688 Bulletin American Museum of Natural History [Vol. XL VI 



Two specimens in the Biological Survey collection come from San 

 Tomas (U. S. N. M. No. 37519) and San Quintin (37529). 



This species, while unquestionably present in the Colorado Desert 

 area (Van Denburgh and Slevin, 1913, p. 417), appears to be more 

 abundant in the San Diegan fauna, and also, perhaps locally, to the east 

 of the desert. 



Pituophis catenifer annectens Baird and Girard 

 Pituophis annectens Baird and Girard, 1853, p. 72. 

 Pituophis catenifer annectens Van Denburgh, 1920, p. 17. 



Range. — Coast region of southern California and northern Lower California. 



Lower Californian Records. — San Martin Island, Streets, 1877, p. 40; 

 South Coronado Island, Van Denburgh and Slevin, 1914, p. 141 ; Ensenada, Van Den- 

 burgh, 1920, p. 17. 



Pituophis catenifer rutilus Van Denburgh 



Pituophis catenifer rutilus Van Denburgh, 1920, p. 24. 



Range. — Southwestern Arizona, ranging into northern Lower California. 



Lower Californian Records. — (?) Gardner's Laguna (Salton River), Cope, 

 1900, p. 879; (?) Trinidad, Meek, 1905, p. 15. 



A single specimen (U. S. N. M. No. 37536) of Pituophis in the col- 

 lection of the Biological Survey from Alamo appears to be referable to 

 this form. The dorsal scale count is 29-31-23; the ventral plates 

 number 239; the subcaudals, 50; the preoculars are two on each side; 

 the dorsal dark spots are 32, the caudal, 8. 



Van Denburgh {loc. cit.) has recorded this form from Yuma, and it is 

 therefore not improbable from a geographic standpoint that it should 

 occur in northern Lower California. Its presence on the Pacific slope in 

 the San Diegan fauna, however, is an anomaly. It can only be ex- 

 plained by the assumption that it has entered Lower California via the 

 deserts and spread northward from the southern end of the San Pedro 

 Martir Mountains, (or via the San Felipe valley) very much as I sup- 

 pose Crotaphytus wislizenii to have done. 



There does not seem to be any possibility of regarding the present 

 specimen as an aberrant annectens, as both scale and color characters 

 separate it sharply from Van Denburgh's diagnosis of that form. 

 Whether or not P. c. deserticola may occur in Lower California is un- 

 certain, but I believe that the present form will be found to inhabit the 

 northeastern part of the peninsula rather than deserticola, and I have 

 therefore tentatively referred the records of Cope and Meek to rutilus. 



