194 Frogs of the Okefinokee Swamp 



Louisiana. From New Orleans Boulenger described his "var. hufonia." 

 This region ought to have a diversity of Acris forms. 



It is interesting that this form was described as a Rana. In the general 

 appearance of its tadpole we considered it quite Ranid-like. In fact, for a 

 time until we came to know Rana virgatipes tadpoles we wondered if these 

 Acris tadpoles might be the young tadpole of Cope's frog. Gunther put 

 Acris gryllus and Acris pickeringii {Hyla crucifer) in the same genus. Each 

 lays single eggs with a single envelope though in each there are some evi- 

 dences of an inner envelope and each has vitellus .9-1.0 or i.i mm. 



Dumeril and Bibron established Acris for Acris gryllus and Acris nigritus 

 (Pseudacris nigrita). Normally the various forms of P. nigrita lays eggs 

 in masses not singly but Abbott generally and we rarely recorded masses for 

 Acris gryllus. Pseudacris ocularis lay very similar single submerged eggs with 

 a single envelope 1.2-2.0 mm., as in Acris gryllus. The Pseudacris iriseriata 

 or P. nigritus triseriatus tadpoles of western New York normally have teeth 

 formulae of 2/2 like Acris gryllus. Holbrook placed Acris gryllus and Pseudacris 

 ocularis, each in Hylodes. 



In eggs it might be linked with Pseudacris ocularis, Hyla crucifer, 

 Hyla squirella or Hyla gratiosa. In tadpoles it is in some ways apart from 

 all the Hylids of the U. S. A. In other ways it falls close to Hyla crucifer 

 or some species of Pseudacris. In transformation size it falls in with Hyla 

 squirella, Hyla andersoni and Hyla femoralis. In tadpole coloration it is 

 apart. Acris is sufficiently distinct to be retained yet awhile although it 

 has characters in common with Pseudacris and Hyla. It is the most dis- 

 tinctive and commonest Hylid in U. S. A. 



We have made no endeavor to separate Acris gryllus and Acris crepitans. 

 They may be distinct. The only person who has given much attention to this 

 question in recent times is Mr. Percy Viosca, Jr., who believes them distinct 

 in appearance, habits, call, etc. Possibly he is right. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 



1882 Abbott, C. C. Notes on the Habits of the Savannah Cricket Frog. Am. Naturalist 



XVI, 1882, pp. 707-711. 

 1896 Atkinson, C. Batrachia of Turkey Lake, Ind. Proc. Ind. Acad. Sci., 1895, Feb. 



1896, p. 258. 

 1892 Blatchley, W. S. Notes on the Batrachians and Reptiles of Vigo County, Indiana. 



Journal Indiana Soc. Nat. Hist., XIV, 1891-1892, p. 27. 

 1882 Boulenger, G. A. Catalogue of the Batrachia Salientia — . British Museum, 2nd 



edit., London, 1882, pp. 336, 337. 

 1914 Boyle, H. S. Some Notes on the Cricket Frog on Long Island. Copeia, June 20, 



1914 no. 7, p. 4. 

 1896 Brimley, C. S. Batrachia Found at Raleigh, N. C. Am. Nat. 30, 1896, p. 501. 

 1925 Brimley, C. S. and Mabee, W. B. Reptiles, Amphibians and Fishes Collected in 



Eastern North Carolina in the Autumn of 1923. Copeia, Feb. 16, 1925, No. 139, p. 



15- 

 1889 Cope, E. D. The Batrachia of North America. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 34, 1889, 



pp. 324-329- 

 1892 . The Batrachia and Reptilia of Northwestern Texas. Proc. Phila. Acad. Sci. , 



Vol. 44, 1892, pp. 333. 



1914 Deckert, R. F. List of Salientia from near Jacksonville, Florida. Copeia, Feb. 14, 

 1914, No. 3, p. 3- 



191 5 . Concluding Notes on the Salientia of Jacksonville, Florida. Copeia, July 



27, 1915, No. 20, pp. 21-22. 



