DEVELOPMENT OP THE SKULL IN THE BATRACHIA. 
117 
the fore part; its basi-temporal wings are narrow. The vomers (v.) are also normal, 
their dentigerous lobe is small and transverse; they strongly curl round the inner 
nostrils ( i.n .), and have a moderate front lobe. 
I shall have to refer to this skull once and again ; it seems to me to belong to an 
archaic type of the “Anura,” and to be a form very difficult to place, zoologically. 
Idle main departures from, or failures in attaining to, what is typical, are as 
follows :—• 
1. There is only one fontanelle. 
2. This is not covered by the roof-bones. 
3. The ossification of the occipital arch and ear-capsules is generalised and continuous. 
4. The nasal region is very dilated. 
5. There are no palatine bones. 
6. There is no inter-stapedial, the supra-stapedial is confluent above, and the extra- 
stapedial is sub-peltate. 
7. The hyoid arch is very feeble, partly absorbed, and has its dislocated distal ends 
extremely dilated. 
8. The front lobes of the basal plate are similarly dilated. 
9. The thyro-hyals are non-symmetrical. 
10. There is an irregular forked superficial basi-branchial on the under surface of 
the basal plate. 
Third genus. Xenophrys. 
29. Xenophrys monticola. —Adult male ; 3 inches long ; length of hind leg, 4§ inches. 
Darjeeling. 
This fine specimen, the gift of Dr. Gunther, is twice as large as the one described 
by him in his ‘ Reptiles of British India’ (plate 26, fig. H, h', p. 414). That specimen 
only measured 19 lines from snout to vent, with a hind limb 31 lines long ; this gives 
nearly double these lengths. 
Moreover, this appears to be much better developed ; it has a rudiment of the 
“ interdio’ital membrane,” and the fingers and toes have a discoid end one-third wider 
than the contiguous part of the digits. 
I am very doubtful as to the position of this large Frog, and of its equally fine 
relative, Megalophrys montana (ibich, p. 412). 
The figures of the skull of Xenophrys (Plate 23, figs. 5-10) have been purposely put 
on the same plate with those of Pelodytes (figs. 1-4) for contrast. The Family 
“ Discoglossidse” (Gunther, “ Batr. Sal.,” p. 34 ; and Mivart, Proc. Zool. Soc., 1869, 
p. 294) must be one in which the members “agree to differ” to a very great extent, 
especially now Professor Mivart has added the “ Asterophrydidse ” of Dr. Gunther, 
and Professor Cope’s Neotropical genus Grypiscus, which has mandibular teeth, and 
heads a “ Sub-family” of its own. This type has opisthoccelian vertebrse. 
I shall look for its true relations among the “Oriental” Batrachia, and these, when 
