The only list of the reptiles and batrachians of the Seychelles, as far as I know, is given in Wallace's Island Life (London). I undoubtedly have specimens of the latter species to compare with, and must therefore rely on the literature. in this species the frontal suture is absent or only slightly larger than the width of the interorbital space, while in 8.
Diameter of eye 715; 12 entire lamellae under the fourth toe; small ear opening, one-third the diameter of the eye. The coloration is also very different compared to individuals of the same size from the Seychelles, the side stripes of the head being quite distinctive. With these exceptions, in addition to the strong stripe of the cephalic shields, the figures of the head of E.
At the back of the last chin-shield there is a long and narrow infralabial, while in the corresponding place in E. In the arrangement of the mandibular shields, the specimen on which I have ventured upon the basis of a new species certainly appears somewhat abnormal and it is possible for characters to emerge from which may turn out to be non-diagnostic. Ohanler's traveling companion, Lieut, von Hoehnel, of the Imperial Austrian Navy, who also did part of the gathering.
722 AFRICAN REPTILES AND BATRACHIANS — STEJNEGER
The specimens from the .same locality show a remarkable uniformity of color pattern, especially when we consider the great variation of the species. Color description.— Top of head and inner half of the two median dorsal seal rows, brown; a well-defined brownish black band on either side occupies the outer half of these scales and the inner half of the next row of scales, beginning at the outer edge of the supraocular, the two black bands joining and continuing a little posterior to the anus as a median dark band to below the upper surface of the tail;.
724 AFRICAN REPTILES AND BATRACHIANS — STEJNEGER
SERPEN TES
720 AFRICAN REPTILES AND BATRACHIANS — STEJNEGER
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM 727
728 AFRICAN REPTILES AND BATRACHIANS — STEJNEGER
3 on both sides; in the former the preorbitals are somewhat separated from the front, while in the latter they barely meet it). 20112 differs considerably in this respect, the center of the back being marked with a broad and very dark brown. stripe from the head to within a very short distance of the tip of. In addition, the other markings are above and below a lot. darker and better defined, the dark vermiculations on the top of the head and the outer double line on each side of the gastrosteges being particularly well marked; the two lower entire scale rows in the light space between the middle dorsal band and the broad lateral bands are marked with a narrow dark stripe along the middle.
The broad median dorsal stripe is also traceable in the light specimen, especially posteriorly, but is somewhat darker than on the upper side. Rostral normal, more than twice as wide as high, well visible from above; nose large, greatly swollen and bent on the upper surface of the head, the nostril is pierced at the canthus rostralis and quite visible from above, the subnaral suture does not reach the nostril, obliquely behind, meets the suture between the first and second supralabial pieces; intemasals nearly triangular, very small, less than one-third of prefrontals; loreal long and narrow, twice as long as high; deep furrow from rostral to eye formed by suture bordering supralabials above; preocular relatively small, just touching anterior part above; frontals long, twice as long as wide, longer than prefrontals and internals combined, as long as parietals; supraoculars large, rather swollen; two postostelars, upper one slightly larger; anterior temporals two, long, the upper one especially narrow, pointed anteriorly and barely reaching the upper posteular; two pairs of chins, the last slightly longer. Color gray above, with a broad toothed brown band down the middle of the back almost to the tip of the tail, the borders and lateral projections almost black, the adjacent scales, especially in front, pale bull'; set of blackish spots corresponding to lateral notch of dorsal band in scale row closest to gastrosteges and urosteges; on posterior half of body more or less distinct line in third row from grastrosteges and urosteges; the tip of the tail is almost monochromatic; top of head grey, with distinct dark brown niarblings; dark brownish transocular line; each of thelabialsin. both mandibles with an arbitrarily defined dark brownish spot; underside whitish, indistinctly marbled with dull brown and marked with poorly defined, narrow, longitudinal blackish spots; underside of tail densely sprinkled with greyish.
The difference between the two species, as Caras points out from the description alone, consists in the number and shape of the anterior temporal parts and the greater length of the tail in the present species. The color is very similar, the main difference being that the dorsal band in the current species is completely serrated and that in this species the spots are present on the scale row next to the gastrosteges. Many other differences might be noted if we were to accept the details of the skull shape as shown in the figure as absolutely correct in all cases, but this is hardly to be expected.
I had originally established a new name for the present species, not supposing that the snake Anopistoglypli had been described by Peters as an Ablabes; but comparison with his figure and description leaves little doubt but that it is the same species, and that Petersover- seemed the groove of the last maxillary tooth. As to the propriety of uniting Boettger's Hemirhagerrhis with Amphiophis Smith, I can form no opinion, as I am not acquainted with the type of the better type. The main differences consist of the single anal, as described by Peters, versus the double in both of our specimens, and the somewhat greater number of urostegae in the type.
The latter difference, however, is easily within the range of individual variation, and the difference in the anals hardly seems to be of much greater importance in this case, as the specimens appear in every respect to agree perfectly. The main characteristics of the species, namely the very elongated head and the great length of the frontal compared to the supraoculars, the former, which is consequently broadly in contact with the preocular and the prefrontal widely separated from the supraoculars, are very strongly marked in our specimens, and Peters' description of the color agrees very well with the larger one.
732 AFRICAN KEPTILES AND BATRACHIANS STEJNEGER
The specimen shows on the right side of the face the anomaly of having the posterior upper corner of the fifth supralabial split as a large innocular. There is such confusion in the literature regarding -the species of the genus Dasypeltis, and the specimens before me agree so little between them and with the published descriptions, representing about half a dozen species or subspecies, that I have been unable. I name them for my pleasure. The only other way would have been to create new names, but as I have no doubt that the sonic names of the old names will become available as soon as someone with more material has been able to muddle through the current skeleton.
No. 16775 is much the larger of the two examples before me; it is of a uniform dark brown olive top and yellowish underside; it lies. The dentition of the keels of the third, fourth, fifth and sixth lower lateral scale rows are very pronounced, the scales themselves being very small and obliquely arranged. The ground color is the same dark brown olive, perhaps a shade browner, and at first glance it appears uniform, but closer inspection reveals that on the back there is a series of dark spots separated by a pale space, the markings being very similar to those on the back of Sordelli. 'figure of B.
734 AFRICAN REPTILES AND BATRACIIIANS STEJNEGER
The coloration above is pale grayish, the edges of the scales are paler, the underside uniformly pale yellowish; round the neck a single broad pale black collar covering" 12 gastrosteges and about as many scales on the vertebral line beginning on the fifth gastrostege and on the sixth vertebral scale from the parietal. Diagnosis. — Nineteen rows of scales; produced rostrally, but not forming above ridge; internasal not in contact with loreal, excluded by prefrontal, which is in contact with posterior nasal; anal one;. Remarks.—In rostral form the present species appears to be somewhat intermediate between Caususrhov&beatwandC.
73G AFRICAN REPTILES AND BATRACHIANS STEJNEGER
Moreover, I can say that in the youngest specimen the rostral is only somewhat prominent, hardly more so than in C.
738 AFRICAN REPTILES AND BATRACHIANS STEJNEGER
APOD A
They show, among other things, the relative number of complete and incomplete "circular folds" supported by Boulenger in constructing his key to this genus (Cat. Bat.Grad.Br. Mas., 1882, p .96) is worthless. It is clear from the annexed table that while in some of the specimens "almost all the circular folds* completely encircle the body," in others most of these folds are widely separated on the front of the back, some nearer the head. being complete, however, in most cases. On the ventral surface, all numbered rings are continuous, lateral impressions on the back, which are not numbered, alternating with complete rings.
It therefore seems better to rely on the smaller number of rings and their incompleteness on the anterior portion of the ventral surface which H. Description of type specimen.-Teeth small, unequal in eacli jatv, the mandibular larger than the maxillary, the palatines very small;. Bemarlcs.-In general coloring the present species, of which we. owns the large type specimen collected by Dr. Mot; Seychelles), agrees very closely with our specimens of II.
On the other hand, the new species shows considerable resemblance in the arrangement of the folds to Boulenger's Gryptopsophis multiplicatiiSj. The latter represents a different genus, which, however, lacks the inner row of mandibular teeth, while our living specimen has well-developed inner mandibular on each side. The position of the tentacle also varies widely, it is three times closer to the eye than the nostril.
As the arrangement of the folds somewhat resembles that of Urceotyphlus oocyurus, I was at first inclined to refer Dum6ril's two small specimens from the Seychelles, and recorded by him as belonging to the latter species (Mem. Looking at the figure (/.c .) I find, however, that the tin tentacle is placed directly under the nostril, and I am therefore compelled to believe that it still has. With regard to the generic position of the news species, I must remark that the tentacle appears to be surrounded entirely from a groove, but how.
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. 741
