Dr. A. Giinther on a new Snake fy-om Bahia, 335 



Of the genus Oxyrhopus I have seen the foUowhig species : — 

 O. Clcelia, O. formosus, O. petolariusy O. immaculatus, and O. tri- 

 geminus. The last-named one and O. petolarius are the most 

 common. Of O. immaculatus I have seen a single specimen. 



Of the family Elapidse two species are very common — Flaps lemnis- 

 catus and E, corallinus. The variety of the latter with white-edged 

 black rings never attains but a small size ; it differs also in colora- 

 tion from the others, being brick-red. I am therefore inclined to con- 

 sider it as a distinct species — the E. circinalis of Dum. and Bibron. 



Addition to Dr. Wucherer's x\rticle on the Ophidians 

 OF Bahia. By Dr. A. Gunther, F.Z.S., etc. 



Almost simultaneously with the concluding part of Dr. Wucherer's 

 paper "On the Ophidians of Bahia," I received from him a small 

 Snake, which on examination proved to be a new species of the 

 genus Dromictis. 



Mr. Cope has lately* pointed out the complete gradation existing 

 between the most slender species of Dromicus and the stout forms of 

 the genus Liophis, dividing them into six divisions, characterized by 

 the structure of the scales and by the relative length of the tailf . 

 This new species would enter the division Lygophis of his arrange- 

 ment, having the scales without grooves, and a tail the length of 

 which is one-fourth of the total. 



Dromicus (Lygophis) Wuchereri, sp. nov. 

 Scales in fifteen rows. Loreal square ; one praeorbital, reaching 

 to the upper surface of the head, but not touching the vertical ; two 



postorbitals ; eight upper labials, the third, fourth, and fifth enter- 

 ing the orbit (the third with its posterior angle only) ; the seventh 

 labial forms only a small portion of the lip, and on one side it is 



* Proc. Acad. Nat. Sc. Philad. 1862, p. 75. 



t Mr. Cope's general observations on the species of these genera are perfectly 

 correct, and the divisions proposed by him are most convenient for the determi- 

 nation of the species, but they do not appear to me to be more natural groups than 

 those which we had before ; for instance, Liophis Reginee is certainly more closely 

 allied to L. Merremii and to L. Cobella than to Dromicus TemminckU; yet L. Re- 

 gints and D. TemmincMi are united into one group, and the two others into 

 another. L. conirostris cannot be separated from L. Reginm. And if Liophis and 

 Dromicus be brought into so close a proximity as they are by Mr. Cope, Zamenis 

 and certain species of Coronella, Leptodira, &c., cannot be kept at a distance. 



