UATKACniA SALIENTIA. 25 



Back with a bony dorsal shield ; toes very slightly webbed at the 

 base ; tympanum distinct. 



a. Large specimen. Brazil. — In the stomach I Ibiuid a t'ldl-grown 



Cystiyna thus fuse us. 



b. Adult. Brazil. Presented by Lord Stuart. 



c. Very large specimen : skin. Brazil. 



2. Ceratophrys boiei. 



Ceratophrys boiei, Jf'icd, lieitr. i. p. 592 ; Dum. ^ litbr. p. 4;37. 

 Stonibus eorniitu.?, Gravcnh. Isis, 1825, p. 952. 



boiei, Graveith. Belie, p. 50. t. 9. f. 1, 2. 



Ceratophrys granosa, Cuv, Heyne Anim. ; Guerin, Iconoyr. Rcpt. 

 pi. 2G. f. 2. 



Back without bony shield ; a transverse crest between the eyes ; 

 toes slightly webbed at the base ; tympanum indistinct. 



a. Adult male. Brazil. 



b. Adult female. South America. 



c. d. Adult. vSouth America. Purchased of Mr. Argent. 

 e. HaLf-groflTi. South America. 



/. Half-grown. Soi^th America. 



3. Ceratophrys megastoma. 



Bufo corniitus, Baud. Rain. p. 102. pi. 38, and Rcpt. viii. p. 21-1 



(synon. wrong); Latr. Rcpt. ii. p. 117. f. 1. 

 Rana megastoma, Spix, Test. t. 24. f. 1. 



Ceratoplirj's daudiui, Cur. Regne Anim. ; Dum. ^- liibr. p. 440. 

 Phrynoceros ?, Tschudi, Batr. p. 82. 



Back -without bony shield ; no crest between the eyes ; toes broadly 

 webbed ; tympanum distinct. South America. 



4. Ceratophrys omata. 



Uperodon ornatmn. Bell, Zool. of the Beagle, Rept. p. 50. pi. 20. f. 2. 

 Trigonophrys rugiceps, Ilalhnrell, Proc. Ac. A^'at. <SV. Philad. 1856, 

 p. 298, and Journ. Ac. Nat. Sc. Philad. 1858, pi. 30. 



Back with a bony dorsal shield; upper eyehd sUghtly pointed, 

 triangular ; toes haljf- webbed ; tympanum indistinct. 



a, b. Adult male and female. Buenos Ayres. Presented by C^harles 

 Dan^dn, Esq. — Original specimens of BeU's description and 

 figiire. 



c. Adidt female. Parana. From Mr. Cuming's Collection. 



d. Large specimen : stuffed. South America. Presented by Lieut. 



Maud, ll.N. 



This species is so closely allied to Ceratophrys cornutus, that one can 

 hardly uiulerstand how one naturalist could have placed it in a genus 

 of Bufonida;, and how another coidd have not only established a new 



