312 BARBOUR: ZOOGEOGRAPHY. 



cataloguing, or while sent to Cope for identification, they may have been mixed 

 Avith Weinland's collection, and finally labeled "Haiti." 



Ameiva atrata Garman. 

 Garman, Bull. Essex inst., 1887, 19, p. 8. 



This is a distinct species, related to A. corvina, but confined, so far as known, 

 to the island of Redonda. The type is M. C. Z., No. G,084. 



Ameiva analifera Cope. 

 Cope, Proc. .\mer. philos. soc, 1869, 11, p. 158. 



This species is allied to A. pleei, of Martinique, and through it to A. suri- 

 namensis. The types came from St. Martins and St. Bartholomew. The 

 Museum has a number from the latter island. 



Ameiva gannani, sp. nov. 



T7jpe: — 'No. 6,141, M. C. Z., Anguilla, F. Lagois, collector. 



In 1887 Garman noted, but did not describe, this specimen from Anguilla 

 as a variety of A. analifera Cope. A re-examination of the specimens of Cope's 

 A. analifera, from St. Bartholomew, shows that A. garmani differs from the 

 other examples in several characters which the series from St. Bartholomew 

 show to be constant. These differences, taken in connection with the very 

 markedly different coloration, prove that the Anguilla form constitutes a dis- 

 tinctly vaUd species. In species of Ameiva, the unvarying color pattern and 

 color of individuals of the same age is an excellent diagnostic character. 



Ameiva garmani is similar to A. analifera Cope, but differs in the following 

 characters : — median gulars larger on the average in A . garmani than in A . 

 analifera, and differently arranged, in that large and small scales occur irregu- 

 larly, while in the St. Bartholomew specimens the scales are evenly graded in size, 

 and are regularly arranged. In A . garmani, the largest of the outer tibials is very 

 different in size from that of the other species, being not only larger, but having 

 its vertical and horizontal dimensions almost equal, while in the other specimens 

 this scale is much longer than high. There are corresponding differences in 

 size and position of the other enlarged tibials owing to their filling an area about 

 a scale of such different character. As Garman (Bull. Essex inst., 1887, 19, 

 p. 10) said, this species is "easily distinguished" from its ally "by the color; 

 lighter brown anteriorly, with large light gray or olive spots posteriorly, which 

 gives the hind legs the appearance of being gray reticulated with brown," in- 



