112 V. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 206 



groin; distinct, wide, diagonal brown bars on forearm and tibia; femur 

 and upper arm entirely immaculate; a few dark postanal spots, and a 

 fine irregular sprinkling of dots often over the entire back, tibia, and 

 tarsus; ventral surface pale and immaculate. Except for the oc- 

 casional reduction of the pattern of lines into a less distinct series of 

 dots, there is very little change in color in this fairly adequate series. 



Two individuals from Pirapora, Minas Gerais, disagree with the 

 Rio de Janeiro frogs in having a distinct white dorsolateral stripe 

 from posterior comer of eye to groin, a slight anterior continuation of 

 it being visible on the canthus rostralis. The dorsal pattern is also 

 much reduced, so that an irregular series of pale tan dots is all that 

 remains of it. Otherwise these specimens are like the others just 

 mentioned. 



~^ This series of Rio de Janeiro specimens was compared with the type 

 of Hyla goughi by H. W. Parker, British Museum (Natural History). 

 He noted that they agree very closely indeed with goughi, saying, 

 "I suspect they are really conspecific. The only difference appears to 

 be in color pattern." His sketch of goughi from Trinidad shows a 

 secondary crossbar between the anterior borders of the upper eyelids, 

 which region is usually immaculate, or at most finely dotted, in the 

 Rio de Janeiro frogs. His examination of the Pirapora specimens led 

 him to believe they were a color phase of the Rio de Janeiro form, but 

 more material is needed to see whether the white dorsolateral stripe is 

 constant in the Pirapora form. If so, it may eventually require a sub- 

 specific designation. 



Remarks. — A small species also found at various locaUties in the 

 Federal District, less common than Hyla goughi but somewhat re- 

 sembling it, is H. decipiens. It can be told from goughi by its much 

 smaller eye and by its relatively short fourth toe and fuller webs. Its 

 thick dorsal skin in life has a golden metallic luster which is never 

 found in goughi, and even in preserved specimens the difference in 

 integument can usually be noted. Often decipiens has a dorsal pat- 

 tern of dark, posteriorly diverging lines highly suggestive of goughi, 

 and with the immaculate femur and belly found in both species, and 

 their similar size, they may be very easy to confuse. 



H. nana, found in Minas Gerais, not far south of Pirapora, has like- 

 wise the dorsal pattern of diverging lines and is small in size, but its 

 extremely pointed snout, narrow head, and projecting upper jaw, will 

 separate it from either decipiens or goughi, both of which have blunt 

 snouts, wide heads, and slightly projecting upper jaws. 



One of the color patterns of Hyla minuta, consisting of elongate 

 stripes that diverge posteriorly, may be confused with goughi. 



One of the females caught at Manguinhos on January 23, 1935, 

 deposited a mass of about 40 eggs, which swelled in water so that the 



