LIZARD CNEMIDOPHORUS PERPLEXUS — MASLIN, ET AL. 333 



agree with the published figure above it. He states: "In the type 

 specimen of this subspecies the interparietal plate is narrower than 

 the parietals, and is twice as long as wide." In the figure it is much 

 broader. Farther on he also states that there are 19 femoral pores 

 on eacli side in the type; the excellent figures show 25. 



These discrepancies suggest that possibly the type is some specimen 

 other than USNM 3060 or, as was frequently done in those days, 

 more than one specimen was cataloged under that numbei-. Through 

 the kindness of Dr. Kellogg we have been able to examine all of the 

 specimens upon which Baird and Girard based their description. 

 The largest of these is now numbered 3060, and it is perfectly obvious 

 that the figure, in spite of the legend beneath it, is not of this specimen. 

 On the other hand Cope's (1900, pp. 573-574) description of the type 

 is a remarkably accurate description of this very same individual. 

 Originally, however, there were, indeed, two specimens cataloged 

 under this number. The smaller of the two was reidentified by 

 Stejneger (Cochi-an, in lit.) as gularis and assigned a new number, 

 USNM 30885. Actually the specimen — judging by its small size, 

 seven light stripes, moderately enlarged hexagonal post-antebrachial 

 scales, enlarged temporal scales, etc.^ — ^is a specimen of C. inornatus. 

 It is of interest to note that Cope's (1900, p. 588, fig. 112) figure of 

 Cnemidophorus tesselatus variolosus Cope is also of a specimen num- 

 bered 3060. But this figure, too, is not of the specimen now bearing 

 this number, nor is it a figure of USNM 30885. Cope obviously had 

 been careless in assembling his manuscript, and his figures in this 

 instance are valueless in determining the status of this species. His 

 (1900) figure 105 is not a figure of a specimen of C. perplexus at all, 

 but probably of some race of C. tigris. 



Before assuming that USNM 3060 is the type of perplexus as indi- 

 cated but not specifically stated by Cope, it is essential to know if 

 this specimen is a syntype. The original material upon which Baird 

 and Girard based then- description of this species is apparently intact, 

 or nearly so, and in the U. S. National Museum; but the catalog 

 entries of this material do not completely match Baird and Gu-ard's 

 (1852, p. 128) locality notations. 



Dr. Doris M. Cochran, cm-ator of herpetology at the U. S. National 

 Museum, has kindly provided us with the catalog entries on this 

 material. The specimens from the "Valley of the Rio San Pedro of 

 the Rio Grande del Norte" are cataloged as having been collected 

 along the "Rio San Pedro to the Rio Grande, Texas" by Col. Graham. 

 However, Baird and Girard (1852) in their introduction specifically 

 state the bulk of the material upon which their paper is based was 

 "collected by John H. Clark, under Col. J. D. Graham." There are 

 now five specimens in this lot cataloged under USNM 3022; origin- 



