Hutton had called Talitropsis crassicruris in 1896. On examination of the hind femur he found a small spine on the inner side in contrast to Hutton's statement, “Femora without any apical spines”. Hutton also described the fore tibia as having “two pairs of spines” beneath, while Alfken found his specimens had four alternating spines. The hind femur has, according to Hutton, “two spines on the outer edge”; but Alfken found two spines on one leg and one on the other. Alfken then says, “If in spite of this I identify our specimens with Talitropsis crassicruris, I do this because I presume that in Hutton mistakes of observation are present in these

Text-fig. 1–Talitropsis crassicruris Hutton Fig. 1–Female genitalia ventral view. Fig. 2–Female genitalia dorsal view Fig. 3–Male genitalia dorsal view. Fig. 4–Male genitalia ventral view, hypandrium in place Fig. 5–Male genitalia ventral view, hypandrium removed to expose structures beneath. Scale 0.4 cm applies to Fig. 1 Scale 0.3 cm applies to Figs. 2, 3, 4, 5. For list of abbreviations, see index at end of paper.

points”. However, Alfken considers these three differences are sufficient to warrant erecting a new genus Gammaroparnops for the species.

Comparison of the generic description of Gammaroparnops with my specimens shows several differences Alfken says, “Femora antica et intermedia inermia”, whereas apical spines may occur on both femora. Also the hind femora each usually bear two apical spines, one prolateral and the other retrolateral, while Alfken observed only the inner one. Spine counts of the legs of 26 specimens have shown that the number of spines mentioned by Hutton and Alfken are both correct, and that variation is common throughout the species, so that it cannot be used as a taxonomic character. Whether the spines on the fore tibiae are paired or irregular is not of sufficient importance taxonomically to warrant consideration here.

In 1925, Miss Lysaght expanded Alfken's description when she examined material collected on the 1924 Otago Institute trip to the Chatham Islands. The description agrees with the specimens except that her statement, “Front and mid femur unspined”, is not always correct, although Hutton's type material does lack spines. Also she records only the prolateral apical spine on the hind femur, and failed to observe the retrolateral one. She realised that variability occurred in the number of spines present on the hind tibia, but did not expand this to cover the other segments in all the legs. She also noted the variability in width of the hind tibiae.

The differences which Alfken raises to support his decision to remove this species from the genus Talitropsis Bolivar and describe for it a new genus Gammaroparnops, do not seem to me to be sufficiently strong to warrant such a step. The spination of the hind femora and fore tibiae are variable throughout the species and cannot be used as taxonomic characters. The other point of the hind femur possessing a small apical spine which Hutton failed to observe does not seem to me sufficient evidence on its own for changing the generic name, especially as the generic description of Talitropsis says, “Femora without apical spines, or with a short stout one on the inner side.” In actual fact, I have found there are sometimes two apical spines on the hind femur, but because of the close agreement of the species crassicruris to the generic description of Talitropsis in all other points, I think it can be regarded as an oversight on Hutton's part, and of specific rank only. Thus I propose to place this weta back in its original genus Talitropsis Bolivar and synonymise Gammaroparnops Alfken with Talitropsis.

From examination of 26 specimens of T. crassicruris the main specific features by which it can be easily recognised appear to be:

• (1) Hind tibae dilated and flattened above in both male and female.

• (2) Constancy in shape of the subgenital plate in the male.

• (3) Fore and middle femora usually without spines, but sometimes possessing apical spines.

• (4) Second segment of hind tarsi less than half the length of first segment.

• (5) Maxillary palps with third and fourth segments subequal.

The species Talitropsis crassicrusis is now redefined as follows:

Colour: Basic colour mid-brown, marbled with deep ochrous; pronotum, mesonotum and metanotum not margined; abdominal segments with a deeper brown band at distal margin; anal segment dark brown; fore and middle femora, tibiae and tarsi pale ochrous, interspersed with transverse bands of deeper ochrous; hind femora ochrous with narrow bands of brown; apex of hind femora, hind tibiae and hind tarsi deep reddish-brown; ovipositor deep reddish-brown.

Body: Length up to 24 mm., average length 23 mm. Body sparsely clothed with short golden setae. Ovipositor 0.625 as long as body. Antennae 3.5 times as long as body. Compound eyes nearly as wide as long. Fastigium almost as high as long, rising abruptly, slightly convex, with base touching scapes of antennae. Maxillary palps with third and fourth segments subequal. Pronotum, mesonotum and metanotum margined; sternum transversely narrowed, metasternum with a low rounded medial elevation. Cerci, Figs. 1, 2 (C), long, tapering, unsegmented, clothed with long and short setae; 0.25 length of ovipositor. Bodies of male and female subequal.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

For list of abbreviations, see index at end of paper.

For list of abbreviations, see index at end of paper.