CHECKLIST OF THE SNAKES OF MEXICO 69 



Type locality. — Zacualtipan, Hidalgo. 



Range. — Southern Hidalgo, central-western Veracruz and northern 

 Puebla. 



GEOPHIS NASALIS (Cope) 



Catostoma nasale Cope, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, vol. 20, 1SG8, p. 131, 



fig. 



Ocophis nasaUs Smith, Smithsonian Misc. Coll., vol. 99, No. 19, 1941, pp. 4-5. 



Type. — ^Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. Nos. 3319-21, three cotypes. 



Type locality. — "Near the city of Guatemala," Guatemala. 



Range. — INIountains from southern Chiapas to central Guatemala 

 (only Mexican record is from Chicharras, Chiapas). Perhaps north- 

 ward to central Guerrero (Xochitempa and Amula, Guerrero). 



GEOPHIS OMILTEMANA Gunther 



Gcophis omiltemana GiJNTHEE, Biologia Centrali-Americana, Rept., 1893, p. 92, 

 pi. 33, fig. A. 



Type.— Brit. Mus. Nat. Hist. 

 Type locality. — Omiiteme, Guerrero. 



Range. — Sierra Madre del Sur, central Guerrero (known only from 

 the type locality) . 



GEOPHIS PETERSII Boulenger 



Geophis petersii Bottlenger, Catalogue of the snakes in the British Museum, vol. 

 2, 1894, p. 321, pi. 16, fig. 2.— Tayu)r, Uuiv. Kansas Sci. Bull., vol. 27, 1941, 

 p. 121, fig. 2 (head). 



Type. — Brit. Mus. Nat. Hist., two cotypes. 



Type locality. — "Mexico City," probably in error. 



Range. — Northern Michoacan (recorded only from Patzcuaro). 



GEOPHIS ROSTRALIS (Jan)» 



Elapoides rostralis Jan, Iconographie g4n6rale des ophidiens, livr. 12, 1865, pi. 2, 

 fig. 2. 



Geophis rostralis Bocouet, Mission scientifique au Mexique et dans I'Amgrique 

 centrale. Kept., livr. 9, 1883, pp. 533-534, pi. 31, fig. 10.— Boulengee, Cata- 

 logue of the snakes in the British Museum, vol. 2, 1894, pp. 323-324. 



Type. — Location uncertain. 



Type locality. — Mexico. 



Range. — Uncertain. Possibly western Oaxaca. 



GEOPHIS SALLAEI Boulenger 



Geophis sallaei Boutjenger, Catalogue of the snakes in the British Museum, 

 vol. 2, 1894, p. 318, pi. 16, fig. 1.— Smith, Copeia, 1942, No. 4, p. 259. 



Type. — Brit. Mus. Nat. Hist. 



™ There is some confusion in the literature concerning the identity and identifying char- 

 acters of the closely related species rostralis and duhius, but in the absence of a sufficient 

 number of specimens to settle at present the suggested problems, we cannot formulate a 

 reliable opinion of the number of species that actually exists. It is suggested that at least 

 three are involved, but for the present we follow Eoulenger's arrangement. 



