154 NiCHOLiiS A\i> Bakxes. — rtcn New Terrcsirial Isopocls. 
In otliei- vesptH'ta, hoAvever, this spoeica differs from a typical 
Culxni,s to much tlie same extent as d(‘es Akcnnaiiia. The feeble 
develo]mu'u(: of the walking' lej;'s, tlie form of the terminal ainlom- 
iual se^'iiieiit and uropodsj the fohled coxojxidites of the meso- 
somatic se^’meiits are all more or less exce])tional in tliis genus. 
The great development of spines is, as already pointed out, 
])aralleled only in the S. .African and 8. Anunhean forms. Budde- 
Lnnd’s descri])tion of one of the latter Diploexochus (Cubans) 
(chiiialKs Brandt, is unfortunately not available, but from Miss 
K’icliardsoii s notes (U)B^, p. 479) it "would ajjpear to be remarkably 
like C. wilsniui'cl. 
('aharis londispinis Kichardson, "with ‘which it has very evident 
aflinities, has coxoj)odites np-on tlu' first and second mesosomatic 
segments, differing, however, in form and j)osition. Tliere are, also, 
minor differences, in the ceplialon (which instead of being slightly 
excavate is raised), in the nnml>er ami ari-angement of the spine;^ 
a.nd in the presence of tlie exojiodite n])on the uropod. No mention 
is made by Aliss Hichardson of scales, it is probable, therefore, 
that they ari' absent. 
In the a])i)areiit al)seuce of an exojiodite on the uropods 0., 
wilsmorci seems to differ from lonpispinis, D. echinatus and A. 
spinosa. 
(kmcerning the respiratory organs nothing is stated in either 
A. spinosa or C. lonpispinis. In ('. -wUsinorei, as noted above, a 
most cai'efnl search ami tlu- cutting and examination of serial 
sections failed to reveal any trace of tracheae. 
Thus, although in many features this • Western Australian form 
does not conform strictly to the (hibarid ty])e, it seems advisable 
for the ])iesent at least, to refer the species to that genus. It 
is jmssibly intermediate in character betAveen tlie South American 
form loiu/ispinis and the South African Akcrmania spinosa. 
The second of these new s])Ocies is a member of the family 
Scv])hacidae and of the genus Actmeia. It a^ipeai's to be the hrst 
memlx'r of this genus to be recoriled from Western Australia. 
This species was first collected by one of us (G.E.N.) at 
('ottesloe, duly 19tl4. Further siiecimens have since been collected 
ar Leighton and (k)ttesloe, duly 1925 and April 1920, but in A'ery 
small numbers. Their colour and habits, as mentioned beloAA', make 
them extremely difficult to find and ])robably account for the 
smallness of tlu' collection. 
It fits V('ry well into (diilton’s generic description of Aciaecia 
(1901, ]). IdO), and ai>pears to be intc'rmediate in structure betAA'een 
the two species he has described (1901) A. cuchroa and A. opihensis. 
