Crickets (Insecta, Orthoptera, Gryllidea) are amongst the most abundant and diverse insects in New Caledonia: 40 genera are recorded today from the Archipelago and 180 cricket species have been reported; 19 genera and more than 90% of the species are endemic. Owing to this diversity, crickets prove an interesting model to test evolutionary hypotheses about New Caledonia and its fauna. They also reveal useful ecological indicators to survey and manage New Caledonian biodiversity. Both research and conservation developments need however that crickets are properly identified. In the present paper, an illustrated key to the identification of New Caledonian cricket genera is proposed, based on specimen examination; an emended diagnosis is given for each genus, using general morphology, coloration and the main traits of male genitalia, together with available data on habitat and biology. The genus Paora Gorochov, 1986 n. stat. is restored from its synonymy with Apteronemobius Chopard, 1929, Trigonidomorpha Chopard, 1925 n. stat. is restored as a valid genus, not a subgenus of Trigonidium Rambur, 1839, and one new genus and five new species are described: Archenopterus adamantus Desutter-Grandcolas, n. sp. (Gryllidae, Podoscirtinae), Caledonina Desutter-Grandcolas, n. gen., with Caledonina chopardi Desutter-Grandcolas, n. gen., n. sp. as the type species, Koghiella minima Desutter-Grandcolas, n. sp. and Orintia cornuta Desutter-Grandcolas, n. sp. (Trigonidiidae, Nemobiinae), and Lepidogryllus darthvaderi Desutter-Grandcolas & Anso, n. sp. (Gryllidae, Gryllinae).

We present a catalogue and systematic overview of Uropeltidae Müller, 1832 based on both new and previously published molecular and morphological data, and a new molecular phylogenetic analysis. We support the monophyly and distinctiveness of Brachyophidium Wall, 1921, Melanophidium Günther, 1864, Platyplectrurus Günther, 1868, Pseudoplectrurus Boulenger, 1890, and Teretrurus Beddome, 1886. We move Uropeltis melanogaster (Gray, 1858), U. phillipsi (Nicholls, 1929), and Pseudotyphlops Schlegel, 1839 to Rhinophis Hemprich, 1820, and re-name Pseudotyphlops philippinus (Müller, 1832) as R. saffragamus (Kelaart, 1853), and U. smithi Gans, 1966 as U. grandis (Beddome, 1867). Thanks to these changes, the taxonomy of all these genera is based on monophyletic entities. Diagnoses based on meristic and mensural characters for external and internal anatomy are provided for the family and all genera, and accounts are given for all currently recognized species, summarizing known morphological variation. We note several taxa that continue to be of uncertain phylogenetic affinity, and outline necessary future studies of variation in systematically valuable characters such as rostral and tail morphology. Cryptic variation is likely present in many species, and additional collection of specimens and DNA-sequence data will likely be needed to provide conclusive resolution for remaining taxonomic issues. Numerous questions remain for the systematics of Uropeltidae, and we hope that this study will provide a platform for ongoing research into the group, including the description of cryptic species, clarifying the phylogenetic placement of some remaining taxa, and quantifying the range of intra- and inter-specific variation in crucial morphological characters.