HERPETOLOGY OF JAPAN. 431 



the Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London for 1903. They 

 can not well be referred to that species because of the small number 

 of scale rows, especially around the neck. Their scale formula agrees 

 well with that of D. major, which seems to have the same distribution 

 as D. ornata, but their rostral is much broader than high, as is the case 

 in the latter and not as broad as high. They also agree in many respects 

 with D. cyanocincta, which occurs as far north as Formosa at least, but 

 the maximum of tlieir ventrals is 246, while the minimum of ventrals in 

 the latter species is said to be 281, and, save in exceptional cases, above 

 300. In Boulenger's synopsis of the species,^ D. cyanocincta on the one 

 hand and D. ornata, major, and godeffroyi on the other are distin- 

 guished by the latter having the ''second pair of chin-shields, if dis- 

 tinct, separated by several scales," while in the former they are said 

 to be "in contact on the middle line " "or separated by a smgle scale," 

 but evidently this -distinction does not hold, at least not for the present 

 species. Peters, in the original description of D. godeffroyi, expressly 

 states that in the larger specimen of the types both pairs of chin- 

 shields are in contact, while in the smaller one the posterior pair is 

 separated by two scales which are pointed anteriorly. In our four 

 specimens scarcely two are exactly alike, though there can not be the 

 faintest doubt that they all belong to the same species. One (No. 

 33934) has the two posterior chin-shields in contact; in two (Nos. 

 33933, 33935) they are separated by one, and to some extent also 

 by a second scale, while in the fourth (No. 33936) they are separated 

 by two scales exactly shaped as described by Peters. 



The distance from the type locality, the Kingsmill, or Gilbert 

 Islands, is certainly considerable, but so little has been collected in 

 the intermediate region that no adverse argument can be derived 

 from the remoteness of the Riu Kiu Islands. 



In one sense our specimens are intermediate between all the species 

 mentioned. This has already been demonstrated with regard to the 

 relations of the posterior chin-shields. In the number of scales 

 around the neck (viz, 30-34) they assume a position between D. 

 cyanocincta, with 27-33, and D. ornata, with 35-42. In scales around 

 the body (33-43) they agree better with D. cyanocincta (39-43) than 

 with D. ornata (40-50), while in the number of ventrals (227-246) 

 they come within the limits of the latter (210-300) and not within 

 the former (281-426).^ It is just possible that the case is similar to 

 the one pointed out under D. fasciata and melanocephla (p. 421) and 

 that the limits of the three species are not properly defined. 



It may be that the distinction is not so much one of scale formula 

 as of other characters. Thus, according to Boulenger. D. major, 



a Cat. Sn. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1896, pp. 286-287. 



& The type specimens of D. godeffroyi are said to have 294 and 284 ventrals, respec- 

 tively, consequently more than the exceptional minimum pf a few D. cyanocincta. 



