1872.] F. Stoliczka — On Indian BatracUa. 105 



the base of the -ith toe rounded, flattened, more distinct in the young than 

 in the adult, 



11. Htlaeai^a Tytleri, Theobald. 

 Stoliczka, Joum. A. S. B., xxxix, Pt. II, p. 148. 



This species is as yet only known from Lower Bengal and Barma. It is 

 perfectly distinct from B. erythrcBa. Since the publication of my notes 

 (loc. cit.) I have received several specimens from Pegu* through Mr. Kurz. 



In most of these the 4th toe slightly exceeds half the length of the 

 body, and the distance from anus to heel is somewhat more than its total 

 length. The coloration perfectly agrees with the specimens formerly 

 described from Moulmein. 



22. Hylarais^a Malabaeica, (D. and Bib.) 



The back is during life vinaceous red (not brick red) , paler on the snout 

 and passing mto vinaceous ashy with a few black dots on the sacral region ; 

 limbs above dull black, mottled and spotted with reddish white ; upper arm 

 with a longitudinal blackish band on the exterior-inferior side, and another 

 one on the postero-superior ; sides of body pure black, with or without a few 

 white spots ; glandular folds white, the upper one is not very distinctly 

 defined from the vinaceous red colour of the back ; the lower is interrupted 

 on the humeral region, but distinctly continues to the groin ; upper lip with 

 a white stripe, its edge being dull vinaceous black, and of the same colour is 

 also the throat and breast, being mottled with paler and passing towards 

 the vent into almost pure white. The swollen tips and joints of the fingers 

 and toes are reddish white, and the two metatarsal tubercles pure white. 



I met with several specimens of this frog at Nadauli on the Western 

 Ghats. The body of the largest is only 1*5 inch, equal to or slightly less, 

 than the distance from the anus to the metatarsal tubercle. 



I very much doubt that the Chinese species which Steindachner 

 (Amph. Novara Exp., 1867, p. 48) describes under the name of malaharica 

 is really identical with our Indian frog. He says, that the toes are half- 

 webbed and the tips on the fingers indistinctly developed, while in malaharica 

 the toes are barely half-webbed, and the tips of the fingers very distinctly 

 swollen (at least in fresh specimens). The general coloration of both is 

 certainly very similar, but in detail Steindachner' s description is not easily 

 applicable to true malaharica. 



13. Htlarai^a monticola, Anderson. 

 Journal A. S. B,, 1871, p. 25. 



The only type specimen is a female. I obtained a male in the Eungnu 

 valley (Sikkim) at about 4000 feet elevation. The structure and coloration 



* Dx'. Giiuther (Proc. Z. S., 1868, p. 479) quotes the Cuylonese H. maculariob 

 also from Pegu ; might this not be a specimen of Tytleri or nigrovlUata ? 



