AMPHIBIA. 25 



AMPHIBIA. 



The Amphibia are very poorly represented in Dr. Stoliczka's collections. Only four 

 species are represented, and only one was procured from Eastern Turkestan ; all are well 

 known forms of Batrachia. No examples of Urodela were met with. 



Order BATRACHIA. 



Family RANIDJS. 

 1. RANA CYANOPHLYCTIS. 



Schneider apud Gunther : Kept. Brit. Ind., p. 406; Stoliczka: Jour. As. Soc. Bengal, 1870, xxxix, 

 Pt. 2, p. 146; Proc. As. Soc. Bengal, 1872, pp. 85, 102,130; W. Blanf . : Jour. As. Soc. Bengal, 

 xxxix, Pt. 2, p. 374 ; Eastern Persia, ii, p. 433. 



1 3, between Mari and Kashmir. 



This species had previously been recorded by Dr. Stoliczka from Mari. It is common 

 throughout the peninsula of India, and is the only abundant frog in the dry western 

 parts of the country, Kachh (Cutch), Sind, &c., extending to the west into Baluchistan. 



2. DlPLOPELMA CARNATICUM. 



Engystoma carnaticum, Jerdon: Jour. As. Soc. Bengal, 1853, xxii, p. 534. 



Diplopelma carnaticum, Jerdon: Proc. As. Soc. Bengal, 1870, p. 85; Stoliczka: Jour. As. Soc. Bengal, 



1870, xxxix, p. 154; Proc. As. Soc. Bengal, 1872, p. 110. 

 ? D. ornatum, Dum. Bib., apud Giinther : Kept. Brit. India, p. 417; see also Proc. Zool. Soc., 1875, 



p. 568. 



1, Tinali, on the road from Mari to Kashmir. 



The single specimen obtained agrees very well with specimens in the Indian Museum 

 from the peninsula of India and Burma. No representative of the genus had, so far as I am 

 aware, been previously met with so far to the north-west. 



It is not without some hesitation that I retain the name D. carnaticum for this species, 

 as Dr. Giinther has recently repeated his opinion that both Engystoma carnaticum (in part 

 at least) and E. rubrum of Jerdon, or rather specimens identified as such by Jerdon, are 

 identical with E. ornatum of Dumeril and Bibron, but Dr. Jerdon has pointed out that 

 E. carnaticum does not agree with Dumeril and Bibron's description, whilst the form 

 inhabiting Malabar, whence the type of E. ornatum was obtained, is probably distinct from 

 that found in Central and Northern India. I must say that I feel much doubt as to whether 

 E. carnaticum is the species described by Dumeril and Bibron, the colouration described 

 by those authors differing greatly from that of the present form, so far as I am acquainted / 



with it. 



