112 
ZOOLOGICAL LITEllATUllE. 
The following known species have been figured by Gunther, 
Kept. Brit. Ind. : — 
Ti'opidophorus mio'olepis, Gthr., pi. 10. fig. A j Euprepes rufescenSf Shaw, 
pi. 10. fig. B j Euprepes olivaceus, Gray, pi. 10. fig. D j Mabouia quadrilineataf 
Blyth, pi. 10. fig. E \ Mabouia chtnensis, Gray, pi. 10. fig. F j Eumeces 
reevesii, Gray, pi. 10. fig, K j Eumeces taprobanensiS) Kelaart, pi. 13. fig, B. 
Prof. Peters, Monatsber. Acad. Wiss. Berlin, 1864, has reex- 
amined the typical specimens of Scincoids described by Wieg- 
mann, and other species contained in the Berlin Museum. 
Besides those mentioned above, the following deserve particular 
attention : — 
1. Heteropus (Fitz.). He shows that Fitziiiger applied this name first 
to Sphenops capistratus and afterwards to Heteropus fuscus (D. & B.). 
He adds the remark that the inner finger of Sphenops capistratus is not rarely 
absent, p. 47. 
2. Camilia jarnaicensis (Gray) identical with Diploglossus monotropis 
(Wiegm.), p. 48. 
3. Eumeces (Wiegm.). The typical and only species of this genus known 
to Wiegmann is Scincus pavimentatus (Geoflr.) = aldrovandi (D. 
& B .) } therefore Dum^ril and Bibron have misapplied this name, p. 48. 
4. Euprepes lynxe (Wiegm.) has been erroneously referred to E. quinque- 
lineatus (Gm.) byDumeril and Bibron, and belongs to Eumeces (Wiegm.), p. 49. 
6. Eumeces oppelii (B. & B.) identical with Euprepis rufescens (Wiegm.), 
p. 49. 
6. Euprepis {Scincus) carinatus (Schneid.) is identical with, and prior to, 
E. sebce (D. & B.) = JS’. rufescens (Shaw), p. 50. 
7. .Euprepes spilonotus (Wiegm.) differs scarcely from Eumeces sloanei 
(Baud.), p. 50. 
8. Euprepes semitceniatus, E. pyrrhocephalus, and E. brevicollis of Wieg- 
mann are good species, p. 50. 
9. Euprepes smithii (Gray) is identical with E. homalocephalus (Wiegm. 
Isis, 1828, p. 374), p. 51. 
10. Euprepes {Scincus) auratus (Schneid.) is a compound. The species 
for which Wiegmann has retained this name has the scales sometimes 
smooth, sometimes striated, p. 51. 
11. Eumeces quinquelincutus (B. & B.). Prof. Peters is of opinion that the 
Japanese specimens are different from those of North America, p. 57. Gun- 
ther (Kept. Brit. Ind. p. 84) shows that specimens from Japan and North 
America are more nearly allied to each other than to those from China. 
New species : — 
E 2 iprepes monticola, Giinther, Kept. Brit. Ind. p. 80, pi. 10. fig. C ; Eumeces 
himalayanus, Gunther, p. 86, pi. 10. fig. II, from the Himalayas and Kashmir j 
Eumeces modestus, Giinther, p. 87, pi. 10. fig. G, from Ningpo j Eumeces lada^ 
censis, Gunther, p. 88, pi. 10, fig. I, from Tibet j Eumeces siamensis, Gunther, 
p. 91, from Siam; Eumeces bowrinyii, ibid., from Hongkong; Eumeces iso- 
dactylusj Giinther, p. 93, pi. 13. fig. A, from Gamboja. 
