Cope.] loo JulylH, 



So far as the "Catalogue of Batrachia Salientia in the British Mu- 

 seum" is concerned, no cliaracters to distinguisli tliem can be found. 

 But I pointed ovit, some years ago, that the difference consisted mainly 

 in the structures of the distal phalanges characteristic of each : also that 

 Hylorana is much nearer to Rana, and is only to be distinguished from it 

 generically, without the interposition of any possible form which would 

 not unite them. The T-shaped phalange in some Hyloranae is so weak, 

 while the expansion of the tip of the same in Rana temporaria and others, 

 is so distinct, as to render the permanent distinction of the two genera a 

 mere matter of future discovery. 



LlMNOMEDUSA MACROGLOSSA, D. B. 



Having had an opportunity of examining the sternum of this species 

 for the first time, I find that it possesses the styloid xiphisternum which I 

 have indicated as characteristic of the typical group Cystignathi of the 

 family Cystignathidse, and it must therefore be referred to the neighbor- 

 hood of Cystignathus. Besides other points, Limnomedusa, Cope, is 

 distinguished from Cystignathus by the vertical pupil. 



Keferstein states that I erroneously ascribe an osseous stylus of the 

 xiphisternum to the genus Borborocaetes Bell. The facts are as follows : 

 This genus was distributed by Giinther in the Catal. Bat. Sal. Brit. Mus. 

 in two widely different groups, Cystignathus, and one he called Limno- 

 dynastes. I first pointed out* that this series of species differed radically 

 from Cystignathus and its allies, in the smitiform cartilaginoits xiphis- 

 ternum, and also in the large cranial frontanelle. 



Up to that time the Australian species called Limnodynastes had never 

 been received other than specific characters, as that by which it was stated 

 by Giinther to differ from Cystignathus, viz., the transverse extension of 

 the series of vomerine teeth, is one included in the range of many well- 

 known genera, as Rana, Lithodytes, and Cystignathus itself. The South 

 American species named by Bell long previously, Borborocaetes, differ 

 only from those of Australia in the shortening of these series, and not 

 more than Cystignatliu.s taeniatus does from C. albilabris. 



GOMPHOBATES BILIGOWIGERUS, CopC. 



GompJwbates notatus, Reinhdt. and Llitken, Yid. Medd. Copenhagen, 

 1861, 33 Tab. IV, f. 3. Liuperus Uligonigents, Cope, Proc. Ac. N. Sci., 

 Phila., 1860, 517. Uraguay. 



EusoPHtis KEBULosus Gope, Cystignathus nebulos^is Oirard. It is prob- 

 able that the Cystignathid described by Giinther, P. Z. S., Lond., 1868, 

 482, as Gaeotus maculatus, is a variety of this species. It agrees in all 

 respects except in having a black suborbital spot, and line on the cantlms 

 rostralis, which Girard's types do not exhibit. Giinther places it among 

 his Bombinatorina. It is scarcely necessary to observe that it has not 

 the least affinity to Bombinator. 



*Nat. Hist., Review ]S65. 



