1892.] FROGS IN THE INDIAN MUSEUM. 345 



8. Rana TENAssERiMENSis, sp. u. (Plate XXIV. figs. 4, 4 a.) 



Vomerine teeth not well developed, in one specimen absent alto- 

 gether, in another in two oval groups between the choanoe ; no 

 papillae on the tongue ; head short and rounded, with indistinct 

 canthus rostralis and slightly concave loreal region ; nostril a good 

 deal nearer the tip of the snout than the e^-e ; interorbital space 

 somewhat wider than the upper eyelid ; tympanum distinct, about 

 two-thirds the size of the eye ; fingers and toes moderate, the tips 

 dilated into quite large disks, about one-third the size of the tym- 

 panum ; first finger much shorter than the second ; toes rather less 

 than one-third webbed, webs extending to about a level with the first 

 joint of the phalanges ; subarticular tubercles moderate ; a small oval, 

 flat, inner metatarsal tubercle ; no tarsal fold ; a fringe along tlie 

 fifth toe ; tibio-tarsal articulation reaching to a level with the front of 

 the eye ; skin of the back wrinkled into short longitudinal glandular 

 folds; a fold from the eye to the shoulder above the tympanum. 



Above brown, with darker spots and scattered white blotches ; 

 limbs both fore and hind cross-barred ; beneath lighter brown, 

 minutely speckled with darker. 



Length, snout to vent 22 millim. 



This Frog seems to be most nearly allied to B. leptodactyla, from 

 which, however, it differs in wanting the free pointed papillae of the 

 tongue and having shorter legs. It is altogether a very distinct 

 species. 



It is perhaps somewhat near to R. hascheana, Stol. (above, p. 344), 

 from which, however, it differs in its rough granular skin, its indis- 

 tinct vomerine teeth, and lastly, and chiefly, in its very much larger 

 fingers and toe-disks. 



There are five examples of this species in the Indian Museum, all 

 collected, by Mr. Limborg in Tenasserim. 



9. Rana gracilis, Gravenh. ; Boulenger, Ind. Rept. p. 456, 



The type of Lymnodytes macularius, Blyth, which species has 

 been identified by Boulenger with R. gracilis, Gravenh., agrees very 

 well with the description given of this Frog by Boulenger {loc. cit.j, 

 except for the fact that the skin above is very distinctly granulate, 

 as in R. malabarica. 



10. Rana nigrovittata (=tytleri) and R. ERVTHRyEA. 



The distinction drawn by Boulenger, namely, the presence of an 

 outer metatarsal tubercle in R. tytleri and its absence in R. erythrcea, 

 does not seem to be very constant ; in fact the only difference of 

 specific value between the two forms seems to be that in R. erythraea 

 the dorsal glandular lateral fold is very much thicker and more 

 prominent than in R. tytleri. 



The type of Hylorana tytleri of Theobald, which is in the Indian 

 Museum, has a very thick glandular lateral fold, and must therefore 

 be referred to R. erythrcea ; the other species, the form described 

 by Boulenger under the name R. tytleri, will therefore require 



