48 
MEMOIES OF THE QUEENSLAND MUSEUM. 
specialisation, but I think it is a significant thing that some of the Papuan frogs 
now regarded as belonging to the family Pelobatidse differ from some Cystigna- 
thids in characters which are a matter of “ degree ” only. Thus Lechriodus 
melanopyga , Doria,* can hardly be distinguished from Phanerotis fletcheri on 
externals alone, a fact which also serves to show how slender and unstable is 
the boundary between the Australian members of the family CystignathidsE with 
slightly dilated sacral vertebrae, and some of the Pelobatida* in which they are 
a little more so. 
The type of Remaster convexiusculus agrees almost exactly with Dr. van 
Kampen ’s splendid description and figure of P. nova -guinea. It differs only in 
the distribution of the warts on the back, which are not so well developed and 
confined more to the sides. Dr. van Kampen makes no mention of the large, 
rather spaced maxillary teeth, which certainly obtrude themselves upon one’s 
notice. The vomerine teeth are exactly as they are figured by Dr. van Kampen 
but differ from the condition found in P. fletcheri, in which they are weaker 
and do not extend out beyond the level of the choanse. Macleay describes the 
tongue as “largely notched behind,” but I find it to be quite small as stated by 
van Kampen. The same may be said of Macleay ’s “rather large” choana?, which 
cn the contrary are rather small and almost exactly as figured by the Dutch 
author. The fingers and toes of the type specimen are considerably shrunken,, 
which would account for Macleay ’s misleading statement that they are webbed. 
The colour marking of the type agrees in detail with Dr. van Kampen’s 
illustration. 
2. HYLOPHORBUS RUFESCENS, Macleay. 
Macleay, Proc. Linn. Soc. N. S. Wales, ii., 1878, p. 136. Type locality: Katow, British New 
Guinea. 
Boulenger, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (6), xix., 1897, p. 12, pi. ii., fig. 3 ( Mantophyrne lateralis). Typ 
locality : Mount Victoria, British New Guinea. 
Mehely, Termesz. Fuzetek., xxiv., 1901, p. 220, pi. iv. and pi. v., and pi. x., fig. 4 (M. lateralis , 
Blngr). 
The type specimen of this frog is in poor condition. The extremities have 
contracted considerably and the colour is quite bleached. Nevertheless it is. 
sufficiently perfect to identify it with Mantophryne lateralis , Boulenger. It 
agrees in every detail except that the form is slightly more slender, while the 
two warts on the chin of Boulenger ’s specimen are not discernible. The lower 
jaw of the type lias been crudely broken, showing the two dermal esophageal 
ridges quite distinctly. The tympanum is now perfectly distinct. The charac- 
teristic tongue is exactly as described by Boulenger. The very fine, almost 
invisible vertebral fold is also present in Macleay ’s specimen. The colour is: 
now quite bleached, but Macleay ’s original description agrees in all essentials 
with Boulenger ’s fine figure. Therefore, Mantophryne lateralis, Boulenger, 
becomes replaced by the earlier name Hylophorbus rufescens , Macleay. Manto- 
* Doria, Ann. Mus. Civ. Genova, vi., 1874, p.. 355, pi. xii., fig. K. 
