478 DUNN. 



Province, has 11 costal grooves, the vent is Y-shaped, the vomerine 

 teeth are in adult form for Hynobius, consisting of an outer branch of 

 6 teeth making a right angle with an inner branch of 10 teeth, series 

 separated from its fellow by width of nares, extending further back in 

 the middle than on the sides, length of inner branch not equalling 

 distance between outer edge of nares to median line; total length 

 134 mm., head 18, body 45, tail 48. 



Abe (1921) gives measurements of two adult males from Sapporo: 



A large larva, U. S. Nat. Mus. No. 64903 from the estuary of the 

 Shirisetunai River, near Lake Shikotsu, Iburi Province, agrees with 

 the Cal. Acad. Sci. specimens. Total length 102 mm., head 14, 

 body 43, tail 45. 



Remarks: The specimens I have examined from Yezo are all one 

 species and this species is very distinct from any of the Hondo Hyno- 

 bius I have seen. 



None the less it has been considered to be fuscus, lichenatus, or 

 nigrescens. Irrespective of whether one considers, as I do, that 

 lichenatus, fuscus, and nigrescens are all synonyms of peropus, or not, 

 there are good reasons why this Yezo animal cannot be identified with 

 any of them. 



In the first place lichenatus was described from a fully developed 

 specimen 74 mm. long. This is a length at which the Yezo animal is 

 still a larva. The color of lichenatus as described by Boulenger is 

 very different from that of the Yezo form. The toes of lichenatus are 

 short. The reasons for identifying the Yezo Hynobius with lichenatus 

 are the shortness of the vomerine series of lichenatus, its 11 costal 

 grooves, and its northern range. 



Nigrescens as described by Stejneger is a very different animal from 

 the Yezo one; in color, in shape of tail, in length of toes, and in longer 

 vomerine series it is sufficiently different. 



Fuscus was described by Tago at nearly the same time as Stejneger 

 described nigrescens. According to Tago the two are the same. It is 

 hard to believe that his description of Nikko specimens could apply 

 to the present form. 



Hashimoto (1910) apparently made no comparison with actual 

 specimens. He came to the conclusion that lichenatus and nigrescens 

 occurred on Yezo by comparing his specimens with Boulenger's and 

 Stejneger's descriptions. His opinion that he had two species was 



