﻿RICE 
  GRASSHOPPERS 
  OF 
  GENUS 
  HIEROGLYPHUS 
  AND 
  THEIR 
  NEAREST 
  ALLIES. 
  233 
  

  

  hind 
  tarsi 
  are 
  marked 
  with 
  brown 
  instead 
  of 
  black 
  ; 
  the 
  head 
  above, 
  metazona 
  of 
  the 
  

   pronotum 
  and 
  hind 
  femora 
  above, 
  reddish 
  ; 
  hind 
  tibiae 
  faintly 
  bluish. 
  Subgenital 
  

   plate 
  with 
  the 
  carinae 
  not 
  very 
  distinct, 
  granulate. 
  

  

  $ 
  (type). 
  $ 
  (paratype). 
  

  

  Length 
  of 
  body 
  40 
  mm. 
  54 
  mm. 
  

  

  ,, 
  pronotum 
  9? 
  (hind 
  angle 
  13-5 
  

  

  broken 
  off) 
  

  

  „ 
  elytra 
  26 
  32-5 
  

  

  „ 
  hind 
  femur 
  22 
  27-5 
  

  

  The 
  type 
  is 
  from 
  Atbara, 
  Sudan 
  (British 
  Museum) 
  ; 
  the 
  paratype 
  from 
  Adamane, 
  

   Kamerun 
  (Brunner 
  von 
  Wattenwyl's 
  collection 
  in 
  the 
  Wiener 
  Staats-museum) 
  . 
  

  

  This 
  new 
  species, 
  unfortunately 
  represented 
  by 
  two 
  specimens 
  onty, 
  is 
  very 
  

   closely 
  related 
  to 
  the 
  Oriental 
  H. 
  concolor, 
  from 
  which 
  it 
  is 
  separated 
  by 
  only 
  a 
  few 
  

   characters 
  of 
  uncertain 
  value. 
  It 
  is 
  not 
  impossible 
  that 
  further 
  study 
  of 
  long 
  series 
  

   of 
  both 
  species 
  may 
  result 
  in 
  the 
  necessity 
  of 
  uniting 
  them, 
  but 
  I 
  believe 
  that, 
  even 
  

   in 
  that 
  case, 
  they 
  may 
  be 
  regarded 
  as 
  distinct 
  geographical 
  races 
  (subspecies). 
  The 
  

   differences 
  between 
  the 
  male 
  and 
  the 
  female 
  of 
  the 
  new 
  species 
  are 
  scarcely 
  more 
  

   than 
  individual, 
  and 
  I 
  do 
  not 
  hesitate 
  in 
  regarding 
  them 
  as 
  conspecific, 
  which 
  makes 
  

   the 
  range 
  of 
  distribution 
  of 
  the 
  species 
  to 
  extend 
  right 
  across 
  the 
  subequatorial 
  belt 
  

   of 
  Africa. 
  

  

  2. 
  Hieroglyphic 
  concolor 
  (Walk.) 
  (fig. 
  2 
  A). 
  

  

  1870. 
  Oxya 
  concolor, 
  Walker, 
  Cat. 
  Derm. 
  Salt. 
  Brit. 
  Mus., 
  iv, 
  p. 
  646. 
  

  

  1878. 
  Hieroglyphus 
  tarsalis, 
  Stal, 
  Bih. 
  Sven. 
  Akad. 
  Handl., 
  v 
  (4), 
  pp. 
  48, 
  93. 
  

  

  1893. 
  Hieroglyphus 
  citrinolimbatas 
  , 
  Brunner 
  v. 
  Wattenwyl, 
  Ann. 
  Mus. 
  Genova, 
  

  

  xxxiii, 
  p. 
  154. 
  

  

  1910. 
  Hieroglyphus 
  concolor, 
  Kirby, 
  Syn. 
  Cat. 
  Orth., 
  iii, 
  p. 
  397. 
  

  

  1910. 
  Hieroglyphus 
  citrinolimbatus, 
  Kirbj', 
  I.e., 
  p. 
  397. 
  

  

  1912. 
  Hieroglyphus 
  concolor 
  —-■ 
  tarsalis, 
  Bolivar, 
  Trab. 
  Mus. 
  Madrid, 
  no. 
  6, 
  p. 
  54. 
  

  

  1912. 
  Hieroglyphus 
  citrinolimbatus, 
  Bolivar, 
  I.e., 
  p. 
  54. 
  

  

  1914. 
  Hieroglyphus 
  citrinolimbatus, 
  Kirby, 
  Fauna 
  Brit. 
  Ind., 
  Acrid., 
  pp. 
  202, 
  205. 
  

  

  1914. 
  Hieroglyphus 
  concolor, 
  Kirby, 
  I.e., 
  p. 
  202, 
  205. 
  

  

  1916. 
  Hieroglyphus 
  tarsalis, 
  Carl, 
  Revue 
  Suisse 
  Zool., 
  xxiv, 
  no. 
  6, 
  pp. 
  478, 
  479. 
  

  

  1916. 
  Hieroglyphus 
  citrinolimbatus 
  Carl, 
  I.e., 
  pp. 
  478, 
  479. 
  

  

  1918. 
  Hieroglyphus 
  concolor, 
  Bolivar, 
  Trab. 
  Mus. 
  Madrid, 
  no. 
  34, 
  p. 
  22. 
  

  

  1918. 
  Hieroglyphus 
  tarsalis, 
  Bolivar, 
  I.e., 
  p. 
  29. 
  

  

  1918. 
  Hieroglyphus 
  citrinolimbatus, 
  Bol., 
  I.e., 
  p. 
  30. 
  

  

  As 
  I 
  have 
  had 
  the 
  opportunity 
  of 
  comparing 
  cotypes 
  of 
  H. 
  citrinolimbatus, 
  Br. 
  Watt., 
  

   with 
  the 
  types 
  of 
  Oxya 
  concolor 
  t 
  Walk., 
  and 
  also 
  of 
  comparing 
  the 
  latter 
  with 
  the 
  good 
  

   description 
  of 
  H. 
  tarsalis, 
  Stal, 
  I 
  do 
  not 
  hesitate 
  in 
  regarding 
  all 
  the 
  three 
  species 
  as 
  

   identical. 
  The 
  onhy 
  reason 
  for 
  separating 
  citrinolimbatus 
  is 
  that 
  it 
  has 
  the 
  pronotum 
  

   very 
  narrowly 
  marginated 
  with 
  yellow, 
  which 
  character 
  is, 
  however, 
  obviously 
  of 
  

   no 
  specific 
  value, 
  since 
  it 
  varies 
  even 
  in 
  the 
  small 
  series 
  of 
  specimens 
  before 
  me. 
  

  

  The 
  general 
  coloration 
  of 
  this 
  species 
  varies 
  from 
  greenish-yellow 
  to 
  brownish- 
  

   yellow 
  ; 
  the 
  transverse 
  sulci 
  of 
  the 
  pronotum 
  are 
  very 
  narrowly, 
  or 
  not 
  at 
  all, 
  

   blackened 
  ; 
  the 
  coloration 
  of 
  the 
  hind 
  tarsi 
  (see 
  the 
  key 
  to 
  species) 
  is 
  very 
  character- 
  

   istic. 
  The 
  size 
  is 
  very 
  variable, 
  as 
  the 
  following 
  dimensions 
  show 
  : 
  — 
  

  

  &? 
  99 
  

  

  Length 
  of 
  body 
  . 
  . 
  .. 
  30-45 
  mm. 
  .. 
  46-60 
  mm. 
  

  

  ,, 
  pronotum 
  . 
  . 
  7-10 
  ,, 
  . 
  . 
  13-16 
  ,, 
  

  

  elvtra 
  .. 
  22-32 
  „ 
  .. 
  33-45 
  ., 
  

  

  hind 
  femur 
  .. 
  16-22 
  ,, 
  .. 
  25-? 
  

  

  