﻿162 
  DISCOGLOSSlDrE. 
  

  

  3. 
  Alttes. 
  

  

  Wagler, 
  Syst. 
  Amph., 
  p. 
  206 
  (1830). 
  

  

  Pupil 
  vertical. 
  Yomerine 
  teeth 
  iu 
  transverse 
  or 
  

   slightly 
  oblique 
  series 
  behind 
  the 
  choanae. 
  Tongue 
  

   circular, 
  entire, 
  slightly 
  free 
  behind. 
  Tympanum 
  

   distinct. 
  Fingers 
  free, 
  toes 
  webbed 
  ; 
  outer 
  meta- 
  

   tarsals 
  separated 
  by 
  web. 
  Diapophyses 
  of 
  sacral 
  

   vertebra 
  strongly 
  dilated. 
  Urostyle 
  articulated 
  to 
  

   two 
  condyles. 
  

  

  Two 
  species, 
  both 
  of 
  which 
  inhabit 
  Europe. 
  The 
  

   presence 
  of 
  three 
  palmar 
  tubercles 
  in 
  A. 
  ohstetricans, 
  

   and 
  of 
  two 
  in 
  A. 
  cisternasii, 
  and 
  the 
  short 
  swollen 
  

   outer 
  finger 
  in 
  the 
  latter 
  easily 
  distinguishes 
  them, 
  in 
  

   addition 
  to 
  several 
  other 
  characters, 
  external 
  and 
  

   osteological. 
  

  

  The 
  characters 
  in 
  which 
  the 
  latter 
  species 
  differs 
  

   from 
  the 
  former 
  are 
  adaptations 
  to 
  more 
  burrowing 
  

   habits, 
  and 
  of 
  too 
  slight 
  importance, 
  in 
  my 
  opinion, 
  to 
  

   justify 
  the 
  genus 
  Ammoryctis, 
  proposed 
  by 
  Lataste 
  in 
  

   1879 
  for 
  the 
  then 
  newly 
  discovered 
  Alytes 
  cisternasii, 
  

   which 
  has 
  since 
  proved 
  to 
  be 
  endowed 
  with 
  the 
  same 
  

   extraordinary 
  nursing 
  habits 
  as 
  its 
  long 
  known 
  and 
  

   famous 
  congener. 
  It 
  may 
  be 
  added, 
  as 
  a 
  further 
  

   argument 
  against 
  generic 
  distinction, 
  that 
  the 
  tad- 
  

   poles 
  of 
  the 
  two 
  species 
  resemble 
  each 
  other 
  so 
  closely 
  

   as 
  to 
  be 
  almost 
  indistinguishable 
  before 
  the 
  limbs 
  

   have 
  made 
  their 
  appearance 
  ; 
  this 
  being 
  the 
  only 
  

   instance 
  that 
  I 
  know 
  among 
  Batrachians 
  of 
  well- 
  

   marked 
  species 
  not 
  being 
  differentiated 
  in 
  their 
  larval 
  

   condition. 
  The 
  contrary 
  would, 
  however, 
  in 
  my 
  

   opinion, 
  be 
  no 
  valid 
  objection 
  to 
  generic 
  association, 
  

   for 
  reasons 
  explained 
  in 
  the 
  Introduction, 
  p. 
  110. 
  

  

  