Waite — Review of Australian Typhlopidae 5 



and mistakes made in leading textbooks have been, and will continue to be, per- 

 petuated. CJado\v(4) states that: "The pterygoids and maxillaries, connected 

 by the ectopterygoids, are absent, owing to reduction in the 'rv])hlopi(lae." ."seeing 

 that both ])terygoids and maxillaries are present, this statement is inexplicable. 

 Parker and Haswell (5) write: "'riie 'ryi)hlopidae difl'er from the rest of the 

 Ophidia in having the maxillae immobile," and so on. 



.Ml writers agree, however, that there is no ectopterygoid in the skull of 

 members of the Typhlopidae, and had we not the assurance of Huxley. Boulenger 

 and other original investigators, I should probably have thought otherwise. I 

 am unaware that any Australian species has been previously examined, and it 

 may be that some of our forms, including T. aiistralis. the species now in question, 

 mav show some divergence in regard to their cranial features. It is not, at least 



Fig. 5. Skull of T. aiistrali. 



a. articular 



bo. basioccipital 



bs. basisplienoid 



c. coronoid 



d, dentarv 



ec. Pectopterygoid 

 e.\. exoccipital 

 f. frontal 



m. maxillary 

 n. nasal 

 p. parietal 

 pf. prefrontal 

 pm. premaxillary 

 po prootic 

 pt. pterygoid 

 q. quadrate 



s. supraoccipital 



at present, my purpose to deeply consider osteological characters, but I should 

 like to draw attention to the method of articulation of the pterygoid as found in 

 T. aiistralis. This slender bone is not connected directly with the movable 



(4) Gadow, Cambridge Nat. Hist. viii. 1901, p. 381. 



(5) Parker and Haswell, Text-book of Zool. ii. 1910, p. 349. 



