SUMATRA. 15 



yet to be discovered in the highland areas, still the Malay Peninsula has been 

 very carefully studied during the last few years, and it is strange that there 

 remains such a considerable number of species occurring in Sumatra and Borneo, 

 which are not yet known in Malacca. 



Since Werner's paper appeared, van Kampen has published his complete 

 tables of distribution for the Amphibia throughout the Indian Archipelago, as 

 well as two other papers of importance, all showing what remarkable forms have 

 lain unknown for a long time on the islands. In 1905 van Kampen described 

 Dyscophina volzi (Zool. jahrb. Syst., 1905, 22, p. 708-10, pi. 26). This is a 

 representative of that small compact family, the Dyscophiidae, nearly all of 

 which occur in Madagascar; the first known exception was the genus Calluella, 

 which is Burmese. Van Kampen's form was described only a year after Boulen- 

 ger made known Colpoglossus brooksi, a new genus and species of the same 

 family from Borneo. These animals are difficult to find, owing to their burrowing 

 habits. The way in which they ha\-e remained long undiscovered in a locality 

 which has been well studied reminds one of the fact that the North American 

 discoglossoid Ascaphus truei of Stejneger is still known by the type alone; and 

 that the recently discovered Kaloula verrucosa Blgr., found only a few years ago 

 in Yunnan, has been found still more recently in the province of Shantung. 



Of fifty species of ampliibians known from the island of Sumatra, seven, 

 or fourteen per cent, seem to be peculiar to it. Van Kampen reports both 

 Megalophrys montmia and M. nasuta from Sumatra, though in Werner's com- 

 parative fist, which we have spoken of before, the latter only is mentioned as 

 being Sumatran, the former being Javan. Werner also includes M. hasselti in 

 his list of species occm-ring in Java and Malacca, but not in Sumatra. Van 

 Kampen, on the other hand, has M. hasselti from several definite localities in 

 Sumatra, as well as in the Phihppines, Borneo, and Java. 



There remains to be mentioned Werner's record of Rana novae-brittaniae 

 Werner, which has the very improbable distribution of Sumatra and the Bis- 

 marck Archipelago. It seems unlikely that this can be explained by suggesting 

 accidental transportation. Perhaps it is more likely to be a case of convergence, 

 where some similar form lias by chance grown so hke another as to be indis- 

 tinguishable; but a misplaced label often is to blame for this sort of anomaly. 



Rana hosii Blgr. occurs on Sumatra, Borneo, and Java, but not in the Malay 

 Peninsula. Polypedates colletti (Blgr.) has the same distribution, likewise P. 

 oHlophus (Blgr.), except that the former occui's also in Natuna; these two 

 species do not, however, occur in Java. 



