10 CHELONIA. 
discoverer of the species in Ecuador and on the Gulf of Darien. But this mistake is 
due to his having confounded (in the last years of his life) Mr. Salvin with Mr. Fraser. 
In fact, the spirit-specimen said to be from the “ Gulf of the Darien” is one of the 
types, and the very specimen figured. The locality ‘‘ Darien” became attached to it 
through the insufficient care of a person who assisted Gray. 
DERMATEMYS. 
Dermatemys, Gray, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1847, p. 55. | 
1. Dermatemys mawil. 
Dermatemys mawii, Gray, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1847, p. 56; Cat. Shield Rept. p. 49, t. 21*; Proc. 
Zool. Soc. 1864, p. 125; Dum. & Boc. Miss. Sc. Mex., Rept. p. 17, t. 7. fig. 2; Cope, 
Proc. Ac. Nat. Sc. Philad. 1865, p. 187, and 1868, p. 119; Preudhomme de Borre, Bull. 
Ac. Belg. 1869, p. 116 (young). 
Emys berardii, A. Dum. Arch. Mus. d’Hist. Nat. vi. p. 231, t. 15. 
Dermatemys berardii, Cope, 1. c. p. 120. 
? Dermatemys abnormis, Cope, 1. c. (young). 
Dermatemys salvinii, Gray, Suppl. Cat. Shield Rept. p. 50. 
? Chloremys abnormis, Gray, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1870, p. 711, t. 42 (young). 
Hab. Mexico, Tabasco (Cope), Laguna de Terminos, Yucatan (Zool. Soc.), Vera Cruz 
(Bérard); British Honpuras, Belize (Cope, Bocourt, P. de Borre); GUATEMALA 
(Salvin). 
A vegetable-feeder, called “ Tortuga blanca” in Mexico. 
CHELYDRA. 
Chelydra, Schweigger, Prodr. Monogr. Chelon. p. 28. 
1. Chelydra serpentina. 
Chelydra serpentina (Linn.), Peters, MB. Berl. Ak. 1862, p. 627 ; Cope, 1. c. 1872, p. 28. 
? Chelydra, sp., Cope, Proc. Ac. N. Sc. Philad. 1865, p. 187. 
Hab. Nortu AmeERIcA.—MeExico and southwards to Ecuador. 
Called “ Chiquihuan” in Mexico. 
Ranges from Canada to Ecuador. Mexican specimens have been examined by Cope. 
2. Chelydra rossignoni. 
Emysaurus rossignonit, Dum. & Bocourt, Miss. Sc. Mex., Rept. p. 18, t. 5. fig. 2. 
Hab. Muxico; Guatemata (Bocourt). 
* The suture dividing the gular plate is much too distinctly represented in this figure; in the original 
specimen (which is dry) there is no more of a suture than in another from Salvin’s collection—merely a groove 
in the underlying bone is indistinctly visible in both specimens through the transparent substance of the 
epidermal scute. 
