36 MR. F, E. BEDDARD OlSf THE ANATOMY [Jan. 15, 



British Museum.' The differences between the viscera of different 

 species are by no means so well known. Indeed the only recent 

 memoir known to me dealing with the visceral anatomy of 

 Chamasleons, which also refers to specific differences within the 

 genus, is that by Dr. Wiedersheim *, chiefly dealing with the 

 respii'atory system in Ch. vulgaris and Ch. tnonachus. I have 

 dissected, with reference to more than one point in the visceral 

 anatomy, the following species, viz.: — Ch. vulgaris, Ch. calcarifer, 

 Ch. dilepis, Ch. pumilus, Ch. j^arvilohus, Ch. tceniobro7ichus, Ch. 

 hasiliscus, and Ch. verriccosics. I am in consequence able to offer 

 some additional anatomical facts concerning the genus, which are 

 also of classificatory importance. 



I may first of all call attention to an external character of the 

 little-known Chamceleon calcarifer. One of the external characters 

 which distinguishes Ch. calcarifer from Ch. vulgaris is the presence 

 in the former of a more distinct ventral crest composed of a 

 line of conical and, at times, overlapping " enlarged granules." 

 This line is traceable, but is by no means so well marked, in 

 Ch. vulgaris. The division of these venti'al scutes which marks 

 the position of the umbilicus in the foetus is therefore exceedingly 

 obvious in Ch. calcarifer and less easily to be mapped, out in 

 Ch. vulgaris. It lies behind the middle line of the body. It is 

 represented by a long space contained in the middle of the ventral 

 crest, which bifurcates to embrace it, and in this region therefore 

 is double. The number of scales on the two sides is uneven ; 

 I counted 13 on the left and 11 on the right side. The size of the 

 region of the integument which appears to mark the umbilicus was 

 rather greater in Ch. vulgaris, but, as already said, the indistinct- 

 ness of the ventral crest renders it difficult to be accurate. In 

 Gh. dilepis this area was quite as distinct as in Ch. calcarifer and 

 occupied the same position ; there were, however, only 10 pairs of 

 scales, closely apposed. 



The lungs show some variation in structure from species to 

 species. That there is some variation in these organs has already 

 been pointed out by Wiedersheim, who figures those of Ch. imlgaris 

 and of Ch. monachus. The differences seem mainly to affect the 

 number and form of the tags which are appended to the lungs, 

 those very characteristic anangious outgrowths of the lung. 

 Wiedersheim distinguishes between the moi'e or less cylindrical 

 outgrowths and the branches of the lung itself which bear them. 

 The outgrowths, which exist more anteriorly and always on the 

 ventral side of the lung, are simply the tubular ca3ca. Towards 

 the end of the lung the lung itself is divided into several 

 processes. In a young example the author quoted found that the 

 cseca were solid. There is therefoi-e reason for distinguishing the 

 pulmonary caeca from the lungs, and a careful examination of both 

 shows a ceasing of the reticular bands which cover even the 

 anangious part of the lungs. As the number of outgrowths not 



* Ber. naturf. Ges. Freiburg-i.-Br., Bd. i. 1886, Heft 3. 



