Acris gryllus 193 



body. In some lots from a single locality some specimens have the hind foot 

 one-half the length, while others fall a little below and still others fall a little 

 above this proportion. 



"The distinctness of the posterior femoral brown stripe is subject to vari- 

 ation. . . ." 



In 1892 Hay considers Acris "Closely allied to Hyla," and gives the two 

 subspecies as occurring in Indiana just as E. E. Ramsay (1901, p. 222), and 

 McAtee (1907, p. 15) do for Monroe County, Indiana. H. Garman (1892, pp. 

 342, 343) holds "LeConte's characterization of the two forms . . . the 

 best extant, but the only difference he presents which in so variable a species 

 is of a varietal importance, is the size (1.4 inches for variety gryllus and 1.2 

 for variety crepitans). None of the Illinois specimens examined are more 

 than 1.25 inches in length of body." 



S. N. Rhoads (1896, pp. 396, 397) adds more to the gryUus-crepitans dis- 

 cussion "Examination of nearly forty specimens from widely separated 

 localities in Tennessee and Kentucky fails to reveal any constant distinctions 

 between gryllus and crepitans, if both forms are found in the State. Prof. 

 H. Garman considers the size of gryllus (1.4 in.) as given by LeConte as the 

 only reliable difference. This is much larger than any in my series, and as 

 the Samburg specimens are smaller and more slender than those from the 

 Cumberland plateau, the theory that the Southwestern frogs are larger 

 than Northeastern ones is contradicted. LeConte defines the habitat of 

 gryllus in the South Atlantic States, and that of crepitans in the remainder 

 of the eastern United States, but Prof. Cope's identication of the Smith- 

 sonian series allots specimens of both forms to both sides of the Allegheny 

 Mountains in such a way that faunal definitions lose their significance. Such 

 being the case I have lumped the entire Tennessee series under the original 

 specific name." W. P. Hay (1902, p. 128) holds gryllus and crepitans "of 

 very doubtful vahdity." Deckert (1915, p. 22) observes that "This species 

 looks and acts more like a water frog than a tree-toad, although belonging to 

 the latter family." In 191 7 Dunn (p. 621) finds his material from the North- 

 west of North Carolina intermediate between A. g. gryllus and A. g. crepitans, 

 but in 1923 Brimley and Mabee (1925, p. 15) find in eastern North Carolina 

 both Acris crepitans and Acris gryllus. 



Earlier than 1923 Percy Viosca, Jr., believed he could separate Acris 

 gryllus and Acris crepitans. In 1923 (p. 43) he discusses this matter thus: 

 "The puzzling status of the Genus Acris, as far as Louisiana is concerned, has 

 been positively cleared by these studies. There are two distinct species in 

 Louisiana, the upland species being, tentatively, Acris gryllus, and that of the 

 lowlands, Acris crepitans. Wherever their ranges overlap, they are found side 

 by side without interbreeding, each with its characteristic chorus and habits." 



In 1925 we took one evening trip with him in February but the 

 author did not get enough experience in the one evening to warrant his at- 

 tempting to tell them by song, habits and structural and color characters. 

 If any one can do it Mr. Viosca is the person with experience to do it. Fur- 

 thermore, Mississippi Valley, Texan and southeastern forms crowd into 



