HEKPETOLOGY OF JAPAN. 403 



1802. Flaturus fasdalus Latreille, Hist. Nat. Rept., TV, p. 185 (Indies). — 

 Fischer, Abh. Naturw.Ver. Hamburg, III, 1856, pp. 28, 70 (part: speriin. 

 Hamburg Mils., Indian Ocean). — Hallowell, Proc. Phila. Acad., 1860, 

 p. 493 (Naha, Okinawa shima). — Boulenger, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 

 1887, p. 149 (Loo Choo Islands). 



1817. Platurus laurenti Rafinesque, Amer. Month. Mag., I, p. 432 (substitute 

 name; not of Daudin, 1803). 



1836. Coluber platrjcaudatus Oken, Allgem. Naturg., VIII, p. 566 (lapsus). 



1858. Platurus laticaudatus var. Guenther, Cat. Colubr. Sa. Brit. Mus., p. 272 



(New Guinea, Bengal, Siam, Van Diemen's Land). 



1859. Flaturus Jischeri 3 AS, Rev. Mag. ZooL, 1859 (p. 149); author's separate, p. 25, 



pL D (t>q:)e-locality, Indian Ocean; type in Mus. Milano); Icon. Ophid., 

 livi-. 40, 1872, pi. I, fig. 2 (tyi^e).— Guenther, Rept. Brit. India, 1864, 

 p. 356, pL XXV, fig. A (Bengal; Siam; New Guinea; New Hebrides)-. — 

 Anderson, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1871, p. 189 (Calcutta). 

 1871. Platurus affinis Anderson, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1871, p. 190 (tyi^e- 

 locality, Fallahs Mullah, Calcutta; type in Ind. Mus., Calcutta). 



The Coluber laticaudatus of Linnieiis (Syst. Nat., 10th and 12th edi- 

 tions) was based upon his account of the same species in ^luseum 

 Adolplii Frederici, which was piibhshed in 17.54 and not binominal. 

 Two specimens were apparently described in that work. It now 

 turns out from Andersson's examination of the types °' that Linn«us 

 had before him a specimen of each of the two species lately known as 

 Platurus laticaudatus and P. coluhrinus, the former with 19 scale rows, 

 the latter with 23. His 0. laticaudatus is consequently a composite 

 species, and the application of the name by the first reviser who 

 separated the component forms must stand. 



The two species were steadily confounded by all authors, just as 

 Linnaeus had done, though under various names, such as Platurus 

 fasciatus and Flydrophis coluhrinus, until 1858, when Girard, for the 

 first time (and not Peters in 1877, as occasionally stated), clearly sepa- 

 rated, described, and named them. He tied the name laticaudatus, 

 which had scarcely been used at all in the herpetological literature 

 since the time of Linnaeus, to the species with 19 scale rows, and 

 applied Hydrus coluhrinus of Sclmeider correctly to the other, this 

 being the oldest name used for a specimen of the latter, though 

 Sclmeider himself did not realize its distinctness from the Linnaean 

 species, of which, as we have seen, in reality it only formed a part. 

 Girard's nomenclature has been followed by nearly all subsequent 

 writers. 



The fact that Linnaeus in the Systema Naturae only gives the scale 

 formula (i. e., number of ventrals and subcaudals) of the specimen 

 with 2.3 scale rows (220-42) is not sufficient reason for fastening the 

 name C. laticaudatus to the species represented by this specimen, in 

 view of the above argument, and is, moreover, sufficiently set off by 



« Bihang Svensk. Vet. Akad. Handl., XXIV, 1899, Pt. 4, No. 6, p. 18. 



