(5) DIE FELSNISCHE PDSKAPOROS BEI HAMOR IM KOMITAT BORSOD UND IHRE FAUNA. 159 



We feel fully entitled to consider Rana Mehelyi By. as tlie 

 pleistocenic ancestor of liaiia fiinra Rös. It is an extremely intereslin? 

 fact to note, that the mammals that lived here in the Pleistocen to- 

 gether with the Rana Mrhcli/l are now confined to the arctic regions, 

 and live there in almost unchanged uniformity, whiist Rana Mrlteii/i 

 on tlie contrary remained here and may be considered as the ancestor 

 of our present liana luf<ca Rös.' having undergone great modilications 

 in consequence of gradual changes in climatic and soll conditions. 

 Judging from the remains ieft of llana Mehelyi it must have been a 

 more robust and stouter animal than the present Itana fa.^ca Rös. 

 and its mode of life must also have been different for the laige tiiber 



Fig 7. R. Mehelyi n., tarsun. 

 (3'M.) 



Fig. 8. R. fusca Rös, tarsus 

 Lugano. {S'/ä/l.) 



superior on ileum were broiight about by such muscular action, as is 

 no more met with. I thought at first, that the already mentioned 

 bony-protuberance on the ileum might have been produced by muscle- 

 action connected with burrowing. 



This supposition of mine was partly supported by the fact, that 

 the tarsi are comparatively much shorter and broader than those of 

 our Gommon-frog, whiist the dimension most strikingly resemble those 

 of Rana chine>isis Osb. viz. the latter species is characterised by the 



1 It is not impossible, that the species here described is identical with the 

 Rana fusca Rös. now living on the Tumlra's. A specific distinction nevertheless 

 appears desirable in spite of my not disposing of material for comparing from the 

 above named region, this question therefore remains open to further investigation. 



