In 1881 Alexander Strauch published what he ma ny significant details, 

 described as a preliminary report of his studies 



of amph isbaen ians — a small group of reptiles al- ^e Leningrad collection, furthermore, contains 

 lied to the lizards and snakes. This important the ho]otype of Nikolskij's ( 19°7) Diplometopon 

 paper was based upon a reexamination of most of zarudnyi deposited there together with the rest of 

 the types in European museums. Strauch's success the 'ranian collection described by that author, 

 in clarifying the concept of a number of species Besides these specimens Strauch was also able to ex- 

 rested to a large extent upon his willingness to change paratypes and syntypes of various species 

 travel in order to examine the original types described by Boulenger and others. All of these are 

 rather than to expend major efforts in extrapo- referred to in the list given below, together with 

 lating a concept from the often inadeguate ori- their current status and comments upon the specimens 

 ginal descriptions. Four of the six new species where indicated. The sequence follows that of my 

 described in his study were based upon specimens checklist of the Amphisbaenia (Gans, I967), except 

 then in the collection of the St. Petersbourg for the species of Leposternon . which are listed in 

 Academy of Sciences, which is now the Zoological the order of their description. 

 Institute, and have apparently not been reexam- 

 ined until this time. ' am m °st grateful to my colleague, Dr. Uya 



Darevsky for permission to examine these materials 



It is truly unfortunate that Strauch was only in nIs care, for hospitality during my stay in 



able to publish the text of his revision (both in Leningrad, and for arranging to translate these 



the Bulletin and the Melanges Biologiques of the notes. 

 Academie des Sciences de St. Petersbourg) but that 



the illustrations could not be printed. His in- LISTING 

 tention to include them in a later, perhaps more 



extensive study is indicated by the existence in TR0G0N0PH I DAE 



the library of the Zoological Institute of a plate Pachycalamus brevis GUnther, 1881 (Z.I.L. No. 

 labelled A. Strauch, Amph isbaen iden Tab. I and 6678), from Socotra, presumably a paratype ex- 

 Mem. Acad. Sci. VII Serie. This document includes changed by the British Museum in I885. 

 views of nine species (Fig. 1, Trogonophis wieg - Diplometopon zarudnyi Nikolski, 1907 (Z. I.L. 

 manni : Fig. 2, Bipes canal iculatus : Fig. 3, Am- No - l°3 4 l)> labelled "East Persia, Djibel-Tnie, 

 phisbaena fuliqinosa : Fig. 4, A. alba : Fig. 5, A. neighbourhood Nasrie and Achvas." Holotype. 

 pretre i : Fig. 6, A. leucocephala : Fig. ] , A. mei — 



tens i: Fig. 8, A. verm icular is : Fig. 9, perhaps AMPH ISBAENI DAE 



A. prunicolor — this illustration does not seem to Amphisbaena alboc ingglata Boettger, 1885 



pertain to any of the forms described in Strauch, (Z.I.L. No. 6660), from "Paraguay." Holotype 



1881), but the paper for which it was intended was purchased from Linnea, 188"5. The specimen has 



apparently never published. 193 body, 3 lateral, and 24 caudal annul i, 16 



dorsal and 11-12 ventral segments per midbody 



Another important collection was apparently annulus, and a snout-vent plus tail length of 

 purchased in 1885 from the "Linnea" Institute. The 7 2 plus 10 mm. The posterior part of the head 

 small collection ascribed to "Paraguay, Amer. mer- shields are asymmetrical as is the mentomalar 

 id." included five important amph i sbaen ians that region. Other characteristics are in good agree- 

 were catalogued with the ascription "Original" by ment w ith the description and the name is proper- 

 names described by Boettger (I885) as from a "Lin- l Y assigned as Amphisbaena prunicolor albocingu - 

 nea" collection. As best can be determined now, lata (cf. Gans, 1966b). 



the "Linnea" was a commercial company which pur- Amphisbaena fenestrata (Cope), 1861 (Z.I.L. 

 chased specimens from foreign collectors (in this No « "J106), from "St. Jean." marked as exchanged 

 case, H. Rohde), had them identified and published from Reinhardt (Copenhagen), I878; may be one of 

 on (often paid for on a "per species" basis), and the paratypes of Amphisbaena antillensis Rein- 

 then sold the specimens to various museums such as hardt and Lutken, 1862. 



London, Wien, and apparently Leningrad. Until Amphisbaena gracilis Strauch, 1881. The holo- 



1885, Linnea was located in Frankfurt am Main, but type of this species is supposed to be Z.I.L. No. 



records in the British Museum disclose that it 5517» without locality. The specimen appears to 



moved to Berlin in that year and apprently became have become lost or destroyed which is unfortun- 



defunct about a decade later (cf. Gans, 1966a). at e since the description in not immediately as- 

 signable and the status of the name remains in 



My colleague, Dr. Ilja Darevsky, had earlier doubt, 

 informed me of the existence in the Leningrad col- Amphisbaena leucocephala Peters, I878 (Z.I.L. 

 lection of five specimens of amph isbaen ids pur- No - 5569), from Bahia. This specimen, correctly 

 chased from "Linnea" in 1885 and ascribed to the identified by Strauch, is only the third known 

 five new species described in Boettger's 1885 pa- individual of the species (cf. Gans, 1965J- The 

 per. Since Boettger had only a single specimen of specimen is faded, but it is still noticeable 

 each form, since no other specimens with these that the head was light colored and the darker 

 data were found in any European museum, and since brown P'9">ent covers the dorsal surface from the 

 it was unlikely that two collections of equivalent ne ck to the tail only. The specimen has 233 body, 

 composition would appear in a single year, I have 4 lateral and 25 caudal annuli with the autotomy 

 already predicted (Gans, 1966a, I967) that Strauch site on the 6th caudal. Supra- and infralabials 

 acquired all five types. It is now possible to number 4 and 3, the first and second postgenial 

 confirm this. Not only are the entries marked rows have 2 and 5 segments, and there are 9 post- 

 "original" in the old Academy catalog, but the malars. Ten precloacal pores occur, and a mid- 

 specimens agree with the original descriptions in bod y annulus has 19 to 21 dorsal and 20 to 21 



