AMPHIBIA. 
25 
AMPHIBIA. 
The Amphibia are very poorly represented in Dr. Stoliczka’s collections. Only four 
species are represented, and only one was procured from Eastern Turkestan; all are well 
known forms of Batrachia. No examples of Urodela were met with. 
Order BATBACHIA. 
Pamily— BANIBJE. 
1. Eana cyanophlyctis. 
Schneider Gunther: Eept. Brit. Ind., p. 406 Stoliezka: Jour. As. Soc. Bengal, 1870, sxxix, 
Pt. 2, p. 146j Proc. As. Soc. Bengal, 1872, pp. 85, 102,130;—W. Blank: Jour. As. Soc. Bengal, 
xxxix, Pt. 2, p. 374; Eastern Persia, ii, p. 433. 
1—3, between Mari and Kashmir. 
This species had previously been recorded by Dr. Stoliezka from Mari. It is common 
throughout the peninsula of India, and is the only abundant frog in the dry western 
parts of the country, Kachh (Cutch), Sind, &c., extending to the west into Baluchistan. 
2. Diplopelma carnatictjm. 
Bngystoma carnaticumy Jerdon: Jour. As. Soc. Bengal, 1853, xxii, p. 534. 
JDijtlopelma carnaticim, Jerdon: Proc. As. Soc. Bengal, 1870, p. 85;—Stoliezka: Jour. As. Soc. Bengab 
1870, xxxix, p. 154; Proc. As. Soc. Bengal, 1872, p. 110. 
? I), ornatum, Dura. Bib., apud Gunther: Kept. Brit. India, p. 417; see also Proc. Zool. Soc., 1875, 
p. 568. 
1, Tinali, on the road from Mari to Kashmir. 
The single specimen obtained agrees very well with specimens in the Indian Museum 
from the peninsula of India and Burma. No representative of the genus had, so far as I am 
aware, been previously met with so far to the north-west. 
It is not without some hesitation that I retain the name D. carnaticum for tliis species, 
as Dr. Gunther has recently repeated his opinion that both Engystoma carnaticum (in part 
at least) and JE. rubrum of Jerdon, or rather specimens identified as such by Jerdon, are 
identical with E. ornatum of Dumeril and Bibron, but Dr. Jerdon has pointed out that 
E. carnaticum does not agree with Dumeril and Bibron’s description, whilst the form 
inhabiting Malabar, whence the type of E. ornatum was obtained, is probably distinct from 
that found in Central and Northern India. I must say that I feel much doubt as to whether 
E. carnaticum is the species described by Dumeril and Bibron, the colouration described 
by those authors differing greatly from that of the present form, so far as I am acquainted, 
with it. 
