1907.] AjStatomy of the pelobatid^. 909 



if the foregoing genera are allowed, and if Megcdoplwys is distinct 

 from LejJtohrachium, that that Frog will have to be placed in a 

 distinct genus equivalent to these others. For this genus I 

 suggest the name Pelobaxrachus, which may be thus defined : — 

 Skin vnth cons2yicuoi(,s indurations. A feiv large tubercles. 

 Aggregations of gkmds present on thighs, hut smaller than in 

 allied genera. Tympanum invisible. Vertebrce procoelous ; sacral 

 vertebra fused with coccyx. Omosternum of fair size and calcified 

 in part ; sternum ossified xoith expanded cartilaginous xiphistermmx. 

 Hyoid with anterior p)'>'Ocesses parallel; thyrohyals hourglass- 

 shaped v-ith long cartilaginous epiphysis lying behind last peiro- 

 hyoid. Right lung supported for half its length by ligament. 

 Sternum short in proportion to body-length. Pectoralis jjosterior 

 reduced in length. Suhmaxillaris with extensive tendinous centre. 

 Siihhyoideus large and distinct from submaxillaris. Larynx with 

 long separate hypopharyngeal processes and long bronchial hoop on 

 each side. 



The following characters are, so far as we know, peculiar or 

 nearly peculiar to, and therefore to be used in the definition of, 

 the genus Pelobates : — 



Skill withoui indurations. Vertehrce proax-lous. Sacricm. fused 

 tvith coccyx ; transverse process of sacrum formed from two vertebrce. 

 Anterior processes of hyoid nearly meeting in middle line ; anterior 

 cornua of hyoid rudimentary and detached frovi the body of the 

 hyoid. Xo gland on thighs. Toes ujebbed fully. Metatarsal 

 tidjercle a sharp-edged digging-organ. Larynx diferent in fortn 

 from that of Oriental Pelobatidoi* . Omostermmi riidimentary, 

 cartilaginous ; xijihisternum ossified, ending in an expanded carti- 

 laginous plate. ^Sternum short in proportion to body-length. 

 Pectoralis posterior arising from whole of stermmi. Sid)m axillaris 

 fleshy throughottt with only a fine tendinous raphe. Subhyoideus 

 not very distinct from submaxillaris. 



The facts do not exist for a criticism of the nmnerous species 

 that have been desci'ibed and assigned to the genus Leptobrachizim, 

 and especially recently. -It is clear, however, from these descrip- 

 tions that external characters foi'merly regaixled as distinctive of 

 the genera Megalopjhrys, Xenophrys, and Leptobrachium respec- 

 tively can no longer be allowed. For example, the species 

 Leptobrachitim p)elodytoides t has an oval metatarsal tubercle pre- 

 sumably like that of Megalophrys, and therefore not like that of 

 I^eptobrachium hasseltii. L. carinense % has horns on the eyelids 

 as has Megalophrys, and the integument is hardened by stellate 

 bony deposits. L.fea'. has the same characters, and, in addition, 

 warts upon the body, the presence of which differentiated X. mon- 

 ticola which has them not, from Megalophrys which has them. 

 The fact that these forms possess proccelous vertebrte does indeed 



* I reserve details for the present wliicli I hope to furnish later. 



t Bouleijger, Batrachia in ' Fauna of British India,' 1890, p. -510 &c. 



X Bonlenger, Ann. Mi.js. Geneva, yiii, 1893, p. 344. 



61* 



