MEXICAN TAILLESS AMPHIBIANS 85 



the posterior limbs are not so long as in adults. In 1879 Cope ^° 

 referred to "numerous specimens from Tehuan tepee, wliich fix the 

 characters and the locality." One of the six cotypes (U.S.N.M. 

 No. 31302) agrees with the measurements given by Cope in the 

 original description of C. labialis, but inasmuch as all of them are 

 quite young individuals the designation of an electotype will not 

 simplify taxonomic procedure. The color markings of these young 

 individuals are either indistinct or obliterated by action of the pre- 

 servative. The rows of tiny asperities or tubercles on back and on 

 upper surfaces of the hind limbs are quite distinct. 



The specimens identified as C. gracilis Dum^ril and Bibron, by 

 Cope (U.S.N.M. Nos. 10018-19), were collected in Tehuantepec, 

 Mexico, by Francis Sumichrast, who wrote that the specimens for- 

 warded to the National Museum, as well as those sent to the Paris 

 Museum, were found under old logs and stones near the water. 



The type of Cystignathus fragilis (M.H.N. P. No. 195a, parchment 

 label No. 6316) is labeled as having been collected by Bocourt in 

 Tehuantepec, Mexico. The following notes were made on this 

 specimen: Head and body length, 35.2 mm.; transverse diameter 

 of tympanum, 2.6 mm.; tympanum two-thirds the diameter of the 

 eye; the hind limb being carried forward along the body, the tibio- 

 tarsal joint reaches to center of eye; a tarsal fold present; vomerine 

 teeth in two transverse rows behind the level of the choanae. 



Ives ^^ reports the finding of four specimens of Leptodactylus 

 lahixilis near a water trough on a hacienda near Tekanto, Yucatan, 

 and Noble ^^ has recorded the accession of a large series from several 

 localities in Nicaragua. 



Schmidt ^^ dissents from the prevailing opinion that the Mexican 

 L. labialis is identical with the Porto Rican L. albilabris, which also 

 occurs on several of the Virgin Islands, and says: 



I am unable to agree with Stejneger and Noble, who have compared the 

 Central American L. labialis with this species, that they are identical. In a 

 series of many hundreds of specimens from Nicaragua in the American Museum 

 of Natural History, there is no approach to the adult size of the Porto Rican 

 specimens; other differences have been pointed out by Noble (1918, Bull. Amer. 

 Mus. Nat. Hist., Vol. XXXVIII, p. 323); and a comparison of the voices and 

 breeding habits of the two species remains to be made. They are so closely 

 related, however, that the problem of distribution is scarcely altered by this 

 view. 



Noble, in 1918, after handling a large series of these frogs from 

 Nicaragua, called attention to three characters that he thought 



aoCope, E.D., Eleventh contribution to the heipetolog>' of tropical .\merica. Proc. Amer. Philos. 

 Sec, vol. 18, no. 104, p. 270, June 20, 1879. 



31 Ives, J. E., Reptiles and batrachians from northern Yucatan and Mexico. I'roc. Acad. Nat. Sci. 

 Philadelphia, 1891, p. 461. 



22 Noble, G. K., Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., vol. 38, art. 10, p. 323, 1918. 



33 Schmidt, K. P., Scientific survey of Porto Rico and the Virgin Islands. New York Acad. Sc:., vol. 

 10, pt. 1, Amphibians and land reptiles, pp. 38, 39, 1928. 



