externally minutely granular. 

 Fectines short, furnished with 6 teeth. 



Total length 34!"5 millim., of carapace 4*3, of tail 17*5 ; width 

 of 1st segment almost 3, length 2. 



Locality. Jamaica (P. H. Gosse) and Barbados. 

 This species appears to resemble D. oneccicanus of Peters 

 (Men. Ak. Wiss. Berl. 1861, p. 512) in having the dorsal 

 surface granular and two keels on the back of the hand {cf. 

 Karsch, Mitth. Miinch. ent. Ver. 1879, p. 99). D. mexicanus, 

 however, at least differs in being considerably larger (50-55 

 millim.), and in having a greater number of pectinal teeth (12 or 

 more) {cf. Karsch, Zeits. Naturwissen. (3) v. p. 407, 1880). 



Grenus Oiclits, Simon, Ami. Soc. Ent. Fr. (5) x. pp^ 397-398 



(1880). 



According to Simon this genus differs from Diplocentrus in 



