not correct as they possess a fourth pair above, equal in length to his “middle pair”, which Hutton failed to observe. Describing the hind tarsi, Hutton says, “The first joint longer than the other three together”, while the first segment is actually not quite as long as the other three together. According to Hutton the subgenital plate of the male is longer than broad, but it is really broader than long. In the female he says the subgenital plate is short and has “the apex with three points”. This does not agree with my specimens as the plate is short and widely emarginate; but in Hutton's type material for the species the plate is not visible.

From the foregoing it can be seen that the differences between P. serratum and Hutton's generic description of Pleioplectron when considered together are major ones. Thus it appears that P. serratum was not placed in the correct genus. Any one of these characters might be disregarded generically, but together they have a definite significance and so, because of this, I propose to make P. serratum the type species of a new genus Novoplectron.

The genus Novoplectron is now defined as follows:

Body rather stout, sparsely clothed with short setae. Antennae very long and tapering, three times as long as body, almost touching at their bases; scape about four times as large as pedicel, which is narrower than scape, but broader than other segments; pedicel as broad as long; third segment narrower than pedicel, on dorsal aspect one third as long again, and on ventral aspect half as long again as pedicel; from fourth segment onwards to about 0.33 length of flagellum, segments broader than long, more distally segments become unequal in length and steadily decrease in size Scape thickly clothed with setae; segments from pedicel to fourteenth segment sparsely clothed with setae; from fourteenth segment onwards all segments thickly clothed with short golden setae. Head vertical; compound eyes laterad, nearly elliptical; a single anterior, white, median ocellus only. Fastigium almost as high as long, rising abruptly, slightly sulcate, with base touching scape of antennae. Mandibles small. Maxillary palpi with third segment 0.625 length of fourth. Pronotum rounded anteriorly and produced in front over occiput, truncated posteriorly; pronotum, mesonotum and metanotum not margined. Sternum transversely narrowed, metasternum bearing a median tubercle. Fore coxae close together, but not quite touching, each armed laterally with a spine. All femora sulcate ventrally. Femora, tibiae and two proximal segments of hind tarsi armed with variable numbers of spines above and below. No spines occur on fore femora, or fore and middle tarsi. Apical spines on femora, tibiae and two proximal segments of hind tarsi constant in number–fore femur bears one spine beneath prolaterally; fore tibia bears four spines, one above and one beneath, both prolaterally and retrolaterally; fore tarsus is unarmed; middle femur bears two spines beneath, one prolateral, the other retrolateral; middle tibia bears four spines, one above and one beneath, both prolaterally and retrolaterally; middle tarsus unarmed; posterior femur bears one spine above prolaterally; posterior tibia has a pair of apical spurs above clothed with setae, two pairs of apical spines–one pair above and one beneath, and a pair of smaller subapical spines beneath, one from each pair being prolateral and the other retrolateral; posterior tarsus two proximal segments each has two spines above, one prolateral and one retrolateral; other two segments unarmed. Proximal segment of hind tarsus nearly as long as the other three segments together. Cerci long, slender, tapering, unsegmented, clothed with long and short setae. Subgenital plate of female much broader than long, with distal margin widely emarginate. Ovipositor sabre-shaped, 0.66 to 0.75 as long as body Subgenital plate of male triangular, broader than long, sides spreading slightly proximally, tapering abruptly to concave distally, with a rounded apex; lanceolate distal portion thickly clothed with short setae on both dorsal and ventral surfaces Laterally the plate bears two styli thickly clothed with short setae; the lanceolate distal portion of the plate and the two styli are joined laterally by a connective membrane.

Type species for the genus: Novoplectron serratum (Hutton).

Novoplectron serratum (Hutton), 1904.

1904. Pleioplectron serratum Hutton, Trans. N.Z. Inst 36, p. 154.

1925. Pleioplectron serratum Hutton, Rec. Cant. Mus. Vol. II, No. 5, pp. 306–307, Figs. 6–8.

Plate 24, Figs. 3, 4. Text-fig. 2, Figs. 1–4.

There are several small points in which my material differs from Hutton's description of the species Pleioplectron serratum, but none of them are as important as the generic differences. Hutton says, “Fore and middle femora unarmed below”, but in some specimens the middle femora do bear spines, although the fore femora

never have them. However, in the type material neither fore nor middle femora possess spines. The hind femora, according to Hutton, are armed “with fifteen teeth below in each row, those of the outer row smaller than those of the inner”. In 1924 Miss Lysaght found the number of spines on the hind femora very variable, and counts of the type material gave for the two females 15, 16; and 10, 13; and the two males 22, 14; and 14, 14. In 1954 I re-examined this type material and found the spines for the two females were really 17–17, 18–17; and 10–18, 12–16; and the two males 19–21, 15–24; and 13–18, 14–17. Although Miss Lysaght's figures and mine do not agree, they both differ from Hutton's and show the wide range of

Text-fig. 2–Novoplectron serratum (Hutton). Fig. 1–Female genitalia ventral view. Fig. 2–Female genitalia dorsal view. Fig. 3–Male genitalia ventral view. Fig. 4–Male gentalia dorsal view.
Scale 0.3 cm applies to Figs. 1, 2 Scale 0.2 cm applies to Figs. 3, 4. For list of abbreviations, see index at end of paper,

variability which occurs. Hutton describes the fore and middle tibiae as having three pairs of spines below and none above. This, however, is not always the case and the middle tibiae usually bear two or three prolateral spines above as well as an occasional-retrolateral one. These spines are present in the type material, but were missed by Hutton. Hutton says the spines on the hind tibiae range from 16–20, but in actual fact the amount of variation is considerably greater. In the three female types the subgenital plate is hidden and so is undescribed; however, it is visible in some of the females collected on the 1954 Expedition and is short and widely emarginate. Hutton's measurements of the type material agrees with my measurements except that the length of the pronotum in the male is 8 mm., not 15 mm.; the width of the mesonotum is 12 mm., not 9 mm. in the male, and 12 mm., not 8 mm. in the female; and the total length is 27 mm., not 32 mm. in the male, and 22 mm., not 27 mm. in the female. The measurements tend to vary among different members of the species.

In 1925 Miss Lysaght added further points to Hutton's description of P. serratum. Of the antennae she says, “The first two joints of the antennae are longer than broad, those following are broader than long till about one-third of the length from the tip, where they become longer in proportion”, but although the scape is longer than broad, the pedicel is as broad as long and the third segment is longer than broad; from the fourth segment onwards to about a third of the length of the flagellum the segments are broader than long Miss Lysaght recognised the range of variation which occurs in the spination of the legs. Describing the apical spines of the fore tibia she says, “There is one pair of apical spines below, and a single apical spine at the side”, but in all the specimens I have examined there are four apical spines, two above and two beneath. Unfortunately most of her remarks on the apical spines are so confusing that they cannot be followed, and therefore must be disregarded. With regard to the spination of the hind tibiae she says, “The number of spines on the hind tibia, which Hutton gives as 16 to 20, ranges from 18 to 28 on either margin in the females examined, and in the males from 19 to 25”. From examination of 30 specimens I can see no reason for this division of the sexes. Also she says of the apical spines, “In the female there are three pairs of apical spines, the hind tibia and one very large unpaired spine on the inside; the male has four pairs of apical spines on the hind tibia” This statement is completely without foundation, both the male and female possessing four pairs of apical spines on the hind tibia in the type material and in the specimens collected on the 1954 Expedition. Miss Lysaght was trying to draw attention to a sexual dimorphism which does not exist in the spination of the legs.

The differences observed between my specimens and the specific descriptions given by Hutton and Miss Lysaght all point to variation within the species and, although they should be recorded because of this, they are of no real taxonomic value.

From examination of 30 specimens of N. serratum, the main specific features by which it can be easily recognised appear to be.

• (1) Constancy in shape of the subgenital plate in both male and female.

• (2) Hind femora inflated in mature male only.

• (3) Constancy in number of apical spines of the legs.

• (4) Fore femora, and fore and middle tarsi without spines.

• (5) Proximal segment of hind tarsus nearly as long as other three segments together.

• (6) Maxillary palps with third segment 0.625 length of fourth.

• (7) Metasternum bearing a median tubercle.

The species Novoplectron serratum is now redefined as follows:

Colour: Basic colour of body medium to dark fuscous with lateral portions of terga paler fuscous; pronotum, mesonotum and metanotum not margined, no pale line on the pro-