THE FAUNA OF A DESERT TRACT IN SOUTHERN INDIA. 199 



Snakes — 



Typhlops braminus var. arenicola. 



„ limbrickii. 



,, psammophilus. 

 Eryx johnii. 



,, conicus. 

 [Lycodon aulicus.] 



,, striatus.* 

 Zamenis mucosus. 

 Dendrophis pictus. 

 Tropidonotus piscator. 

 [ ,, stolatus.] 



Dryophis myterizans. 

 Naia tripudians. 

 Echis carinatus.* 



The names of species which occur in either of lists i or 2 and also in list 3 are 

 marked with a * ; of those which occur in both 1 and 2 with a § ; and of those which 

 are confined to 2, with a||. 



Of the 14 species and 13 genera included in the first list 3 species and 2 genera 

 are not included in the second, while of the 31 species and 24 genera in the second, 20 

 species and 10 genera are not included in the first. We may, however, regard these two 

 lists as complementary to one another. Of the 26 species and 18 genera in the third list, 

 2 species and 4 genera are common to it and to one or both of the first two. 



NOTES ON DISTRIBUTION. 



On the whole, the inclusion of such forms as Echis carinatus, Eryx conicus, and Eryx 

 johnii in the fauna of Ramanad suggests that this fauna is a desert fauna of wide 

 distribution in India. The most superficial examination, however, of the lists given on 

 the preceding pages will show that there is a very great difference between the fauna 

 of the deserts of the extreme north-western (political) border of India and that of the 

 desert tracts in the south-eastern corner of the Peninsular Area. As Blanford l has 

 pointed out, a great part of Baluchistan belongs practically to the Palsearctic Region, and 

 this observation is well borne out by the collections recently made on the northern border 

 of that country. We may note in passing the comparatively large number of Lacertidae in 

 the two first lists given above, or at any rate in the second list, which is much more nearly 

 complete than the first. There are no members of this family in my Ramanad collection, 

 and it is doubtful whether any exist in the area it represents. In the Afghan-Baluch list, 

 on the other hand, no less than five species, representing three genera, are recorded. A 

 similar difference may be noted as regards the genera of the Agamids included in the 



1 Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. B. CXCIV, 1901, p. 337, etc. 



