MEXICAN TAILLESS AMPHIBIANS 77 



T-shaped; tympanum distinct; cartilaginous omosternum and 

 mesosternum; mesosternum sometimes forms a straplike bony 



style, possibly an age character Tomodactylus (p. 1 20) 



No lumbar gland present; mesosternum not forming a bony 

 style but cartilaginous, straplike, and often spatulate; toes 

 free; apical disks, if developed, generally small; terminal 

 phalanges T-shaped; subarticular tubercles generally extend- 

 ing backward on plantar surface; outer metatarsals united; 

 tympanum distinct; pupil horizontal Syrrhophus (p. 123) 



Genus ENGYSTOMOPS Espada 



1872. EngTjstomops Jimenez de la Espada, Anales Soc. Espan. Hist. Nat., vol. 1, 

 p. 86. [Genotype, Engysiomops petersi Jimenez de la Espada, idem, p. 86 

 (Provinciade Oriente, Ecuador).] — Jimenez de la Espada, 1875, Vertebrados 

 del Viaje al Pacifico, etc., Batracios, pi. 2, figs. 3-3d. 



1873. Microphryne Peters, Monatsber. k. preuss. Akad. Wists. Berlin, p. 616, 

 Oct. [Genotype, Paludicola pusiulosa Cope, 1864, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. 

 Philadelphia, vol. 16, p. 180, Aug. (Truando River, New Granada,Colombia).] 



1875. Peralaimos Jimenez de la Espada, Vertebrados del Viaje al Pacifico, etc., 

 Batracios, p. 163. [Genotype, Peralaimos stentor Jimenez de la Espada, 

 idem, p. 163, pi. 2, figs. 4, 4b (Isla de Tobaga) = B«/o stentor Jimenez de la 

 Espada, 1875, Anales Soc. Espan. Hist. Nat., vol. 1, p. 85.] 



In 1882, Boulenger ^^ recognized Engystomops as a valid genus that 

 included the following species: petersii, pustulosus, and stentor. 

 Boulenger stated in his catalogue that Eupemphix nattereri seemed 

 to agree with Paludicola Juscomaculata. Six j^ears later he ^^ revised 

 his views on this group and published the following explanatory 

 statement : 



The genus Eupemphix, Stdr. { = Engystornops, in part), must, on account of 

 the absence of teeth, be referred to the family Bufonidae, although it is in every 

 other respect identical with Paludicola, to which it stands in the same relation 

 as Pseudophryne to Crinia; this shows that frog-families founded upon the 

 presence or absence of teeth are artificial associations. 



A key to four species of Eupemphix follows after this statement, 

 two of which, nattereri (the genotype) and nana, were formerly included 

 in Eupemphix, but pustulosa and stentor were allocated to Engystomops. 

 No reference is made to the allocation of Engystomops petersii. 

 Professor M6hely in 1904 did not concur with the allocation of Eupem- 

 phix to the family Bufonidae, and held that the structural features 

 did not warrant this classification. Hence Eupemphix and Paludicola 

 were referred to the Cystignatliidae [ = Leptodactylidae]. 



A small group of species, including petersii, stentor, and pustulosus, 

 seems to form a natural assemblage somewhat closely related to 

 Pleurodema and Eupemphix. Southern Mexico on the north and 



2< Boulenger, G. A., Catalogue of the Batrachia Salientia s. Ecaudata in the collection of the British 

 Museum, 2d edit., pp. 27,5-277, 1882. 



25 Boulenger, O. A., Descriptions of new Brazilian batrachians. Ann. and Mag. Nat Hist., ser. 6, vol. 

 1, no. 3, p. 188, Mar., 1888. 



t)G7S5— 32 6 



