246 Frogs of the Okefinokee Swamp 



In general coloration it falls in the group of Hyla cinerea, Hyla cinerea 

 evittata, Hyla gratiosa (sometimes clear green), Hyla squirella (sometimes clear 

 green). Several of these species in males may have green from fore arm for- 

 ward on either side of the throat. In some individuals almost to symphysis 

 of the jaw. In Hyla andersonii it is more definite (white edged usually in the 

 female). (See extended discussion under Variation in color Hyla cinerea). In 

 general, the upper parts of Hyla andersonii are uniform. Sometimes though 

 numerous Hyla cinerea without white or yellow dots or spots on back may be 

 collected but usually they have them. Hyla gratiosa usually has its character- 

 istic dorsal spots but occasionally it may be green with a few dorsal yellow or 

 white spots. Am sure I saw one Hyla andersonii male with a dorsal yellow 

 spot or so but haven't the specimen now to prove it. Too great emphasis 

 cannot be laid on any one character of coloration in Hylas in estabUshing or 

 eliminating relationships. LeConte (1825) questioned Daudin's green Hyla 

 squirella description and illustration but green they will become at times. 

 The above Hyla species are also sexually dimorphic as well as Hyla andersonii. 



If Hyla cinerea with lip and lateral white or yellow stripe with thin 

 purplish line below appear with light line different in extent, purple below 

 absent or present, light line on upper lip only, or without lateral stripe at all 

 {evittata) it can also intensify the purplish below the white hne to get the 

 effect in Hyla andersonii. In a somewhat similar way Hyla squirella and 

 Hyla andersonii might be linked hypothetically. It is, however, hypothesis 

 and is so involved the writer handles it warily. Voice is uncertain in evalua- 

 tion of relationships. Each person might hear it differently, use musical 

 notation, syllables, lines and other forms of characterizations. Too many 

 personal equations are involved unless one person heard all forms to be con- 

 sidered. In egg deposition its eggs are single placed (several emitted at one 

 time) but more or less singly placed in dropping to the bottom. Its method 

 of laying eggs is very interesting. This might lead one to suspect that when 

 some local naturalists of the South can devote some time to Hyla squirella, 

 Hyla gratiosa and other species some of these may have a similar method of 

 deposition. To be certain it must be field and laboratory determined and 

 well checked which most itinerant naturafists have not the time to do thor- 

 oughly. Noble and Noble describe the egg minutely. Without the egg in 

 hand, the writer hardly can say whether it is of Hyla squirella affinity (two 

 envelopes) or Hyla gratiosa (single envelope) or Hyla cinerea (two envelopes). 

 In some way Hyla cinerea with both surface film and strewn eggs in submerged 

 bladderworts, etc., may be the nearer form though Hyla gratiosa and Hijla 

 squirella have singly strewn eggs. 



In general coloration the tadpoles look like Hyla femoralis. The first 

 tadpoles of Hyla andersonii that the writer saw at Lakehurst reminded him 

 very decidedly of Hyla femoralis. Knowing this form was not in Lakehurst 

 we naturally placed them in Hyla andersonii. By accident they proved the 

 very pools in which Noble and Noble worked so hard the previous year. Super- 

 ficially I took them to be near Hyla femoralis. Closer inspection made the 

 resemblance less apparent. They do not superficially and clearly fall into the 



