HARVARD UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY
OF THE
Museum of Comparative Zoology
X, °\ss
AUG 2 5. W*
BULLETIN of
The University of Kansas
SCIENCE BULLETIN
(Continuation of Kansas University Qva rtoriy)
Vol. XXIII
LAWRENCE, KANSAS
Published Semimonthly
Vol. 36
July 15, 1935
No. 14
Entered as second-class matter December 29, 1910, at the post office at
Lawrence, Kansas, under act of July 18, 1894
16-1123
NOTICE TO EXCHANGES
The attention of learned societies and other institutions which
exchange scientific publications with the University of Kansas is
called to the list of publications of this University on the third and
fourth pages of the cover of this issue.
Those marked "Supply exhausted" cannot be furnished at all; as
far as the supply permits the remaining numbers will be furnished
to any of our exchanges who may need them to complete their files.
Back numbers of the Kansas University Quarterly, as far as pos-
sible, will be sent to those of our newer correspondents who are able
and willing to reciprocate. Separates are available to specialists.
ANNOUNCEMENT
The Kansas University Science Bulletin (continuation of the
Kansas University Quarterly) is issued in parts at irregular inter-
vals. Each volume contains from 300 to 400 pages of reading mat-
ter, with necessary illustrations. Exchanges with other institutions
and learned societies everywhere are solicited. All exchanges should
be addressed to the Library of the University of Kansas.
The Kansas University Science Bulletin,
Library of the University of Kansas,
Lawrence, Kan.
EDITORIAL BOARD
H. B. Hungerford, Chairman. C. M. Baker.
E. H. Taylor, Secretary. 0. O. Stoland.
J. D. Stranathan. R. C. Moore.
A. W. Davidson.
AUG 2 5 1936
THE
kansas university
Science Bulletin
DEVOTED TO
THE PUBLICATION OF THE RESULTS OF
RESEARCH BY MEMBERS OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS
Vol. XXIII
(Whole Series.. Vol. NXXIII)
f;^-- ' ' I 7 '
PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY
LAWRENCE, KANSAS
1935
PRINTED BY KANSAS STATE PRINTING PLANT
W. C. AUSTIN. STATE PRINTER
TOPEKA 1935
10-1123
f/#- 1-
A TAXOXOMIC STUDY
OF THE
Cosmopolitan Scincoid Lizards
OF THE
Genus EUMECES
WITH AN
ACCOUNT OF THE DISTRIBUTION AND RELATIONSHIPS
OF ITS SPECIES
BY
Edward H. Taylor
(3)
PREFACK
[n 1926, when the plan of this work was conceived, I began to
assemble at the University of Kansas a collection of Eumeces that
would serve as. a working basis for such a study. These collections
were accumulated slowly, since only certain summer months were
available to me for collecting, and since the species are, save for
one or two, extremely elusive and difficult of accession. In the
summer of 1927, collections were made in Arkansas and Tennessee;
in 1928. in Kansas; in 1929, in New Mexico, Arizona and California;
in 1930, in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada and
Utah; in 1931, in Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico and Colorado.
Thus much first-hand information on habits and habitats was ob-
tained.
In 1932, accompanied by Hobart Smith, I ventured into Mexico.
Here, it was apparent, was a fairly accessible terra incognita that
held the answer to many relationship problems and which doubtless
still had undiscovered species. It was a critical region and larger
series of known species were needed before the relationship of
Mexican and American forms could be understood. This Mexican
journey carried us into seventeen Mexican states and rewarded us
with more than a hundred specimens of these skinks, certain of
which represented species apparently new to science. However, the
very disheartening fact remained that we had failed to obtain several
rare forms long known to science, in spite of the fact that search
was made in the type localities in some cases.
The summer of 1933 was spent in Eastern museums, examining
and reexamining specimens.
In 1934 I journeyed in western Mexico in the states of Sonora,
Sinaloa and Nayarit. Here I met with most disheartening results
as regards Eumeces. In the two months collecting (although more
than 1,500 specimens were collected) only a single specimen of
Eumeces was taken. Hobart Smith, in 1934, accompanied by David
Dunkle, made a journey into northwestern Mexico in the states of
Chihuahua, Durango, Zacatecas and Nuevo Leon, and while gener-
ally successful, likewise obtained only a single specimen of Eumeces.
Aside from the material segregated at Kansas University, I have
been fortunate in having been permitted to examine preserved speci-
mens belonging to all the larger American Museums and many of the
smaller ones.
(5)
6 The University Science Bulletin
In 1928 I learned that Dr. Charles Burt had likewise in mind a
study of the genus Eumeces and we agreed to combine our efforts.
Doctor Burt, during the summers of the two succeeding years,
collected data on specimens in the American Museum of Natural
History and the Harvard Museum of Comparative Zoology. In
1931 Doctor Burt, due to press of other work and the difficulties
involved in our being in separate localities, withdrew from the under-
taking, but very generously made available to me his accumulated
data.
Owing to the necessity of having available more detailed data
than had been taken, I reexamined the specimens at Harvard and
the American Museum and in most cases checked the data taken
by Doctor Burt. In cases where this was not done acknowledgment
is made to Doctor Burt in the text where his data are used.
The work in its present form was completed November 28, 1934.
Edward Harrison Taylor.
Lawrence, Kansas.
TABLE OF COXTKXTS
TAfiE
Preface 5
Table of Contexts 7
List of Illustrations 10
Text figures 10
Plates 14
Introduction 21
Acknowledgments 22
Methods and materials 24
Illustrations 26
Type specimens 27
Classification of the Genus Eumeces 29
Genus Eumeces Wiegmann 29
Synonymy 29
History 30
Generic Relationships 34
Groups Within the Genus 35
Eumeces a Generic Entity 36
Phtlogenetic Tree 38
Generic Description 39
Description of the Skeletal Elements of Eumeces 39
General Distribution 48
Mexican and Central American forms 49
Canadian and American forms 53
Eastern Asiatic forms 55
African and western Asiatic forms 57
Habitat of Eumeces 58
Feeding Habits 61
Defense Habits 62
Breeding Habits and Life History 63
Growth 66
Speciatiox axd Mode of Evolution 67
Sexual Dimorphism 69
Consideration and Evaluation of Specific Characters Used in De-
scriptions 70
Key to the Species of Eumeces Wiegmann 81
Taxonomic Considerations 93
Schwartzei group 93
Eumeces schwartzei Fischer 94
Eumeces altamirani Duges 102
Eumeces managuae Dunn 104
Taeniolatus group 110
Eumeces taeniolatus (Blyth) Ill
Schneiderii group 119
Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin) 126
Eumeces pavimentatus (Geoff roy-St. Hillaire) 133
(7)
Contents
PAGE
Eumeces princeps (Eichwald) 138
Eumeces zarudnyi Nikolsky 142
Eumeces blythianus (Anderson) 143
Eumeces algeriensis (Peters) 146
Eumeces algeriensis algeriensis (Peters) 146
Eumeces algeriensis meridionalis Domergue 152
Longirostris group 154
Eumeces longirostris (Cope) 155
Lynxe group 162
Eumeces lynxe (Wiegmann) 163
Eumeces lynxe lynxe (Wiegmann) 163
Eumeces lynxe furcirostris (Cope) 173
Sumichrasti group 178
Eumeces sumichrasti (Cope) 178
Fasciatus group 186
American species:
Eumeces fasciatus (Linnaeus) 188
Eumeces laliceps (Schneider) 212
Eumeces inexpectatus Taylor 224
Asiatic species:
Eumeces tunganus Stejneger 234
Eumeces xanthi Giinther 239
Eumeces elegans Boulenger 245
Eumeces oshimensis Thompson 253
Eumeces stimsonii Thompson 260
Eumeces barbouri Van Denburgh 265
Eumeces marginatus (Hallowell) 267
Eumeces okadae (Stejneger) 272
Eumeces latiscutatus (Hallowell) 276
Brevilineatus group 283
Eumeces brevilineatus Cope 283
Eumeces callicephalus Bocourt 290
Eumeces letragrammus (Baird) 298
Obsoletus group 304
Eumeces obsoletus (Baird and Girarcl) 305
Eumeces chinensis (Gray) 320
Eumeces chinensis chinensis (Gray) 320
Eumeces chinensis pulcher (Dumeril and Bibron) 328
Eumeces kishinouyei Stejneger 334
Multivirgatus group 340
Eumeces multivirgatus (Hallowell) 341
Eumeces gaigei Taylor 353
Eumeces humilis Boulenger 358
Eumeces parvulus Taylor 363
Eumeces parviauricidatus Taylor 368
Anthracinus group 372
Eumeces anthracinus (Baird) 373
Eumeces copei Taylor 387
Contents 9
PAGE
Eumeces septentrionalis (Baird) 394
Eumeces septentrionalis septentrionalis (Baird) 394
Eumeces septentrionalis obtusirostris (Bocourt) 405
Skiltonianus group 410
Eumeces skiltonianus (Baird and Girard) 415
Eumeces skiltonianus skiltonianus (Baird and Girard) 415
Euvieees skilto7iianus brevipes Cope 428
Eumeces lagunensis Van Denburgh 431
Eumeces gilberti Van Denburgh 438
Eumeces gilberti gilberti Van Denburgh 438
Eumeces gilberti rubricaudatus subsp. nov 446
Quadrilineatus group 451
Eumeces quadrilineatus (Blyth) 452
Brevirostris group 457
Eumeces brevirostris (Gunther) 459
Eumeces indubitus Taylor 466
Eumeces dugesii Thominot 472
Eumeces colimensis Taylor 47^
Eumeces dicei Ruthven and Gaige 4S2
Eumeces ochoterenae Taylor 485
Egregius group 490
Eumeces egregius (Baird) 490
Eumeces egregius egregius (Baird) 490
Eumeces egregius onocrepis (Cope) 497
10 The University Science Bulletin
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
FIGURES
FlGtTtE PAGE
1 . Phylogenesis in the genus Eumeces Wiegmann 38
2. Skulls of Eumeces. (1) Eumeces chinensis (Gray) Amoy, China. Male.
E.H.T. Coll. No. 880; (2) Same, ventral view. (3) Eumeces ob-
soletus (Baird and Girard), Lawrence, Kansas. E.H.T. Coll. No.
881. (4) Same, ventral view. From Kingman (1933) 40
2a. Skulls of Eumeces. (1) Eumeces laticeps (Schneider). K.U. No. 9127,
Imboden, Ark., Byron Marshall, Coll. Adult female; dorsal view.
(2) Same specimen, ventral view. (3) Eumeces pavimentatus
(Geoffroy-St, Hillaire). E.H.T. No. 860, Haiffa, Syria. Dorsal
view. (4) Same specimen, ventral view. From Kingman (1933), 41
3. Distribution of the genus Eumeces Wiegmann 49
4. Head plates of Eumeces. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of
head; C, ventral surface of head; D, region of eye 71
5. Eumeces schwartzei Fischer. Mich. U. No. 68226, Chichen-Itza, Yu-
catan. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 17.6 mm.; width, 16 mm 96
6. Distribution of the species of the Schwartzei group 101
7. Eumeces managuae Dunn. U.S.N.M. No. 89474, Managua, Nicaragua.
A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length,
15 mm. ; width, 13 mm 106
8. Eumeces managuae Dunn. British Museum No. 53.8.17.6. A, lateral
view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length, 14.4 mm. ;
width, 14.5 mm 109
9. Eumeces taeniolatus (Blyth). E.H.T. Collection, Puli Hatun, Trans-
caspia. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 13 mm.; width, 11 mm 114
10. Distribution of Eumeces taeniolatus (Blyth), Eumeces princeps (Eich-
wald) and Eumeces zarudnyi Nikolsky 118
11. Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin). E.H.T. No. 6521, Haiffa, Syria. A,
lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length,
24 mm. ; width, 23 mm 128
12. Distribution of Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin), E. algcriensis algeriensis
(Peters), E. algeriensis mcridionalis Domergue, and Eumeces pavi-
mentatus (Geoffroy-St. Hillaire) 134
13. Eumeces parimentatus (Geoffroy-St. Hillaire). K.U. No. 11022, Haiffa,
Syria. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 19.2 mm.; width, 16 mm. (The rostral extends more
to the upper surface than is shown.) 135
14. Eumeces princeps (Eichwald). K.U. No. 11020, Transcaspia. A, lat-
eral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length,
18.2 mm. ; width, 15 mm 139
15. Eumeces algeriensis algeriensis (Peters). K.U. No. 11019, Casablanca,
Morocco. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 30 mm. ; width, 29 mm 148
16. Eumeces longirostris (Cope). K.U. No. 7280, Castle Island, Bermuda
Islands. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 14 mm. ; width, 12 mm 157
17. Distribution of Eumeces longirostris (Cope) 162
18. Distribution of members of the Lynxe group 163
19. Eumeces lynxe lynxe (Wiegmann). A.M.N.H. No. 12S35, Hidalgo,
Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 9.3 mm. ; width, 8 mm 166
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces 11
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS— Continued
Figure page
20. Eumeces lynxe furcirostris (Cope). E.H.T. & II. M.S. No. 2517, young;
Toxtlacuaya, Vera Cruz, Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal
view of head. Actual head length, 5.3 mm.; width, 4.2 mm 174
21. Eumeces sumichrasti (Cope). Type, U.S.N. M. No. 6601, ''Orizaba,"
Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 16.2mm.; width, 15mm. Drawing by Dr. Doris
Cochran. The depth of the head is slightly greater than the draw-
ing shows 181
22. Eumeces sumichrasti (Cope). Paratype, E. schmidti Dunn, F.M.N.H.
No. 13004, Tela, Honduras. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal
view of head. Actual head length, 11.5 mm.; width, 10 mm 184
23. Distribution of Eumeces sumichrasti (Cope) 186
24. Lacerta cauda caerulea. From Catesby, ''The Natural History of Car-
olina, Florida and the Bahama Islands," vol. II, pi. 67. Somewhat
reduced 192
25. Eumeces fasciatus (Linnaeus). K.U. No. 8332, Lawrence Co., Arkan-
sas. A. lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head
length, 11.5 mm.; width, 11.5 mm 200
26. Eumeces fasciatus (Linnaeus). A.M.N.H. No. 1596, "Western Mex-
ico." A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head 205
27. Distribution of Eumeces fasciatus (Linnaeus) 205
28. Eumeces laticeps (Schneider). Field Mus. No. 853, Enterprise, Florida.
A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length,
about 25 mm.; width, about 26 mm 215
29. Eumeces laticeps (Schneider). K.U. No. 7809, Imboden, Lawrence Co.,
Arkansas. Female. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of
head. Actual head length, 17 mm.; width, 18 mm 218
30. Distribution of Eumeces laticeps (Schneider) 221
31. Eumeces inexpectatus Taylor. K.U. No. 8232 (type), Citrus Co., Florida.
A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length,
13.2 mm.; width, 12 mm 226
32. Distribution of Eumeces inexpectatus Taylor 232
33. Eumeces xanthi Gunther. Field Mus. No. 7396, Hsien-Lung, Shan dis-
trict, Chihli, China. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of
head. Actual head length, 10 mm.; width, 8 mm 242
34. Eumeces elegans Boulenger. Field Mus. No. 7327, Ningkwo, Anhwei,
China. Male. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head.
Actual head length, 12.4 mm.; width, 11 mm 248
35. Distribution of the continental Asiatic species of the Fasciatus group. . . 252
36. Eumeces oshimensis Thompson. U.S.N. M. No. 64210 (C.A.S. No.
21547), Amamioshima, Loo Choo Islands, Japan. A, lateral view
of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length, 14 mm.;
width, 12 mm 256
37. Eumeces oshimensis Thompson. C.A.S. No. 21554, Amamioshima, Loo
Choo Islands, Japan. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of
head. Actual head length, about 17.5 mm.; width, about 14.2 mm., 258
38. Eumeces stimsonii Thompson. C.A.S. No. 21670, Ishigakijima. A,
lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length,
10 mm. ; width, 1 1 mm 261
39. Eumeces latiscutatus (Hallowed). Stanford U. No. 5629, Wakamura,
Japan. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head 279
40. Distribution of the island species of the Fasciatus group 282
41. Eumeces brevilineatus Cope. K.U. No. 7744, topotype, Helotes, Tex.
A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length,
9.4 mm. ; width, 8.6 mm 285
12 The University Science Bulletin
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS— Continued
Figure page
42. Eumeces brevilineatus Cope. E.H.T. & H.M.S. No. 276, near Sabinas
Hidalgo, Nuevo Leon, Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal
view of head. Actual head length, 9 mm. ; width, 8 mm 288
43. Distribution of Eumeces brevilineatus Cope 289
44. Eumeces callicephalus Bocourt. K.U. No. 6474, Ash Canon, Huachuca
Mts., Arizona. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head.
Actual head length, 10 mm. ; width, 8.5 mm 292
45. Distribution of Eumeces callicephalus Bocourt 297
46. Distribution of Eumeces tetragrammus (Baird) 303
47. Eumeces obsoletus (Baird and Girard). K.U. No. 7775, Cameron Co.,
Texas. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 16.5 mm.; width, 14 mm 309
48. Distribution of Eumeces obsoletus (Baird and Girard) 317
49. Eumeces chinensis chinensis (Gray). K.U. No. 9095, Foochow, Fukien,
China. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 21 mm. ; width, 21 mm 323
50. Distribution of the Asiatic species of the Obsoletus group 327
51. Eumeces chinensis pulcher (Dumeril and Bibron). C.A.S. No. 14662,
Shanghai. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, approximately 11 mm.; width, about 10 mm 330
52. Eumeces kishinouyei Stejneger. After Stejneger (1907, figs. 186, 187).
Sci. Coll. Mus. Tokyo, No. 22; Miyakoshima, Sakisliima group, Riu
Kiu Islands, Japan. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of
head. Actual head width, 24 mm 335
53. Eumeces kishinouyei Stejneger. C.A.S. No. 21724, Ishigakijima, Riu
Kiu Islands, Japan. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head.
Actual head length, 15 mm.; width, 12 mm 336
54. Eumeces multivirgatus (Hallowell). E.H.T. Coll.; Weld Co., Colorado,
Barry, collector. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head.
Actual head length, about 9 mm. ; width, about 8 mm 345
55. Distribution of Eumeces multivirgatus (Hallowell) and Eumeces gaigei
Taylor 350
56. Eumeces multivirgatus (Hallowell). U.S.N.M. No. 30833, Chihuahua,
Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 10.2 mm. ; width, 9.5 mm 353
57. Eumeces gaigei Taylor. Mich. U. No. 70517, Culberson Co., Texas.
A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length,
9.2 mm. ; width, 7.8 mm 354
58. Eumeces humilis Boulenger. K.U. No. 13161, Eddy Co., New Mexico.
A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head
length, 7.5 mm. ; width, 6.0 mm 359
59. Distribution of Eumeces humilis Boulenger, E. parvulus Taylor and E.
parviauriculatus Taylor 363
60. Eumeces parvulus Taylor. U.S.N.M. No. 56903, type; Tepic, Nayarit,
Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 9 mm. ; width, 7 mm 365
61. Eumeces parviauriculatus Taylor. U.S.N.M. No. 47536, type; Alamos,
Sonora. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 7 mm. ; width, 6 mm 370
62. Eumeces anthracinus (Baird). K.U. No. 8221, Imboden, Ark. A, lat-
eral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length,
10.2 mm. ; width, 9 mm 375
63. Distribution of Eumeces anthracinus (Baird) 385
64. Eumeces copei Taylor. E.H.T. & H.M.S. No. 1827, near Tres Marias,
Morelos, Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head.
Actual head length, 10.2 mm.; width, 8.3 mm 389
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 13
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS— Continued
Figure pagi
65. Distribution of Eumea s copei Taylor 393
66. Eumeces septentrionalis sept* ntrionalis (Baird). K.TT. No. 6988, 5 miles
west of Onaga, Kan. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of
head. Actual head length, 10.6 nun.; width, 10.2 nun 397
67. Distribution of Eumeces septentrionalis septentrionalis (Baird) and E. s.
obtusirostris (Bocourt) 403
68. Distribution of Eumeces skiltonianus skiltonianus (Baird and Girard),
and Eumeces s. brevipes Cope 425
69. Eumeces lagunensis Van Denburgh. U. of C. No. 13760, Comondii,
1,000 ft., Baja California. A. lateral view of head; B, dorsal view
of head. Actual head length, 7.3 mm.; width, 6.5 mm 434
70. Distribution of Eumeo s lagunensis Van Denburgh 437
71. Eumeces gilherti gilberti Van Denburgh. U. of C. No. 12611, east of
( looperstown, on county line between Stanislaus and Tuolumne Cos.
A. lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length,
about 16 mm.; width, about 15 mm 440
72. Distribution of Eumeces gilberti gilberti Van Denburgh and E. g. rubri-
caudatus subsp. nov 445
73. Eumeces gilberti rubricaud'itus subsp. nov. Cal. TJ. No. 560, Old Fort Tejon,
Kern Co. A; lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head (parietal
region drawn more elongate than actual). Actual head length, 13.2
mm. ; width, 10.8 mm 448
74. Eumeces quadrilineatus (Blyth). A.M.N.H. No. 30197, South moun-
tains. Nodoa, Hainan. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of
head. Actual head length, 14 mm.; width, 12 mm 454
75. Distribution of Eumeces quadrilineatus (Blyth) 456
7ti. Distribution of the species of the Brevirostris group 458
77. Eumeces brevirostris (Gunther). A.M.N.H. No. 19270, Oaxaca. A,
lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length,
7.6 mm. ; width, 7 mm 464
78. Eumeces indubitus Taylor. E.H.T. & H.M.S. No. 1727. (1) Lateral
view of head; (2) dorsal view of head. Actual head length, 10 mm.
(Certain differences in scalation from the type shown.) 468
79. Eumeces dugesii Thominot. Stanford U. No. 3842, Michoac&n, Mexico.
A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head
length, 6.5 mm.; width, 5.5 mm 474
80. Eumeces colimensis Taylor. F.M.N.H. No. 1649, type, Colima, Colima,
Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 10.7 mm.; width, 9.7 mm. (Courtesy, Field Museum
of Natural History) 479
81. Eumeces dicei Ruthven and Gaige. Mich. U. No. 69253, Marmolejo,
Tamaulipas, Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of
head. Actual head length, 6.5 mm.; width, 5.5 mm 483
82. Eumeces ochoterenae Taylor. E.H.T. & H.M.S. No. 1015, type. A,
lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length,
7.4 mm. ; width, 6 mm 487
83. Eumeces egregius egregius (Baird). U.S.N.M. No. 61692, Big Pine
Key, Florida. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head.
Actual head length, 7.2 mm.; width, 6 mm 492
84. Distribution of Eumeces egregius egregius (Baird) and E. e. onocrepis
< ope) 501
14 The University Science Bulletin
PLATES
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS— Continued
Plate page
1. Eumeces schwartzei Fischer. Mich. U. No. 68226, Chichen-Itza, Yuca-
tan; snout to vent, 112 mm 545
2. Eumeces altamirani Duges. Fig. 1, after Duges (1891), pi. XXII,
(p. 547). Eumeces managuae Dunn. Fig. 2, British Mus. No.
53, 8, 17, 6; snout to vent, 116 mm. (Eumeces taeniolatus Boul.) . . . 547
3. Eumeces taeniolatus (Blyth). Figs. 1 and 2, British Mus. No. 70, 11,
29, 9. Alpine Punjab on the route from Jhelum into Kashmir.
Photograph by British Museum of Natural History, (p. 549).
Eumeces princeps (Eichwald) . Fig. 3, K.U. No. 11020, Transcaspia, 549
4. Eumeces taeniolatus (Blyth). E.H.T. No. 4888, Puli Hatun, Trans-
caspia; snout to vent, 98.2 mm 551
5. Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin). Fig. 1, E.H.T. No. 6521, Haiffa, Syria;
snout to vent, 160 mm. Eumeces pavimentatus (Geoffroy-St. Hil-
laire). Fig. 2, K.U. No. 11021, Haiffa, Syria 553
6. Eumeces blythianus (Anderson). British Mus. No. 98.7.12.1, Afridi
Country, Afghan borderland. Photograph by the Brit. Mus. Nat.
Hist 555
7. Eumeces algeriensis algeriensis (Peters). After Boulenger, Trans. Zool.
Soc. London, XIII, pi. 16, Mogodor, Morocco. (Reduced.) 557
8. Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin). Fig. 1, U.S.N.M. No. 10946, Algeria;
snout to vent, 155 mm. (p. 559). Eumeces algeriensis algeriensis
(Peters). Fig. 2, K.U. No. 11019, Casablanca, Morocco; snout to
vent, 173 mm. (p. 559). Eumeces algeriensis algeriensis (Peters).
Fig. 3, U.S.N.M. No. 37290, Oran, W. Algeria; snout to vent,
180 mm 559
9. Eumeces longirostris (Cope). Fig. 1, K.U. No. 8215, Castle Island,
Bermuda Islands; snout to vent, 60 mm. Fig. 2, K.U. No. 8216,
Castle Island; snout to vent, 79 mm.; adult male. Fig. 3, K.U.
No. 7280, Castle Island, Bermuda; snout to vent, 72 mm 561
10. Eumeces sumichrasti (Cope). Figs. 1 and 2, B.M.N.H. No. 81,10,31,30;
Jalapa, Vera Cruz, Mexico; about natural size. Fig. 3, Para-
type, "Eumeces schmidti" Dunn; F.M.N.H. No. 18004, Lancetilla,
Honduras; snout to vent, 64 mm 563
11. Eumeces fasciatus (Linnaeus). Fig. 1, K. U. No. 11359; adult male;
Imboden, Arkansas; about natural size. Fig. 2, K.U. No. 11355;
Imboden, Arkansas; natural size; transitional coloration. Fig. 3,
K.U. No. 11352, Imboden, Arkansas; actual size 565
12. Eumeces laticeps (Schneider). Fig. 1, Mich. U. No. 67792, Pigeon River,
Butte Co., Alabama; adult female; snout to vent, 93 mm. Fig. 2,
Mich. U. No. 67793, Houston Co., Georgia; adult female; snout
to vent, 87 mm 567
13. Eumeces laticeps (Schneider). Fig. 1, Mich. U. No. 57717, Micanopy
Road, Florida; snout to vent, 54 mm.; seven-lined form. Fig. 2,
Mich. U. No. 56607, Alachua Co., Florida; adult female with four-
teen undeveloped eggs; snout to vent, 95 mm.; seven-lined form.
Fig. 3, Mich. U. No. 56686, Hanover, Indiana; snout to vent, 84
mm.; five-lined form. Fig. 4, Okla. U. No. 7265; Delaware Co.,
Oklahoma; adult male; snout to vent, 112 mm.; five-lined form 569
14. Eumeces inexpectatus Taylor. Fig. 1, Mich. U. No. 61629, Gulf port,
Pinelas Co., Florida; female; snout to vent, 67 mm.; actual size.
Fig. 2, same, dorsal view. Fig. 3, Mich. U. No. 61631, Hillsboro Co..
Florida; snout to vent, 50 mm.; actual size. Fig. 4, K.U. No. 8232,
Citrus Co., Florida, type; snout to vent, 66 mm. Fig. 5, K.U. No.
8233; paratype; Citrus Co., Florida; snout to vent, 62 mm 571
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 15
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS— Continued
Platb page
15. Eumeces xanthi Giinther. British Museum No. 89, 6, 25, 4. Ichang,
China. Figs. 1, 2, 3, cotypes, about natural size. Photographs by
Brit ish Museum 573
16. Eumeces elegans Boulenger. Fig. 1, C.A.S. No. 31402, snout to vent,
69 nun. Fig. 2, C.A.S. No. 31399 (the head scales of this specimen
are shown in Text, Fig. 4, A and B). Fig. 3, C.A.S. No. 26762,
snout to vent, 89 mm. All from Mo Kan Shan, China 575
17. Eumeces stimsonii Thompson. Fig. 1, C.A.S. No. 21658; snout to vent,
63mm. Fig. 2, C.A.S. No. 21659; snout to vent, 55 mm. Fig. 3,
C.A.S. No. 21670; snout to vent, 60 mm. Fig. 4, C.A.S. No. 21648;
snout to vent, 53 mm. All from Ishigakijima 577
18. Eumeces marginatus (Hallowell). Fig. 1, C.A.S. No. 24252; snout to
vent, 53 nun.; male. Fig. 2, C.A.S. No. 24254; snout to vent,
70 nun.: male. Fig. 3, C.A.S. No. 24251; snout to vent, 72 mm.;
male. All from Nago, Okinawa 579
19. Eumeces okadae (Stejneger). Fig. 1, U.S.N.M. No. 23895; snout to
vent, 79 mm.; female. Fig. 2, U.S.N.M. No. 23896; snout to vent,
41 mm.; young. Both from Niishima, Idzu Islands, Japan (p. 000).
Eumeces oshimensis Thompson. Fig. 3, C.A.S. No. 21595; Amami-
oshima, Riu Kiu Islands; 51 mm 581
20. Eumeces oshimensis Thompson. Fig. 1, C.A.S. No. 21634, Kike'ia,
Riu Kiu Islands. Snout to vent, 65.5 mm. Fig. 2, C.A.S. i
21626, Kikaiga, Riu Kiu Islands; 82.5 mm. Fig. 3, C.A.S. No.
21613, Amamioshima, Riu Kiu Islands; 66 mm. Fig. 4, C.A.S. No.
21565, Amamioshima, Riu Kiu Islands; 78 mm. Fig. 5, C.A.S. No.
•_' 1!'>33, Ivikaiga, Riu Kiu Islands; 53 mm 583
21. Eumeces latiscutatus (Hallowell). Fig. 1, C.A.S. No. 33028, Kobe,
Japan; snout to vent, 72.5 mm. Fig. 2, C.A.S. No. 33048, Miyazo,
Japan; 74.5 mm. Fig. 3, C.A.S. No. 33049, Miyazo, Japan; 72 mm., 585
22. Eumeces brevilineatus Cope. Fig. 1, K.U. No. 7769, Helotes, Bexar Co.,
Texas; snout to vent, 51 mm. Fig. 2, K.U. No. 13199, Glass Mts.,
Brewster Co., Texas; snout to vent, 49 mm. Fig. 3, K.U. No. 13200,
Chisos Mts., Brewster Co., Texas; snout to vent, 58 mm. Fig. 4,
K.U. No. 7768, Alpine, Brewster Co., Texas; snout to vent, 59 mm., 587
23. Eumeces callicephalus Bocourt. Figs. 1 and 2, Harvard No. 15928,
Chihuahua; snout to vent, 57 mm. Figs. 3 and 4, C.A.S. No.
48095, Huachuca Mts., Arizona; snout to vent, 52.2 mm 589
21. Eumeces obsoletus (Baird and Girard). Fig. 1, E.H.T. Collection,
Lawrence, Kansas; snout to vent, 94 mm. Fig. 2,*K.U. No. 7775,
Cameron Co., Texas; snout to vent, 90 mm. Fig. 3, E.H.T. Col-
lection, Lawrence, Kansas; snout to vent, 97 mm 591
25. Fig. 1, Eumeces chinettsis pulcher (Dumeril and Bibron). C.A.S. No.
1 1662, Shanghai, China, (p. 593). Fig. 2, Eumeces chinensis chinensis
(Gray). Mich. U. No. 65028, Moh Kan Shan, China; snout to vent,
92 mm. (p. 593). Fig. 3, Eumeces chinensis chinensis (Gray).
C.A.S. No. 18603, Keelung, Formosa 593
26. Eumeces kishinouyei Stejneger. Fig. 1, C.A.S. No. 21724, Ishigakijima.
Riu Kiu Islands, Japan; snout to vent, 80 mm. Fig. 2, C.A.S. No.
21722, Miyakojima, Riu Kiu Islands, Japan; snout to vent, 134 mm.
Fig. 3, C.A.S. No. 21725, Ishigakijima, Riu Kiu Islands, Japan;
snout to vent, 137.5 mm 595
27. Eumeces multivirgatus (Hallowell.. Fig. 1, Denver Mus. No. 6; snout
to vent, 60 mm. Fig. 2, D.M. No. 3; snout to vent, 57 mm. Fig. 3,
D. M. No. 8; snout to vent, 63 mm. All from Weld Co., Colorado. . 597
28. Eumeces septentrionalis obtusirostris (Bocourt). Fig. 1, K.U. No. 13158,
Waco, McLennan Co.. Texas; snout to vent. 63 mm. Fig. 2, K.U.
16 The University Science Bulletin
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS— Continued
Plate
No. 13159, same locality; snout to vent, 45 mm. (p. 599). Eumeces
multivirgatus (Hallowell) (p. 599). Fig. 3, U.S.N.M. No. 30833,
Chihuahua; snout to vent, 69 mm. Fig. 4, Collection Grand Canyon
Nat. Park, from Grand Canyon; snout to vent, 35 mm 599
29. (Not printed.)
30. Eumeces humilis Boulenger. Figs. 1 and 2, K.U. No. 13161, Carlsbad
Caverns, Eddy Co., New Mexico; snout to vent, 47 mm. Fig. 3,
Mich. U. No. 70516, Guadalupe Mts., Culberson Co., Texas; snout
to vent, 65 mm 601
31. Eumeces egregius onocrepis (Cope). Fig. 1, U.S.N.M. No. 60515, Au-
burndale, Pope Co., Florida; snout to vent, 54 mm. (p. 603). Eumeces
egregius egregius (Baird). Fig. 2, U.S.N.M. No. 61692, Big Pine
Key, Florida; snout to vent, 46 mm. (p. 603). Eumeces parvulus
Taylor. Fig. 3, U.S.N.M. No. 51395, Miniman, Nayarit; paratype;
snout to vent, 37 mm. Fig. 4, U.S.N.M. No. 56903, Tepic, Nayarit;
type; snout to vent, 51 mm. (p. 603). Eumeces parviauriculatus
Taylor. Fig. 5, U.S.N.M. No. 47536, Alamos, Sonora; type; snout
to vent, 47 mm 603
32. Eumeces anthracinus (Baird). Fig. 1, K.U. No. 11342, Cherokee Co.,
Kansas. Fig. 2, K.U. No. 8219, Lawrence Co., Arkansas. Fig. 3,
K.U. No. 8221, Lawrence Co., Arkansas. Snout to vent, all speci-
mens, 56 mm. Fig. 4, K.U. No. 11339 Galena, Kansas, x-1. Fig.
5, K.U. No. 11340, Galena, Kansas, x-1 605
33. Eumeces copei Taylor. Fig. 1, U.S.N.M. No. 32291; "Either the valley
of Mexico or the neighboring one of Toluca"; snout to vent, 70 mm.
Fig. 2, E.H.T. & H.M.S. No. 3865; 10 miles southeast of Asuncion,
western Mexico, Mexico; snout to vent, 62 mm. Fig. 3, E.H.T. &
H.M.S. No. 3859; same locality; snout to vent, 76 mm 607
34. Eumeces septeiitrionalis septentrionalis (Baird). Fig. 1, K.U. No. 6982;
snout to vent, 74 mm. Fig. 2, K.U. No. 6979; snout to vent, 65 mm.
Fig. 3, K.U. No. 6991; snout to vent, 68 mm. All specimens from
Onaga, Kan 609
35. Eumeces skiltonianus skiltonianus (Baird and Girard). Fig. 1, C.A.S.
No. 48923, Carmel, Monterey Co.; snout to vent, 40 mm. Fig. 2,
Idem. Fig. 3, C.A.S. No. 39330, Comptche, Mendocino Co.; snout
to vent, 65 mm. Fig. 4, C.A.S. No. 26986, Carmel, Monterey Co.;
snout to vent, 67 mm 611
36. Fig. 1, Eumeces lagunensis Van Denburgh. U. of C. No. 13760, Com-
ondii, 1,000 ft., Baja California, Mexico; snout to vent, 50 mm.
(p. 613). Fig. 2, Eumeces skiltonianus skiltonianus (Baird and
Girard). Cal. U. No. 10487, Todos Santos Islands; snout to vent,
65 mm.; typical specimen. Fig. 3, Eumeces skiltonianus skiltonianus
(Baird and Girard). C.A.S. No. 13736 (male), Carmel, Monterey
Co.; snout to vent, 65 mm.; specimens of this type were found with
the typical ones. Fig. 4, Eumeces skiltonianus skiltonianus (Baird
and Girard). Cal. U. No. 10950, Turner's Lyonsville, 3,500 ft.,
Tehama Co.; snout to vent, 61 mm.; a single atypical specimen ob-
tained from a large series 613
37. Eumeces gilberti gilberti Van Denburgh. Fig. 1, C.A.S. No. 65307, Pan-
amint Mts., Inyo Co.; snout to vent, 75 mm. Fig. 2, Cal. U.,
Yosemite Valley, Mariposa Co. Fig. 3, C.A.S. No. 50158, Yo-
semite Valley, Mariposa Co.; snout to vent, 96 mm 615
38. Eumeces gilberti gilberti Van Denburgh. Fig. 1, Stanford U. No. 3421,
San Joaquin Co.; approximately natural size. Fig. 2, Stanford U.
No. 3422, San Joaquin Co.; approximately natural size. Fig. 3,
Cal. U. Mus. Zool. No. 3985, Carbondale, Amador Co.; snout to
vent, 89 mm. Fig. 4, Cal. U. Mus. Zool. No. 3559, San Joaquin Co.;
snout to vent, 98 mm 617
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 17
LIST OF II. I. TITRATIONS— Concluded
Pi mi page
39. Eumeces gHherti rubricaudatus Taylor. Fig. 1, C.A.S. No. 39001, Te-
hachapi Mts., Kern Co.; snout to vent, 51 mm. Fig. 2, C.A.S.
No. 35363, Witch Creek, San Diego Co.; snout to vent, 39.5 mm.
Fig. 3, Cal. U. No. 5560, near Fort Tejon, Kern Co.; snout to vent,
s7 mm. Fig. 4, C.A.S. No. 40301 (male). Campo, San Diego Co.;
snout to vent, 101 mm 619
40. Eumeces quadrilineatus (Blyth). Fig. 1, A.M.N.H. No. 30197; male;
South Mountains, Nodoa, Hainan; snout to vent, 73 mm. (p. 621).
Emmas h/njr lynxe Wiegmann. Fig. 2, Mich. U. No. 48066; fe-
male: Guerrero, Hidalgo, Mexico; snout to vent, 67 mm. (p. 621).
Eumeces colimensis Taylor. Fig. 3, F.M.N.H. No. 1649; type, fe-
male, Colima, Mexico; snout to vent, 65 mm. (p. 621). Eumeces
lynxe lynxe Wiegmann. Fig. 4, F.S.N.M. No. 14605, female; snout
to vent, i»2 mm 621
41. Eumeces brevirostris (Giinther). Fig. 1, E.H.T. & H.M.S. No. 2587.
Fig. 2, E.H.T. & H.M.S. No. 2571. Totalco, Vera Cruz; snout to
vent, both specimens, 54 mm. Fig. 3, U.S.N. M. Xo. 46682, La
Parada, Oaxaca; 64 mm 623
42. Eumeces indubious Taylor. Fig. A, E.H.T. & H.M.S. No. 1674 para-
type; 40 miles south of Mexico City; about actual size. Fig. B,
E.H.T. & H.M.S. No. 1731; type; same locality; about actual size, 625
43. Eumeces ochoterenae Taylor. Fig. 1, E.H.T. & H.M.S. Xo. 1481. Ma-
zatlan, Guerrero, Mexico; snout to vent, 53 mm. Fig. 2, E.H.T. &
H.M.S. No. 1015, same locality; 56 mm. (p. 627). Eumeces dugesii
Thominot. Fig. 3, U.S.N.M. Xo. 26153, Guanajuato. Mexico;
snout to vent, 58.6 mm. Fig. 4, U.S.N.M. Xo. 26154, Guanajuato,
Mexico; snout to vent, 67 mm t>27
2—1123
THE UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS
SGIENGE BULLETIN
Vol. XXIII.] July 15, 1935 [No. 1.
A Taxonomic Study of the Cosmopolitan Scincoid
Lizards of the Genus Eumeces
With an Account of the Distribution and Relationship-
of Its Species
Abstract: This paper is a monographic revision of the genus Eumeces
Wiegmann, based for the most part on the collections to be found in the
United States. All species and subspecies have been redescribed and data on
variation have been recorded. The measurements of a series of specimens of
each form have been given. Practically all species have been figured either by
line drawings or photographs. A more or less complete list of localities where
specimens have been taken is given, as well as maps showing the present known
distribution.
Xumerous nomenclatorial changes have been made from those commonly
accepted.
Compared with the "Checklist of North American Amphibians and Reptiles"
Stejneger and Barbour, 3d ed., 1933, the following names are added, omitted
or changed.
Eumeces laticeps (Schneider).
Eumeces inexpectatus Taylor.
Eumeces egregius egregius (Baird).
Eumeces egregius onocrepis (Cope) .
Eumeces septentrionalis septentrionalis (Baird).
Eumeces septentrionalis obtusirostris (Bocourt) (formerly Eumeces
pachyurus Cope).
Eumeces gilberti gilberti Van Denburgh.
Eumeces gilberti rubricaudatus subsp. nov.
Eumeces skiltonianus brevipes Cope.
Eumeces gaigei Taylor.
Eumeces pluvialis Cope placed in the synonymy of Eumeces
anthracinus (Baird).
Compared with Boulenger's Catalogue of the Lizards of the British Museum,
vol. Ill, 1887, the following changes, additions or omissions occur in forms
(19)
20 The University Science Bulletin
found outside the United States. (This Catalogue, is the only complete treat-
ment of the group.)
Eumeces latiscutatus (Hallowell).
Eumeces chinensis chinensis (Gray).
Eumeces chinensis pulcher (Dumeril and Bibron).
Eumeces bellii (Gray) (placed in synonymy of Eumeces lynxe lynxe
(Wiegmann) .
Eumeces lynxe lynxe (Wiegmann).
Eumeces lynxe furcirostris (Cope).
Eumeces dugesii Thominot.
Eumeces parviauriculatus Taylor.
Eumeces parvulus Taylor.
Eumeces colimensis Taylor.
Eumeces indubitus Taylor.
Eumeces ochotercnae Taylor.
Eumeces altamirani Duges.
Eumeces managuae Dunn.
Eumeces taeniolatus Boulenger referred to the synonymy of
Eumeces managuae Dunn.
Eumeces scutatus Theobald referred to Eumeces taeniolatus (Blyth).
Eumeces pavimentatus (Geoffroy-St. Hillaire).
Eumeces princeps (Eichwald).
Eumeces zarudnyi Nikolsky.
Eumeces algeriensis algeriensis (Peters).
Eumeces algeriensis meridionalis Domergue.
Eumeces chinensis formosanus Van Denburgh referred to the synonymy
of Eumeces chinensis chinensis (Gray).
Eumeces xanlhi Giinther.
Eumeces pekinensis Stejneger referred to the synonymy of
Eumeces xanthi Giinther.
Eumeces kishinouyei Stejneger.
Eumeces okadae (Stejneger).
Eumeces oshimensis Thompson.
Eumeces stimsonii Thompson.
Eumeces barbouri Van Denburgh.
Eumeces marginatum kikaigensis Van Denburgh and Eumeces marginatum
amamiensis Van Denburgh are placed in the synonymy of Eumect s
oshimensis Thompson.
Eumeces ishigakiensis Van Denburgh is placed in the synonymy of
Eumeces stimsonii Thompson.
Taylor: The Genus Eimeces 21
INTRODUCTION
In attempting a taxonomic revision of this puzzling genus
Eumeces, I have had as a goal the proper definition of the genus
and of its known forms; the description of new and unrecognized
forms; the resurrection of species long buried in synonymies; the
disentanglement of certain taxonomic knots; and in a measure the
bringing about of more adequate facilities for the recognition or
determination of species by means of more complete description-
and use of more adequate illustration^
I have also attempted to arrive at the most probable derivation
and relationships of the genus and its species, and so far as my
data go to plot their present known distribution.
The task involving the revision of a genus places a very con-
siderable responsibility upon the reviewer. Particularly is there a
responsibility as regards his interpretation of forms with relation to
taxonomy. Shall this form be made subspecific? Shall this be
recognized as a species? Shall this variety even be recognized with
a name? Or, on the other hand, shall this form now recognized be
relegated to oblivion in the synonymy?
"Lumping" is the lazy method of treatment and probably does
more to obscure true relationships and the consequent bearing on
the evolutionary history of a group than anything else a reviewer
might do. Excessive zeal in "splitting" and thus multiplying named
forms, rather than reducing them, may likewise defeat the desired
end. The supreme difficulty is the maintenance of a consistent
attitude. A question arises concerning two forms occupying ad-
jacent territory: are they species or subspecies? "With a consider-
able number of characters which tend to but do not definitely sepa-
rate the forms, it might appear wise to regard them as subspecies.
If, on the other hand, only a single specimen or a very occasional
one shows a tendency to merge certain characters, it seems unwise to
so regard them. When two forms are able to maintain their identity
throughout a considerable area common to both, one should regard
them as species despite an occasional specimen which seems to com-
bine characters of both, for in this case it may be adaptive re-
semblance due to the same environment. An occasional cross be-
tween species does not necessarily imply close I -ubspeeific) relation-
ship. We are aware of crosses occurring between very distinct
species or even genera which might show mixed characters of the
two forms. One can conceive such crosses in which certain dif-
22 The University Science Bulletin
ferential specific characters are of such a nature as to behave as
Mendelian characters in inheritance, and in a single brood of the
second generation, one might have typical specimens of each species
from a single mother.
In this work, where there seems to be doubt due to an insufficiency
of material, I have usually retained forms under subspecific names,
especially where their ranges are contiguous and have definitive
characters of size, color or squamation which permit identification
of the adult.
In some forms, notably Eumeces obsoletus, the specimens from
north to south vary so gradually that it seems necessary to retain
the variants under a single specific name. In the case of Eumeces
brevirostris, Eumeces skiltonianus and certain others, I have placed
a number of variant forms under a single name, due to too great
an insufficiency of material to positively limit and define these
variants as either species or subspecies. Throughout the work I
have endeavored to maintain a consistent attitude, but uncon-
sciously consistency may have been violated.
In attempting to determine relationships I have found many
difficulties in the way of arriving at unassailable conclusions. No
single set of criteria will suffice, and one may claim that relation-
ships exist between certain forms because of certain scale and color
pattern similarities; in another case one will feel constrained to
postulate relationship in spite of great dissimilarity in color pat-
tern and scale formula ; or, in still another, to separate widely forms
that agree in certain scale or color characters. Here again, perhaps,
consistency has been violated.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
In the preparation of this work, numerous institutions and in-
dividuals have assisted by the loan of specimens, material, books or
information, without which the task would have been impossible.
I wish to offer grateful acknowledgment to Dr. Leonhard Stejneger,
Dr. Doris Cochran and other authorities of the United States
National Museum for the loan of their extensive collection, for
placing at my disposal their libraries and space for work while at
the museum, and for the privilege of describing new forms; to
Dr. Joseph Grinnell and Dr. Jean Linsdale, of the Museum of
Vertebrate Zoology at the University of California, for the loan of
the collections in their charge; to Dr. Albert W. Herre, of the
Stanford University Museum, for the loan of the museum collection;
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 23
to Mr. Joseph Slevin, for the loan of the collection in the California
Academy of Science-; to Mr. L. M. Klauber, of San Diego, Cal., for
the loan of his private collection and that of the Zoological Society
(if San Diego, and for numerous specimens presented to me; to Dr.
Thomas Barbour, director of the Harvard Museum of Comparative
Zoology, and Mr. Loveridge, for the loan of specimens and the
privilege of studying others in that museum; to Dr. G. K. Noble and
Mr. Clifford Pope, for the loan of specimens and the privilege of
studying material in the American Museum of Natural History; to
Dr. Karl Schmidt, of the Field Museum of Natural History, for the
loan of the collections in that institution and the privilege of describ-
ing new species; to Mrs. Helen T. Gaige, for the loan of the large
collections of the Museum of Zoology of the University of Michigan,
and for many other courtesies and much assistance; to Mr. Charles
M. B. Cadwalader and Mr. Henry W. Fowler, of the Academy of
Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, for the privilege of studying speci-
mens in the collection of that institution; to Mr. Graham Netting,
of the Carnegie Museum of Pittsburgh, for the loan of specimens;
to Mr. Charles Bunker, of the Kansas Museum, for the privilege
of studying the extensive collection in his charge and for innumer-
able courtesies in connection with my work; to Dr. I. A. Orten-
berger, for the loan of the collection in the University of Oklahoma ;
to Mr. Roger Conant, for the loan of specimens in the Toledo
Zoological Society; to Mr. Charles F. Walker, for the loan of speci-
mens in the Ohio State Museum; to Dr. S. C. Bishop, for the loan
of specimens in the University of Rochester; to Dr. Isaac Ocho-
terena, director of the Instituto de Biologia in Mexico City, Mexico,
for assistance and many courtesies while in Mexico; to Dr. Sokoloff
and Sr. Rafael Martin del Campo, of the same institution, for many
courtesies and much assistance; to my students in herpetology and
friends at Kansas University who have furnished help and assist-
ance; to Dr. Charles Burt and May Danheim Burt, for the data
taken by them on eastern specimens, for the loan of books, and for
specimens; to Dr. A. H. Wright and Dr. W. J. Hamilton for the
privilege of examining the specimens in the Cornell University
collection.
I desire also to express my heartiest thanks to the following in-
stitutions or persons who have likewise been of assistance: to
Howard K. Gloyd, of the University of Michigan, for transcribing
literature and for specimens; to H. W. Parker, Esq., of the British
Museum of Natural History, for detailed information regarding
24 The University Science Bulletin
numerous specimens, and particularly types in the British Museum
of Natural History, and for the preparation of a series of photo-
graphs of types and important specimens in that institution, and for
exchange of specimens; to Dr. Jean Roux, for data on specimens in
the Basle Museum, and for exchanges; to Dr. Robert Mertens, of
the Senckenbergian Museum, Frankfort am Main, for data and
liberal exchanges of African and Asiatic forms; to Mr. Albert Kirn,
of Somerset, Tex., for specimens; to Dr. M. F. Angel, of the Museum
National d'Histoire Naturelle de Paris, for his kindness in examining
a type specimen in that institution and comments on the same; to
Mr. Lewis T. Barry, of the Colorado Museum of Natural History,
for a series of specimens of Eumeces multivirgatus from Colorado;
to Dr. Frank N. Blanchard for data; to Mr. Lorenzo H. Cook, of
San Diego, for specimens; to John Suarez Wright, of Santa Barbara,
Cal., for specimens and assistance in collecting; to Bill Lunceford,
of Flagstaff, Ariz., for assistance in collecting; to Hobart Smith, of
Lawrence, Kan., for specimens and assistance in collecting as well
as help in typing and reading the manuscript ; to Mrs. Grace Wiley,
of the Minneapolis Public Library Museum, for loan of specimens;
to Dean Wilson, of Ottawa University, for the loan of specimens
in that institution; to Mr. A. F. Carr, of the University of Florida,
for the privilege of examining Florida specimens ; and to Dr. Walter
Williams, for the loan of the collections at Baylor University.
The drawings are of typical specimens, and are largely the work
of Mr. Melvin Douglas, of Lawrence, Kan. The photographs have
been made almost wholly from preserved specimens submerged under
water, by L. M. Peace and Oren R, Bingham, of Lawrence, Kan.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
In this study of the genus Eumeces, the general method of
treatment is that followed in numerous recent monographic works
of a similar sort, save that space has forbidden my quoting ex-
tensively from other authors.
I have endeavored to make the synonymies complete, but I am
aware that this has been done only in a measure, and that doubt-
less I have overlooked important papers. Owing to lack of ade-
quate library facilities, the literature was transcribed by typing
or photostating so that, save for certain rare works, the entire litera-
ture was immediately available. Unfortunately, in the literature
of the Fasciatus group, and again in that of the Schneiderii group,
it has not been possible to relegate, with certainty in all cases,
each species reference to the proper synonymy, owing to my in-
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 25
ability to determine, at times, what species was being treated by a
particular author. The descriptions have been drawn up from in-
dividual specimens in rather considerable detail. Many species
have not been adequately described heretofore. It appears obvious
that brevity in descriptions contributes more to taxonomic confusion
than does prolixity.
In the descriptions many character- are given just as they
appear; and under the topic "variation" the variation of only the
more salient characters is given. It must, of course, be realized that
more characters than are mentioned under this topic also vary;
for instance, lamella formulae, scales about insertion of arms. etc.
The color descriptions are taken largely from alcoholic specimens,
since it is in this condition the specimen is most frequently studied.
When the coloration is taken from living specimens, this fact is
mentioned. It must be remembered that specimens preserved in
formalin* are usually greatly darkened, and often the pattern is
almost wholly obscured. If such specimens are placed below water,
the pattern can often be more easily discerned.
Where a series is available, the measurements of several speci-
mens are given, showing a series from young to old. It will be
noted that relative body proportions change as the specimens grow
older; for instance, the length of limb in proportion to the axilla
to groin measurement, and the width of the head in proportion to
its length.
Distribution of the forms is, for the most part, based on the
locality records of specimens examined. A certain amount of
published data on localities has been discarded or retained with a
question, inasmuch as the exact identity of the specimens reported
may be open to question.
Owing to the courtesy of the authorities of the various museums
of the United States, and owners of certain private collections, it
has been possible to study most of the Eumeces material preserved
in the United States. This material has been subjected to a care-
ful scrutiny and very detailed data taken on practically every speci-
men examined. Thus, for each single specimen, locality data and
museum data have been recorded; ten measurements have been
taken; forty-seven other items of data have been recorded, together
with color data or details of markings. These aforementioned items
involve a count of scales from parietals to above anus; four counts
* One should avoid preserving Eumeces in formalin; or, if used, the specimen should be
allowed to remain in this fluid no more than twenty-four hours before the transference is
made to water (for washing) and then to alcohol.
26 The University Science Bulletin
of scales round the body at various points; and when tail is com-
plete the long series of subcaudals. This involves counting nearly
300 scales on a single specimen; and in most cases these were
counted under a binocular microscope. When one considers the very
large number of specimen examined, it becomes apparent that the
accumulation of data is so great that it is feasible to publish but a
small part of it.
Something less than one third of the species has been observed
and collected by myself. A few species collected by others have
been observed alive in the vivarium. This phase of the work has
been in a measure neglected since in the case of only a few species
has any extensive acquaintance been made with habits and life
histories in the field. Data obtained appear under the various
species discussed. Specimens of certain forms — obsoletus, fasciatus
and septentrionalis septentrionalis — brought to my laboratory have
laid eggs and the young have been hatched. Noble and Mason
(1933) report on the behavior of laticeps and fasciatus, and con-
siderable data on behavior in the field appear in the works of
many authors.
ILLUSTRATIONS
The drawings, particularly as regards the appearance of the
rostral on the dorsal side of the head, may appear to differ from
the details given in the descriptions. This is due to the fact that
the artist has attempted to draw in perspective the receding tip of
the snout. The same is true of scales in the dorsolateral region of
the head. It will be further noted that the drawings are consider-
ably enlarged, and considerable effort has been made to show more
or less accurately the smaller as well as the larger scales.
It will be noted from descriptions that certain changes and addi-
tions have been made in nomenclature of the scales. This has been
done for the purpose of permitting more careful word pictures of
the forms. The scales to which these words apply may be discerned
from the section beginning on page 70 or from the figure on page 71.
The photographic illustrations have been made by photographing
the preserved specimens under water. The specimens are placed
on pins which are fastened to a piece of glass. This is submerged
in water in a white enameled pan at some distance from the bottom,
thus allowing the shadow formed to be thrown out of focus. By
this method much of the light reflected from the scales is eliminated.
The same results can be obtained by using a glass bottomed con-
tainer for the water.
Taylor: The Genus Exjmeces 27
TYPE SPECIMENS
Perhaps nothing is more important to a reviewer of the taxonomy
of a group than a study of the type material on which the various
species have been founded, inasmuch as the written descriptions,
often brief, and the figures, if any, are often inadequate to convey
a correct picture of the species.
In this study, the following types have been examined:
cdtamirani Duges. Alfredo Duges Museum, Guanajuato, Mexico.
anthracinus Baird. United States National Museum.
bicolor Harlan. Academy of Natural Sciences. Philadelphia.
brevilineatus Cope. United States National Museum.
brevipes Cope. United States National Museum.
coUmensis Taylor. Field Museum of Natural History.
copci Taylor. E. H. Taylor-H. Smith Collection, Kansas University.
dicei Ruthven and Gaige. Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan.
egregius Baird. United States National Museum.
epipleurotus Cope. United States National Museum.
? erylhrocephalus Gilliams. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia.
? funebrosiis Cope. United States National Museum.
furcirostris Cope. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia.
gaigei Tajdor. Kansas University Museum.
guttulatus Hallowed. United States National Museum.
indubitus Taylor. E. H. Taylor-H. Smith Collection, Kansas University.
inexpectatus Ta3 lor. Kansas University Museum.
inornalus Baird. United States National Museum.
latiscutatus Baird. United States National Museum.
latiscutatus okadae Stejneger. United States National Museum.
leptogrammus Baird. United States National Museum.
longirostris Cope. United States National Museum.
managuae Dunn. United States National Museum.
marginatus Hallowed. United States National Museum and Academy
of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia (No. 9309).
multivirgatus Hallowed. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia.
obsoletus Baird. United States National Museum.
ochoterenae Taylor. E. H. Taylor-H. Smith Collection, Kansas
University.
pachyurus Cope. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia.
parviauriculatus Taylor. United States National Museum.
parvulus Taylor. United States National Museum.
pekinensis Stejneger. United States National Museum.
quadrilineatus Hallowed. United States National Museum.
rovirosae Duges. Alfredo Duges Museum, Guanajuato, Mexico.
schmidti Dunn. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia.
septentrionalis Baird. United States National Museum.
skiltonianus Baird. United States National Museum.
sumichrasti Cope. United States National Museum.
tetragrammus Baird. United States National Museum.
tunganus Stejneger. United States National Museum.
xanthi Giinther. British Museum, Natural History.
28 The University Science Bulletin
Paratypes of the following have been examined:
chinensis jormosanus Van Denburgh. California Academy of Sciences.
marginatus amamiensis Van Denburgh. California Academy of Sciences.
marginatus kikaigensis Van Denburgh. California Academy of Sciences.
oshimensis Thompson. California Academy of Sciences.
stimsonii Thompson. California Acadenw of Sciences.
Neither types nor paratypes have been seen of the following
species and subspecies:
aldrovandii Dumeril and Bibron. Probably in the Museum National
d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris.
amblygrammus Cope. Formerly in the United States National Museum.
Now apparently lost.
americanus Harlan. Originally at the Academy of Natural Sciences.
Philadelphia. Now apparently lost.
algeriensis Peters. Zoologischen Museum, Berlin.
barbouri Van Denburgh. California Academy of Sciences.
*bellii Gray. British Museum, Natural History.
blythianus Anderson. Indian Museum.
*bocourti Boulenger. British Museum, Natural History. Same type as
humilis.
*brevirostris Giinther. British Museum, Natural History.
callicephalus Bocourt. Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris.
capito Bocourt. Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris.
■fcepedii Merrem. Location of type unknown.
chinensis Gray. British Museum, Natural History.
cyprius Cuvier. Probably no existing type.
dugesii Thominot. Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris.
elegans Boulenger. British Museum, Natural History.
jfasciatus Linnaeus. Figure from Catesby's "Carolina."
halloivelli Bocourt. Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris.
*humilis Boulenger. British Museum, Natural History.
japonicus Peters. Zoologischen Museum, Berlin.
lagunensis Van Denburgh. Type formerly in the California Academy of
Sciences. Destroyed in the fire, 1906.
laticeps Schneider. Present location unknown.
lynxe Wiegmann. Zoologischen Museum, Berlin.
meridionalis Domergue. ? Museum of Oran.
obtusirostris Bocourt. Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris.
onocrepis Cope. Formerly in the Peabody Museum, Salem, Massa-
chusetts. Now apparently lost.
pavimentatus Geoffroy-St. Hillaire. Present location unknown.
pluvialis Cope. Formerly in the United States National Museum. Now
apparently lost.
polygrammus Cope. Formerly in the United States National Museum.
Now apparently lost.
princeps Eichwald. Present location unknown. Possibly Moscow.
pulcher Dumeril and Bibron. Probably Museum National d'Histoire
Naturelle, Paris.
* Photographs of the types have been examined,
t Based on figures which have been examined.
Taylor: The Genus Evmeces 29
adrilineatus Blyth. Formerly in the Indian Museum. Now apparently
lost.
quadrivirgatus Hallowell. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia.
quinqiu lineatus Linnaeus. Probably no existing type.
rufescens Shaw. Probably no existing type other than Aldrovandi's
figure. Quad. Chip., p. 660.
rujo-guttatus Cantor. British Museum. Natural History.
schneiderii Daudin. Probably Museum National d'Histoire Naturclle,
Paris.
schwartzei Fischer. Naturhistorischen Museum, Hamburg.
*scutatus Theobald. Indian Museum. Same type as taeniolatus.
syriaca Boettger. Senckenbergian Museum, Frankfort am Main.
*taeniolatus Blyth. Indian Museum.
triaspis Cope. Nomen nudum.
tatus Daudin. Probably Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle,
Paris.
vittigerum Hallowell. Formerly in the Academy of Natural Sciences,
Philadelphia. Now apparently lost.
zarudnyi Nikolski. Probably Museum of Leningrad.
CLASSIFICATION OF THE GENUS EUMECES
Class Reptilia Laurenti (1768)
^Subclass Diapsida Osborn (1903)
Order Squamata Oppel (1811)
Suborder Sauria MacCartney (1802)
Division Autarchoglossa "Wagler (1830)
Section Scincomorpha Camp (1923)
Superfamily Scineoidea Cuvier (1817)
Family Scincidae Gray (1825)
Genus Eumeces Wiegmann (1834)
GENUS EUMECES WIEGMANN
SYNONYMY
175S. Lacerta (part.) Linnaeus. Systema Naturae, 10th Ed., Vol. 1, p. 205; idem, 12th Ed.,
1766, p. 359.
1824. Scincus (part.) Harlan. Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., IV, pt. 2, 1824, p. 286;
idem, VI, pt. 1, 1829, p. 9; and Med. Phys. Res., 1829, p. 137.
1826. Mabuya (part.) Fitzinger. Neu. Class. Rept., 1826, p. 23.
1830. Euprepis (part.) Wagler. Nat. Syst. Amph.. 1S30, p. 161.
1834. Eutncces (part.) Wiegmann. Herp. Mex., 1834, p. 36 (type Scincvs pavimentatus =
Eumeces pavimentatus Geoffroy [part.]); Wiegmann, Arch, fur Natur., II. 2, 1835,
p. 288 (type Eumeces pavimentatus Geoffroy-St. Hillaire) ; idem, III, 1, 1837, pp. 131,
132: Hallowell, Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc, New Series, 1860, p. 73 (subgenus);
Peters, Mon. Ber. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, 1864, p. 48; Stoliczka, Journ. Asiatic Soc.
Bengal, XLI, 1872, p. 121; Bocourt, Miss. Soi. Mexique, Liv. VI. 1879, pp. 418-422;
Smith, Rep. Geol. Surv. Ohio, V, pt. 1. 1882, p. 650; Murray, Zool. Sind, 1884,
p. 355; Boulenger, Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887. pp. 365-366; Hoffman, in Bronn,
* Photographs of the types have been examined.
X Parapsii>a Williston; Lepidosauria Romer.
30 The University Science Bulletin
Klass. Ord. Thier-R., VI, pt. Ill, 1890, pp. 1148, 1149; Boulengpr, Trans. Zool. Soc.
London, XIII, 1895, p. 136; Cope, Amer. Nat., 1896, pp. 1003-1026; Herrick, Terry,
Herrick, Bull. Sci. Lab. Denison Univ., XI, 1899, pp. 146-147; Stejneger, Bull. U.
S. Nat. Mus., No. 58, 1906, pp. 193-195; Beddard, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1907,
p. 58: Van Denburgh, Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci., 4th Ser., Ill, 1908-1913, pp. 211-213;
Ditmars, The Reptile Book, 1919, pp. 195, 196; Schmidt, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist.,
XLIX, 1919, p. 30; Camp, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., XLVHI, 1923, p. 33:
Stejneger, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., LXVI, 1926, pp. 44, 45; Sun, Cont. Biol. Lab. Sci.
Soc. China, II, 1920, p. 2.
1839. Plestiodon Dumeril and Bibron. Erp. Gen., V, 1839, p. 697, (subgenus); Gray, Cat.
Spec. Liz. Coll. Brit. Mus., 1845, p. 90 (genus); Hallowell, Trans. Amer. Phil. Soc,
1860, XI, p. 81 (subgenus); Brown, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1857, p. 215;
Hoffman, in Bronn, Klass. Ord. Thier-R., VI, pt. Ill, 1890, p. 1148; Brown, Proc.
Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1908, pp. 118, 119; Van Denburgh, Occas. Papers Cal. Acad.
Sci., X, No. 1, 1922, p. 577; Pratt, Vert. Anim. Amer., 1923, p. 205.
1843. Pleistodon Fitzinger. Syst. Rept., 1843, p. 22 (emendation; type Pleistodon quin-
quelineatum).
1843. Pariocela Fitzinger. Syst. Rept., 1843, p. 22 (type Pleistodon laticeps).
1848. Plistodon Agassiz. Nomencl. Zool. Ind. Univ., 184S, p. 863 (emendation); Cope,
Second and Third Ann. Rep. Peabody Acad., 1871, p. 82.
1852. Lamprosaurus Hallowell. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1852, p. 206 (type Lamprosaurus
guttulatus).
1854. Eurylepis Blyth. Journ. Asiatic Soc. Bengal, XXIII, p. 739 (type Eurylepis taenio-
latus).
1864. Mabouia Gunther. Rept. Brit. India, 1864, p. 82; idem, Proc. Zool. Soc. London,
1861, p. 316.
1887. Platypholis (non Boulenger) Duges. La Naturaleza, 2d Ser., I, 1887, p. 486 (type
Eumeces altamirani Duges).
History. The generic name Eumeces (from tviArJKrjs, elongated) was
proposed by Wiegmann in his Herpetologia Mexicana (1834, p. 36).
Three species were included: Scincits pavimentatus Geoff roy; Scin-
cus rufescens Merrem ; and Scincus punctatus Schneider. He defined
the group as follows:
"Scutella verticalia tria; frontalia tria; dentes primores 7, maxillares utrinque
20/25; narcs in medio scutcllo sitae (scutellis duobus in unum coalitis);
squamae dorsi laeves."
This was divided into two groups:
"A. Palpebra superior mediocris; inferior scutellato-squamosa ; dentes pal-
atini numerosi. Scincus pavimentatus Geoff.; Scincus rufescens Merr.
"B. Palpebra superior brevis, inferior perspicttlata: Scincus punctatus
Schneid."
The following year, in an article in which he reviewed his own
work (Archiv. fur Naturg., Vol. 2, 1835, p. 288), Wiegmann desig-
nated Scincus pavimentatus as the type of the genus by a statement
in which he says that both Scincus rufescens Merrem and Scincus
punctatus Schneider had been included in the group due to error,
and that both belong to the genus Euprepes, sensu strict u, while
only Scincus pavimentatus Geoffroy belongs to Eumeces. Thus,
with a single species in the genus, this species must become the
genotype. And since Wiegmann must be considered the first re-
viewer, the genus Eumeces must stand.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 31
Dumeril and Bibron (Erpetologie Generate, 1839, V, pp. 629,
630i. after discussing at length the group Eumeces of Wiegman,
state:
"II resulte de ces diverses observations que le sous-genre Eumeces de M.
Wiegmann ne repose pas sur des bases assez fixes pour que nous puissions le
conserver; nous en prenons simplement le nora pour I'appliquer au groupe dont
les caracteres essentiels sont exprimes dans la diagnose mise en tete de cet
article, groupe auquel nous donnons toutefois pour type une des trois especes
d'Eumeces de M. Wiegmann, ou le Srincus punctatus de Schneider."
It is apparent that these reviewers were unaware of the second
contribution on the subject by Wiegmann himself, so that their
choice of a genotype cannot stand. In the above work these authors
associated under the genus (sous-genre) Eumeces, Wiegmann, the
following forms: Eumeces punctatus Wiegmann [= Riopa punc-
tata (Linne)]; Eumeces sloanii Dumeril and Bibron [= Mabuya
sloanii (Daudin)] ; Emm ces spixi Dumeril and Bibron [= Mabuya
aurata Schneider (part.)]; Eumeces mabouia Dumeril and Bibron
\= Mabuya nigropunctata (Spix)]; Eumeces freycinetii Dumeril
and Bibron [= Emoia atrocostatum (Lesson)]; Eumeces carteretii
Dumeril and Bibron [= Emoia cyanogaster (Lesson)]; Eumeces
baudinii Dumeril and Bibron [= Emoia baudinii (Dumeril and
Bibron)]: Eumeces lessonii Dumeril and Bibron [= Emoia cya-
n ura (Lesson)]; Eumeces opelii Dumeril and Bibron [= Riopa
rufescens (Shaw)]; Eumeces microlepis Dumeril and Bibron
[= Riopa microlepis (Dumeril and Bibron)].
For the species listed by Wiegmann as Scincus pavimentatus and
certain other related forms, Dumeril and Bibron erected the genus
Plestiodon and associated in the genus four presumed species, as
follows: Plestiodon aldrovandii [= Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin)
(part.) and Eumeces algeru nsis (Peters) (part.) ] ; Plestiodon sim ns<
Dumeril and Bibron [= Eumeces chinensis (Gray)]; Plestiodon
laticeps [= Eumeces laticeps (Schneider)]; Plestiodon quinquel-
ineatum [= ? Eumeces fasciatus Linne)] ; and Plestiodon pulchrum
[= Eumeces chinensis pulcher (Dumeril and Bibron)]. No geno-
type is mentioned.
The specific forms now recognized under the Schneiderii group
were placed in a single species; and another recognized form, Eu-
prepes lynxe Wiegmann, was placed in the synonymy of the species
Eumeces fasciatus.
Fitzinger (Syst. Rept., 1843, p. 22) designates the genotype as
Pleistodon quinquelineatum [= ? Eumeces fasciatus (Linne)].
32 The University Science Bulletin
Many subsequent authors followed Dumeril and Bibron in their
interpretation of the genus Eumeces. Thus we find in Giinther's
"Reptiles of British India" (1864) a list of sixteen species placed in
the genus, none of which are now recognized as belonging to
Eumeces Wiegmann. The three species of true Eumeces treated in
the work, Eumeces quadrilineatus (Blyth), Eumeces chinensis
(Gray), and Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin) are placed in the genus
Mabuya Fitzinger, as Mabouia quadrilineata, Mabouia chinensis
and Mabouia aurata, respectively. A fourth species, erroneously
placed in this group, is Mabouia maculata Blyth [= Sphenomor-
phus maculatus (Blyth)].
Boulenger (Cat. Liz., Ill, 1887) and Cope (Croc, Liz. Snakes,
1900) have both utilized the genus Eumeces for the lizards as-
sociated under the designation Plestiodon by Dumeril and Bibron.
A few other names, some emendations, have been proposed for
species now recognized in the genus Eumeces.
Pleistodon. This was an emendation of Fitzinger (Syst. Rept.,
1843, p. 22), who designated the type of Dumeril and Bibron's
genus as Pleistodon quinquelineatum (Linne).
Pariocela Fitzinger (loc. cit.) The type designated is Pleistodon
laticeps (Schneider).
Plistodon Agassiz, Nomen. Zool. Index Univers., 1848, p. 863
(Emendation).
Eurylepis Blyth, Journ. Asia. Soc. Bengal, XXIII, p. 739. This
name was proposed for a species of Indian skink named taeniolatus
and characterized by broad plates across the back.
Lamprosaurus Hallowell, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1852, p.
206. This genus was erected for a young specimen of Eumeces
obsoletus which Hallowell named Lamprosaurus guttulatus. The
adult Eumeces obsoletus he placed in the genus Plestiodon. The
character used for the separation of the two forms appears to have
been the apparent absence of pterygoid teeth in the young speci-
men— "no palatine or sphenoidal teeth."
In 1857 (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., pp. 215, 216), having
obtained other specimens of the same species, he considers them as
belonging to Plestiodon and discards his own generic name with the
following statement: "The original specimen from New Mexico
was in such a condition as to render it extremely difficult to de-
termine its true characters." He still failed to realize that he was
dealing with the young of obsoletus.
Platypholis A. Duges, La Naturaleza, Ser. 2, T. I, 1887-1890,
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 33
pp. 485, 486. This generic designation was proposed for a Mexican
species, which he describes under the name Eumeces altamirani, in
the following manner:
"iDebemos considerar este cscincoideo como una variedad nionslruosa 6
el adulto del Eum. Hallowelli? No lo creo, porque ademas de otros caracteres
menos importantes que los soparan, se observa una regularidad tal en la
coalecencia de las escamas medianas de todo el dorso, que deficilmente se
puede considerar esta disposition como un caso de anomalia. Como esta
particularidad es desconocida entre los otros escincoideos creo que si no hay
lugar de establecer un genero especial para el Eumeces Altamirani, a lo menos
se le debe conservar con justicia cl nombre especifico que le impongo; pero
si se creyese conveniente formarlo, se le puede llamar Platypholis."
The action of Dumeril and Bibron in proposing Plestiodon for
this group does not change or modify the proposal of Wiegmann
in 1835. However, it has influenced many subsequent authors.
As late as 1908 Arthur Erwin Brown (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.,
1908, p. 112), after a short review of the forms listed in the
Wiegmannian genus Eumeces, concluded that Plestiodon is the
available name for the genus, a suggestion that was followed by
many American herpetologists, the name appearing as late as
1917 in the Stejneger and Barbour checklist of North American
Amphibians and Reptiles.
However, in the edition of 1924 of this same work, Eumeces was
again restored, and one of the authors, in 1926 (Stejneger, Proc.
U. S. Nat. Mus. Vol. 66, p. 45), points out the steps by which he
has determined the type of the genus.
3 — 1123
34 The University Science Bulletin
GENERIC RELATIONSHIPS
Within the family Scincidae, Eumeces belongs to the section
characterized by conical maxillary teeth, the presence of pterygoid
teeth, and an unmodified tail — the section also occupied by the
genera Mabuya and 'Lygosoma' Boulenger, although certain mem-
bers of the genus Mabuya display a tendency toward bicuspid
teeth, and some of the lygosomoid genera likewise show a de-
parture from the typical conical teeth.
When compared with Mabuya, it is noted that Eumeces has the
palatine and pterygoid bones separated on the median line of the
palate. However, this is a variable character in Eumeces, some
fomns having these elements widely separated, others showing
a closer approach or actual contact, at least of the palatines,
anteriorly.
When compared with 'Lygosoma' we find that here, too, varia-
tion obtains in the relation of the palatines to each other (usually,
if not always, meeting on the mesial line of the palate) and the
pterygoids are in contact at least anteriorly.
In the conformity of external characters the approach in the
greater number of points appears to be closest to certain smooth
or nearly smooth-scaled forms of Mabuya.
Thus, the nostril is pierced in a nasal, and a postnasal is present.
There are two loreals and two presuboculars; the superciliary series
bears the same general characters; the series of enlarged plates on
the lower eyelid, the paired prefrontals, the paired frontoparietals,
the four supraoculars, the lobules on the edge of the auricular open-
ing, and other very numerous characters are practically the same in
the two genera. The temporals, however, are not, at least in speci-
mens of Mabuya examined, clearly differentiated, as they are in
Eumeces.
In certain lygosomoid genera (notably Dasia) , we find a close
approach to the characters of the temporal scales and the widened
subcaudals of Eumeces, but as regards many other characters, a
much greater difference obtains than in Mabuya.
At no point, however, do the genera approach so closely that there
can be any confusion in placing the known forms in their proper
genus.
Taylor: The Genus Fa mixes
35
GROUPS WITHIN THE GENUS
ii
in <
A <
B
! c I
D <
e -<
j i
1. SCHWARTZEI GROUP
2. TAENIOLATUS GROUP
3. SCHNEIDERII GROUP
4. LONGIROSTRIS GROUP
5. LYNXE GROUP
6. SUMICHRASTI GROUP
7. FASCIATUS GROUP
S. BREVILINEATUS GROUP
9. OBSOLETUS GROUP
10. MULTIVIRGATUS GROUP
11. ANTHRACINUS GROUP
12. SKILTONIANUS GROUP
13. QUADRILINEATUS GROUP
14. BREVIROSTRIS GROUP
{»
5. EGREGIUS GROUP
86 The University Science Bulletin
EUMECES A GENERIC ENTITY
In dealing with the genus Eumeces it has been convenient to
associate certain related species into groups, but with no intention
in mind of considering them of the status of genera or subgenera.
However, since certain earlier authors have proposed generic names
for species or groups of species now recognized in the genus Eumeces,
it may be wise to consider the characters on which these generic
names have been proposed.
It will be noted in the arrangement given above, that the species
fall readily into three groups. This grouping is based on the char-
acter and relationship of the preanal scales (see key). Section I
includes the Taeniolatus, Schwartzei and Schneiderii groups; Sec-
tion II, the Longirostris group; and Section III, the remaining eleven
groups. Should these groups be considered worthy of generic (or
subgeneric) distinctions, we find that the oldest generic designation
for the first is Eumeces, since E. pavimentatus of the Schneiderii
group is the type of the genus (designated by Wiegmann in 1835).
For the second, the Longirostris group, no name has been proposed.
For the third group the name Pariocela Fitzinger is the oldest
available generic name (Eumeces laticeps the type), rather than
Plestiodon, since Dumeril and Bibron apparently consider E. pavi-
mentatus (the type of Eumeces) as the type of their genus, and it
is therefore a synonym of Eumeces. Pleistodon of Fitzinger, with
Pleistodon quinquelineatus as type, is an emendation.
In the second grouping of six sections the following associations
obtain. The old section I is divided into two groups, group A con-
taining the Taeniolatus and Schwartzei groups, and for which two
names have been proposed: Eurylepis Blyth (1854) (Eumeces
taeniolatus the type) and Platypholis Duges (1887), with E. al-
tamirani as the type. The latter generic name, however, is pre-
occupied. For group B, including the Schneiderii group, the name
Eumeces would be available. Group C (identical with section II,
including loyigirostris) is without a name, as noted previously.
Group D, including the Lynxe, Sumichrasti, Fasciatus, Brevilineatus,
Obsoletus, Multivirgatus and Anthracinus groups, has available
Fitzinger's Pariocela (1843). A second name, Lamprosaurus Hallo-
well (1852) (type Eumeces obsoletus), is available if Pariocela were
untenable. For group E, including the Brevirostris, Skiltonianus
and Quadrilineatus groups, no generic name has been proposed; nor
has a generic name been suggested for group F, including the
Egregius group.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 37
The likelihood that further generic or subgeneric divisions of the
genus will ever be considered for species now known is extremely
remote.
Boulenger (1887) apparently is the first recent author to treat
the genus as a whole, and since this work was published the only
suggestion of a generic division is that of Dunn (1933), who states,
''These are the only Eumeces [viz., schwartzei, managuae, scutatus
and taeniolatus] with enlarged middorsals, and it is obvious that
they form a natural and a closely related subgroup of the genus.
Indeed, in some ways each of the American species is more like
one of the Indian species than it is like its American relative. The
distribution, the Punjab, the east coast of southern Mexico, and
the west coast of Nicaragua, is quite wierd; but the American
species have certainly no direct relationship with any other Ameri-
can Eumeces. Save for the recently described schmidti from Hon-
duras, which is close enough to fasciatus, schwartzei and managuae
are the only New World Eumeces south of the Mexican Plateau.
I am somewhat inclined to use Eurylepis Blyth (1854, Journ. Asi-
atic. Soc. Bengal 23, p. 739, type taeniolatus) as a name for these
four "Eumeces" with enlarged middorsals."
That this character is not a "fixed" character is evidenced by the
variation that obtains in the number of these dorsals that are fused
or divided in the individual species. Since only a part of the two
median dorsal rows fuse there is usually a double series of scales
following the nuchals that are not fused, and in some forms, a
double series following the fused series, anterior to the base of the
tail. Should one wish to separate these forms it seems quite likely
that other characters less obvious but certainly of more "generic"
importance should be used; but when other differential characters
are used, the association of taeniolatus appears closer to members
of the Schneiderii group, which would thus necessitate the erection
of a name for members of the Schwartzei group.
I feel quite certain that any breaking up of the present group
here treated as a generic entity is unwise, since, if begun, it would
necessitate the erection and recognition of several genera, four of
which (including quadrilineatus, egregius, taeniolatus, lynxe) would
be monotypic and would in no measure have the same generic sig-
nificance as even the genera (subgenera) formed from the genus
"Lygosoma" as used by Boulenger.
It is significant that the recent study of the skulls of Eumeces
by Kingman (1932) shows no osteological differences of sufficient
import to warrant generic separation.
38
The University Science Bulletin
The more one considers the problem of breaking up the genus
Eumeces (as currently comprehended) into genera and subgenera
of doubtful validity, the greater becomes the certitude that we are
dealing with a single generic entity, all of whose species are quite
clearly and entirely set apart from any other such generic groups
and whose relationships among themselves is such as to warrant a
single generic association.
PHYLOGENETIC TREE
The following figure expresses in general my opinion of the
relationships of the various species. I conceive of the ancestral
type as a medium-sized, five-lined skink approximating fasciatus
-parent u=ja ,intl , _ \y
..JX**0^
W 1 Jfi^^
! ^ afasalgfoa.
loagjcastas
-s.
/ /jpSprr*/lr-r,e=r->1-crt-t i g
^rtn-if/ns
. sch^
V attamir-ani
Fig. 1. Phylogenesis in the genus Eumeces Wiegmann.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 39
in size, character and habits. The relationships of gaigei and
parviuuriculatus are in doubt. It is possible that the former may
actually be a derivative of the Brevilimatits group, allied with
callia phalus; and that the latter may be a derivative of the
Brevirostris group, a relative of ochoterenae. The evidence for
these associations is equally as strong as that which has caused
me to associate them with the Multivirgatus group. The young of
these, when discovered, may offer more certain clues. Should the
other relationship be the correct one, their present resemblances
may be explained as the effect of similar environment.
GENERIC DESCRIPTION
The genus may be defined as follows: Maxillary and mandibular
teeth conical or with rounded, spheroid crowns, variable in number;
the premaxillary teeth, usually three on left side, four on right side;
pterygoid teeth present, variable in size and number; prevomerine
teeth present or absent (usually two when present) ; the palatine
bones not meeting on the median plane of the palate, but varying
in degree of proximity ; pterygoids separated on median line.
Eyelids well developed, the upper eyelid variable (better de-
veloped in African and western Asiatic forms) ; tympanum present,
deeply sunk; nostril pierced in a nasal, which may be single, partly
divided by a suture or more or less completely divided, in which
case the nostril is between the two moieties; supranasals present;
never more than four supraoculars; prefrontals, frontoparietal and
interparietal distinct. Limbs well developed, pentadactyl, all digits
clawed; digits subcylindrical or compressed, with transverse lamel-
late scales below, which may be compressed, keeled or padlike in
character. Body scales usually small, more or less cycloid, oc-
casionally fusing dorsally into larger plates.
DESCRIPTION OF THE SKELETAL ELEMENTS OF
EUMECES
I have chosen as a type for this description, a skeleton of a speci-
men of Eumeces obsoletus from Kansas. The description of the
skull is taken from Kingman (1932).
"Frontal. The frontal bones are two in number located between the orbits
of the eye and beneath the frontal and frontoparietal scales of the dorsal
surface of the head. In the median line each is flattened except for slight
depressions, while along the sides extending from the orbit to its anterior
extremity there is a beveled edge that forms the support for the supraocular
40
The University Science Bulletin
PREMAX
MAX
MAX
— PREMAX
PRVOM
SO Aw
EXO/BA° PARO
BAO' vEXO
1. Eumeceschinensis.
2. Eumeceschinensis.
S°/ DXO n, rSUPT
EXO PARO-
MAX--
— PREMAX
PRVOM
EPG—
BAO vEXO
3. Eumcccsobso'etus.
4. Eumecesobsoletus.
Fig. 2. 1, Eumeces chinensis (Gray) Amoy, China. Male. E. H. T.
Coll. No. 880; 2, Same, ventral view. 3, Eumeces obsoletus (Baird and
Girard), Lawrence, Kan. E. H. T. Coll. No. 881. 4, Same, ventral view.
From Kingman (1932).
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
41
FR-M-
-PREMAX
%\^-PI
\ SUPT
EXO BAO PARO
BAO' EXO
1. Eumeces laticeps
2. Eumeces latic:ps.
-PREMAX
^V-— MAX
SO .~y~ PAR0'
EXO BAO SUPT
3. E. schneidem pavi.nentatus
PREMAX
„— PRVOM
DAO EXO
4 E schneidern pavimentatus.
Fig. 2a. Skulls of Eumeces. 1, Eumeces laticeps (Schneider). K. U.
No. 9127, Imboden, Ark.; Byron Marshall Coll. Adult female; dorsal
view. 2. Same specimen, ventral view. 3, Eumeces ■pavimentatus (Geof-
froy-St. Hillaire). E. H. T. No. 860, Haiffa, Syria. Dorsal view. 4, Same
specimen, ventral view. From Kingman (1932).
42 The University Science Bulletin
scales above the eyes. Anteriorly it articulates with the nasal bone, to which
it unites along a crescentic suture from the median line. In the anterior
lateral portion of the orbit it is in contact with the prefrontal. A small
maxillary process is found on the anterior lateral surface where it comes in
contact with the maxillary bone lateral to the nasal suture. Posteriorly it
meets the anterior edge of the parietal bone. Laterally along the margin of
the orbit it is in contact with the postorbital.
"Parietal. The parietal is a single median bone located beneath the
parietal, interparietal and nuchal scales of the surface of the head. This is
composed of a more or less triangular body which has within it, in the median
line, a small opening, the parietal foramen for the organ of the same name.
The opening is a little anterior to the middle of the body of the bone. Ex-
tending posteriolaterally are two processes, the squamosal processes. These
are curved and slightly recurved away from the median line. In the median
line at the posterior border there is a prominent notch into which fits a
membrane and a small knob-like element that suggests the location of an
"interparietal." Lateral to this notch two posteriorly directed processes ex-
tend to meet the occipital bone. Along the median and posterior border of
the parietal there is a marked ridge which is continuous with an obliquely
directed surface for the attachment of the neck muscles of the skull.
"On the ventral surface of the body of the parietal bone and in direct line
with the parietal foramen are two sliverlike processes which extend down al-
most at right angles to the remainder of the bone. These articulate with the
epipterygoid and with the latter enforce the upper jaw and gave rigidity to
the membrane surrounding the brain.
"The parietal articulates with the following: frontal, squamosal, postfrontal,
paraoccipital, and epipterygoid bones.
"Supraoccipital. The supraoccipital is an unpaired median element fused,
in the adult, at the basal part of the skull with the exoccipitals, paroccipitals
and some of the bones of the otic capsule. The posterior and lateral limits of
this element cannot be distinguished in the adult. It probably forms a
median raised area from the foramen magnum forward to the median line of
the parietal as well as a slight flattened process on either side of raised median
portion. These flattened processes contain the median portions of the semi-
circular canals which are visible from the dorsal surface.
"Exoccipitals. The exoccipitals form the sides of the foramen magnum and
the lateral pieces of the occipital condyle. The occipital condyle is composed
of three parts; the median piece is the basioccipital while the lateral two are
exoccipital parts. The main portion of this bone is inseparably fused with
the paroccipitals. The lateral processes articulate with the quadrate, parietal,
squamosal and supratemporal bones.
"Basioccipital. The basioccipital is placed ventrad to the foramen magnum
forming about thirty degrees around that aperture. The general outline of
this bone is suggestive of the shape of a diamond with its long axis running
from left to right. Along the anterior and lateral border of this diamond-
shaped area the basioccipital articulates with the basisphenoid by an irregular
suture. In the adult a slight depressed groove remains, separating the basioc-
cipital and the exoccipital bones.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 43
"Basisphenoid. The basisphenoid is located just anterior to the basioc-
cipital, with which it articulates by an irregular suture. The body of this
bone is more or les.-; triangular with the base posterior and its apex extending
to the interorbital rostrum anteriorly ; which is in the region of the presphenoid.
Extending laterally from the body are two fan-shaped processes, the pterygoid
processes, which form broad but thin facets for the articulation with the
pterygoid as it moves with the movement of the lower jaw.
"Prootics. The prootics are two bones between the basisphenoid, basioc-
cipital, paraoccipital and supraoccipital bones. In the adult the sutures are not
clearly visible.
Tvrasphenoid (presphenoid). The parasphenoid is continuous with the
basisphenoid and extends forward to the prevomers and palatines. This bone
has been homologized with the vomers of mammals. This element in these
lizards is cartilaginous and forms the ventral support for the interorbital
septum. The space in which this is located is called the interpterygoidal space.
It is impossible to see where it unites with the ethmoid or sphenethmoid in
prepared skulls.
"Quadrates. The quadrates are two conspicuous bones at the posterior
and lateral surfaces of the skull, articulating directly with the pterygoid on
the ventroanterior surface; with the paroccipital, supratemporal and squamosal
on the dorsal and posterior border. Each quadrate is concave on its ventral
posterior surface, while it is convex anteriorly. There is a double articular
surface for the movement of the lower jaw; the tympanic membrane and the
columella are parts articulated with this bone.
"Pterygoids. The pterygoid bones are long (10 mm.) and extend about half
the length of the entire skull on the ventral surface. The anterior portion may
be considered the body, which bears teeth upon its ventral median surface.
These teeth are placed in depressions and seemingly in two rows of irregular
size and range from six to ten on each side. The teeth are rather heavy and
are blunt at their extremity. This bone connects anteriorly with the palatines,
laterally with the ectopterygoids and the jugals, while posteriorly it articulates
with the quadrate, and about its middle with the basisphenoid. (The posterior
process is a thin knifebladelike process passing from the basisphenoid to the
quadrate.) Its articulation with the ectopterygoid is by a broad, flat surface
directly under the ectopterygoid bone. The ectopterygoid, or os transversum,
with the pterj-goid process together produce the posterior bar, the limit of
the postpalatine vacuity.
"Ectopterygoids (os transversum or transpalatines) . There are two ecto-
pterygoids, and they extend from the maxillary and jugal bones to the ptery-
goid, and these are the onty bones with which they articulate.
"Epipterygoids. The epipterygoids are a pair of slivershaped bones ex-
tending from the dorsal surface of the pterygoid to the parietal bone. The
union with the pterygoid bone is made by means of a socket in which the
enlarged end of the epipterygoids fit. The other end of the epipterygoid is
attenuated and meets a sliverlike process extending down from the parietal
bone, with which it articulates.
"Palatines. The palatines are two in number and meet in their anterior
portion. There are two plates that make up this bone, one located dorsally
44 The University Science Bulletin
and one ventrally; both plates are united along the lateral margins. The
ventral plate is nearly flattened and is continuous with the broad palatine
process from the alveolar surface of the maxillary bone. Posteriorly it is
continuous with the anterior surface of the pterygoid. The dorsal plate has
a somewhat curved surface as well as a double curved margin along the
median line. At the anterior surface of this plate the left and right palatine
bones come in contact. This contact is directly posterior to the prevomer
teeth, which project back a little distance in the median line. The dorsal
plate articulates with the prevomers anteriorly while posteriorly it unites
with the pterygoids as does the other. The space between the dorsal and
ventral plates of the palatine bone produces a passage for air down the sides
of the prevomer to the nasal passage.
"Prevomer {vomers, but not homologous with the vomer of mammals).
The prevomers are represented in this form by a single inseparable piece in
the adult, which has all evidence of being composed of two distinct parts
united in a groove in the median line. At the posterior end of the plate
near the median groove is found a pair of toothlike processes that may be
considered the homologue of prevomerine teeth. Extending from these proc-
esses forward is a gentle ridge which becomes flattened near its articulation
with the premaxillary bones. At the extreme anterior end in the median
line is a tubercle with a cartilaginous tip and a slight depression on either
side. Two openings may be seen along the lateral margin next to the max-
illary bones; these seem to connect with a cavity in the prevomers and may
be the opening to Jacobson's organ. Posterior to these openings and along
the margin in the maxillary bone is a slitlike passage which is continuous
with the nasal passage above.
"Premaxillary. The premaxillary bones are two in number and are
located on the anterior surface of the upper jaw. There are two distinctly
separate bones in this form. Left and right elements are not equal in size
as the right one is slightly larger, having four teeth while on the left side
only three are present. The premaxillary bones articulate dorsally and
posteriorly with the nasal bones, laterally and posteriorly with the maxillary
bones and ventrally with the prevomers. The dorsal median processes form
a separation between the external nares.
"Maxillaries. The maxillary bones are elongated bones that constitute
the outer edge of the upper jaw and bear the majority of the teeth in this
region. They form the posterior and lateral margin of the external nares
and the lateral margin of the postpalatine vacuity and lateral margin at
anterior edge of the orbit of the eye. The maxillary articulates with the
following bones: anteriorly with the premaxillaries, prevomers, nasals and
septomaxillae ; posteriorly with the frontals, prefrontals, lachrymals, jugals,
and ectopterygoids ; and medially with the palatines. The outer edge of the
ventral surface of the maxillary bone is raised into a flange, while the inner
surface is on a lower level and is continuous with the palatine bone. The
nearly cylindrical teeth are fastened to the lower surface of this bone and also
to the raised flange, making the teeth pleurodont in attachment. Smaller
teeth are visible on the lower surface and are the replacing teeth for worn-
out older ones.
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces 45
"Jugals. The jugal bones are narrow bones forming the angle of the
upper jaw and the outer and posterior margin of the orbit. The entire shape
suggests that of a hockey stick. The straight handle-shaped portion is fastened
near its end along the edge of the orbit, making up part of the lateral border.
The ventral part is curved and meets the maxillary at its posterior end.
Here it becomes narrowed to a very thin process that is lodged between the
maxillary, ectopterygoid and lachrymal bones. On its dorsal and posterior
end it articulates with the postfrontal, postorbital, and squamosal. On the
ventral surface of the jaw a posterior lateral spine is seen as though it were a
continuation of the upper jaw.
"Squamosals (paraquadrates of Gaupp). The squamosals as here identi-
fied articulate in front with the jugal and postorbital, at about the middle of
its extent with the parietal, and posteriorly with the quadrate, supratemporal
and paroccipitals. It is a flattened curved bone forming the outer border of
the dorsal surface of the skull. This bone is undoubtedly not a quadratojugal,
as the lateral temporal vacuity is not formed because of the disappearance of
the lateral arcade.
"Supratemporal (mpramastoid, suprasquamosal, tabular of Noble, or squa-
mosal of Gaupp, epiotic, postparietal) . These bones are two small, insignificant,
sliver-shaped bones located between the squamosal and parietal bones later-
ally, while posteriorly they articulate with the quadrate and paraoccipital
processes. They are never in contact with the postorbital and postfrontal
bones in this form. In disarticulated skulls and in some prepared skulls there
is an additional element that may be an atrophied tabular or quadratojugal.
In most skulls it is represented as an aperture on the quadrate near its articu-
lation with the squamosal and supratemporal at the place of its articulation.
"Postfrontals. The postfrontal bones form the posterior border of the
orbit. A thin, narrow piece extends along the margin of the frontal bone and
the orbit; the body of this bone is a nearly leaf-shaped element in contact
with the parietal medially and with the postorbital laterally and with the
jugal on its anterolateral surface at the posterior lateral boundary of the orbit.
Its posterior extremity is variable both on left and right sides on the same skull
as well as in different skulls.
"Postorbitals (postjrontals — Gaupp). The postorbitals, two small bones
in this skull, do not form part of the orbit nor part of the edge of the skull.
They articulate with the postfrontal, squamosal, jugal and by a slight point
touch the parietal on one side in one skull studied. Each borders on the
fontanelle or vacuity on the dorsal surface of the skull. Its variation will be
brought out in the comparisons of the various species to follow. Ventrally it
presents a triangular appearance.
"Prefrontals (lachrymals of mammals — Gaupp). The prefrontal bones
are located at the median anterior end of the orbit; they are inseparably
united with the lachrymal bone, articulating with the frontal, maxillary and
lachrymals. A part of the suture remaining suggests the place of union with
the lachrymal. A marked ridge and a groove just below shows the point of
attachment of the small supraocular bone, which is found in careful prepara-
tions. It is easily removed with the skin unless extra care is used.
"Lachrymals. The lachrymal bones are at the anterior extremity of the
46 The University Science Bulletin
orbit and are, as previously stated, fused in the adult with the postfrontals.
Each is characterized in this form by having a foramen penetrating it from
the orbital side into the nasal cavity, and articulates with the maxillae, jugals,
and prefrontals.
"Nasals. The nasal bones form part of the septum between the external
nares as well as part of the posterior boundary of the same. These bones
are thin plates nearly ovoid in shape, with their anterior median extremities
covered by the dorsoposterior projections of the premaxillary bones. Posteri-
orly they articulate with the frontals and laterally with the maxillae. The
small septomaxillae probably do not come in contact with this element, but
do with the maxillary bone.
"Stapes. The stapes are thin cylindrical bones that fit into the foramen
ovale of the paroccipital process. They pass out posteriorly to the quadrate,
where they seem to be strengthened in their position by this bone and by
the tympanic membrane on the outer surface of the head."
Dentary. This element extends posteriorly almost to the middle
of the base of the coronoid on its lower surface. It bears 22
pleurodent teeth which point upward and outward, the extreme tips
being slightly recurved; the upper inner face of the bone has a
beaded rim, forming a trough at the base of the toothrow.
Splenial. This bone is elongate, extending as far back as the
dentary. Anteriorly it borders an elongate foramen and has another
small foramen near its anterior end. It does not reach the edge of
the beaded inner side of the dentary.
Coronoid. The upper free edge of the coronoid is elevated about
a millimeter above the ramus, with a forward projecting base which
meets and forms a posterior continuation of the beaded inner edge of
the dentary. The inner free edge is raised above the inner level
of the ramus. There is no posterior projection, and only a slight
projection forward on the outer face of the ramus. On the inner
face of the ramus, the lower edge of the coronoid forms a semicircle.
SuRANGULARE. This element is rather extensive on the outer
posterior face of the ramus. It is notched somewhat by the angulare
posteriorly.
Angulare. This element shows a short anterior notch in which
is inserted the posterior lower part of the dentary; a similar notch
occurs in the posterior border.
Prearticulare. This narrow element extends forward to the
anterior lower part of the coronoid and appears to be (at least
partially) free from the articulare.
Articulare. The upper surface of the articulare has several
ridges and depressions, the anterior part of the articular surface
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 47
raised, forming an elevation somewhat less in height than the coro-
noid projection; the posterior part of this element is thin and
flattened.
Sternum and Ribs. The anterior edges of the sternum form a
right angle, the edges strongly grooved longitudinally. The posterior
edges are scalloped. Two posterior foramina are present. The ribs
of the ninth, tenth, and eleventh vertebrae join the sternum. The
xiphisternum is elongate, divided throughout its length, forming two
equal moieties. Ribs from the twelfth vertebra attach near the
middle, those from the thirteenth and fourteenth attach at the
posterior end of the xiphisternum. The ribs following are free,
their terminal joint curving inwards.
Vertebral Column. There are eight vertebrae anterior to those
with ribs attaching to the sternum. The epistropheus is large, with
a large spine, which is much lengthened, having both an anterior
and a posterior projection. The other vertebrae have a rather
narrow posterior spine. The first vertebra following the epistro-
pheus apparently lacks ribs; those of the next three with short,
flattened ribs, while on the two following the ribs are elongate and
slender. There are nineteen thoraco-lumbar vertebrae, all bearing
ribs. Two fused sacral vertebrae are present, their processes some-
wrhat widened distally. Chevron bones begin on the fourth caudal
vertebra.
Pectoral Girdle and Forelimb. The interclavicle is in the form
of a maltese cross, the lateral wings narrow, not widened at their
bases; the anterior wing reaches as far forward as the anterior
edges of the clavicles on their under side. Clavicles meeting on
median line, where they are slightly widened with one or two some-
what mediad fenestrae. The bone then narrows slightly and then
widens again at the angle of the bone. It then becomes much
narrowed when it joins the suprascapula. This latter element is
narrowed at the point of contact with the scapula, but is much
widened distally. The scapula is broad at the point of contact with
the suprascapula; and then it narrow's considerably where it fuses
with the coracoid. The precoracoid and supracoracoid are fused
with the coracoid. The epicoracoid cartilage borders the medial
edge of the combined coracoid, and helps inclose two large, nearly
equal-sized, fenestrae, the outer of which may not be completely
inclosed. The forelimb is well developed. The humerus is dis-
tinctly longer than the radius or ulna. The ulnare and radiale are
48 The University Science Bulletin
large, articulating directly with the lower ends of ulna and radius
respectively. The centrale is present, but the intermedium is prob-
ably wanting or fused with another element; five carpalia are
present. The pisiforme is somewhat ventral to the end of the ulna.
The formula for the phalanges is: 2-3-4-5-3. The middle finger
is slightly the longest.
Pelvic Girdle and Hind Limb. The ilia are directed backward
in contact with two sacral vertebrae. The pubic bones are narrow,
forming a right angle at the symphysis. Near the junction of the
pubis with the ischium there is a narrow, very strongly curved
ventral process. The ischial symphysis is somewhat elongate, the
bones being wider at this point than elsewhere, forming a forward
projecting point. The foramen cordiforme is very large. Each
ischium has a small posterior projection. I cannot find an os hypo-
ischium in this species and believe that it is normally wanting.
The femur is heavy, and slightly longer than the tibia. Between
the articulation of the femur with the fibula is a small rounded
sesamoid (patella) and two small sesamoid elements about the
ventral side of the articulation of the femur and the tibia. The
astragalus and calcaneum are fused. There are only two tarsalia
present. The phalangeal formula is: 2-3-4-5-4.
The characters of the bony elements vary somewhat in the various
species. Kingman (1932) discusses variation in the cranial ele-
ments. These differences do not involve the loss of any elements,
nor the presence of added elements. He notes some differences in
relationship of the bones, and in the size of fenestrae, number of
teeth, and proportions of various skull elements. My skeletal ma-
terial other than skulls is so limited that at this time I have not
made a comparative study of the skeletons of the various species.
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION
The present distribution of the genus Eumeces is probably more
restricted than formerly, since there are four discontinuous areas
now occupied. These are: An area in the western hemisphere com-
prising the southern edge of Canada, the United States, Mexico and
part of Central America; the isolated Bermuda Islands; an area
comprising the northern edge of Africa and part of southwestern
Asia; and a fourth area including part of southeastern Asia and
the island arcs lying to the east.
It is probable that in North America, during glacial periods,
species have been forced to the south. At the present time it seems
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
49
probable that they are pushing farther north. Their absence from
Europe is probably due to glaciation; and their present restricted
distribution in Africa is due to limitation by the desert. The break
in the continuity of their distribution in Asia seems to be caused by
desert and plateau factors. I offer no explanation of the species on
the isolated Bermuda Islands.
Fig. 3 Distribution of the genus Eumeces Wiegmann.
MEXICAN AND CENTRAL AMERICAN FORMS
Mexico and Central America have no less than eight of the fifteen
groups recognized in this work, all occurring in the Mexican terri-
tory, while only two enter Central America. The Skiltonianus,
Obsoletus and Anthracinus groups are largely American in distri-
bution, although the latter extends as far south as the plateau itself,
if the species Eumeces copei is properly associated with this group,
a matter about which there may be some doubt. The territory
occupied by this species is not contiguous with that of other mem-
bers of the group.
The Schwartzei and Sumichrasti groups are south Mexican and
Central American in distribution and are confined to territory bor-
dering the southern part of the Mexican Plateau, or lying to the
south of the plateau.
The Lynxe group belongs to the high plateau region, as does
4—1123
50 The University Science Bulletin
largely the Brevirostris group. Certain species, at least, in both
of these groups have developed ovoviviparity. The Brevilineatus
group appears to occupy territory in both lowland and highland
regions, some species being adapted to both habitats.
The factors governing the distribution of certain of the various
species of the genus in Mexico are indeed obscure, the usual con-
trolling factors of elevation, temperature and barriers being in a
large measure disregarded, since at least certain of the known forms
occur in the plateau region and in the low coastal region as well.
Certain forms occupy restricted areas, and others are widespread.
Each species apparently must be regarded as a law unto itself, and
considered individually.
The most distinctive forms of this fauna are those belonging to
the Schwartzei group: schwartzei, managuae and altamirani. The
two latter species, known as yet from only one or two specimens,
offer little data save that managuae is from low elevation on the
shore of Lake Managua, while the type locality of altamirani is
"regiones calidades del Estado de Michoacan" (presumably near
Apatzingan) , which lies south of the plateau edge. The records for
schwartzei show it to be a lowland form ; the type locality, a small
island in Laguna de Terminos, Campeche, is near sea level. These
three form a compact group whose closest relatives, judging by scale
characters, may be western Asiatic forms.
The type locality of E. sumichrasti, placed in a group of the same
name, is usually accepted as Orizaba, Vera Cruz. Whether this
refers to the neighborhood of the mountain, to the town, or is an
error, cannot be stated, since the specimens collected by Ferdinand
Sumichrast did not always bear accurate labels. In his own report
of the species he mentioned finding it at an elevation of 590 meters
"en los encinales de Portrero" near Cordova. A record for Jalapa
is the only one from a high elevation. Other reports of the species,
from Vera Cruz, Mineral de Santa Fe, Chiapas (E. rovirosae Duges)
and Lancetilla and Tela, Honduras {E. schmidti Dunn), are all from
sea level or relatively low localities.
Save for the detail of the color pattern on the head, the species
resembles to a considerable degree the five-lined forms of south-
eastern United States, and in my opinion is a distant relative. This
is based on the conformation of the scales, the five-lined color
pattern, and the character of the pits on the scales, as well as body
proportions. At no point, however, are their known ranges con-
tiguous.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 51
I have recently described and named Eumeces copei, a species
long known from a brief description by Cope (1885), but associated
with another species (brevirostris) as a variety without a name.
This form occurs in the highland region, maintaining an elevation
from about 5,000 to 10,000 feet, wherever it has been found. It
exhibits certain color characters common to septentrionalis and an-
thracinus, but differs in the general character of the dorsal scales,
as well as in the details of the color pattern. The relationship, if
properly diagnosed, is more distant than obtains among the other
members of the anthracinus group.
In the central southern highland region, occupying territory in
San Luis Potosi. Guanajuato, Queretaro, Hidalgo, Vera Cruz and
Tlaxcala, is a small group consisting of two closely related forms,
lynxe and furcirostris. These small, five-lined forms, with the
median line forking on the anterior part of the frontal, seem to be
confined to the high plateau region, and their relationship with other
groups is not clear. Numerous characters lacking in lynxe seem
to suggest also a relationship not only with the five-lined forms of
the Fasciatus group, but also with the Brevilineatus group, the
members of which have lost all but the anterior part of the median
line. They agree in the character of the scale pits. However, the
members of the Lynxe group are ovoviviparous.
The species obsoletus, which is apparently closely related to
chinensis, occurs in the northern part of Mexico. Specimens have
been collected in northern Tamaulipas and northern Chihuahua.
The range in Mexico must be much greater than these two records
show. I have taken specimens in the southern part of Brewster
county, Texas, within ten miles of the borders of Coahuila, and in
the Huachuca mountains of Arizona, within two miles of the bound-
ary of Sonora. So one is safe in prophesying its discovery in these
northern Mexican states. This species occupies habitats from sea
level (at Matamoros, Tamaulipas) to elevations of 8,000 feet in
the Chisos mountains of Texas; from open hillsides in the wooded
region of eastern Kansas to the semidesert areas of Arizona and
Chihuahua. It wrould appear to be a very adaptable form.
The remaining forms known from Mexico have been placed into
four groups: the Brevirostris, Brevilineatus, Multivirgatus and Skil-
tonianus groups, the latter known from Baja California in Mexico.
The Brevilineatus. group is represented by three species (brevi-
lineatus, tetragrammus and callicephalus) , all three of which occupy
areas on either side of the boundary, only one, callicephalus (which
52 The University Science Bulletin
reaches the state of Guanajuato), extending any considerable dis-
tance to the south. In the north (and considerably modified from
the typical) callicephalus reaches the Gila river in Arizona. A
vertical range of about 6,000 feet is evidenced.
Three representatives of the Midtivirgatus group are known. In
western Mexico, in the state of Nayarit, is a small species known
from three specimens which I have recently described under the name
parvulus; from Sonora another diminutive species, parviauriculatus,
has been recently described; while a third, a variant of multi-
virgatus, is known from Sonora, New Mexico and Texas.
The Skiltonianus group extends from British Columbia through-
out Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Nevada and Utah, occupying only
the western part of Arizona, narrowing its range in the south so that
it enters Mexico only in Baja California. As yet no species of those
I have assigned to this group are known to occur in any other of
the northern tier of Mexican states.
In Baja California three species are known: S. skiltonianus,
gilberti rubricaudatus and lagunensis, the two former entering and
occupying together the proximal end of the peninsula. Lagunensis
occurs in the more distal parts. The probabilities that the ranges of
skiltonianus and lagunensis overlap are small. Despite certain
museum records skiltonianus* is not known in other parts of Mexico.
The southern part of the plateau region is inhabited by two
closely related species, indubitus and dugesii, of the Brevirostris
group, the former occupying more southeastern territory than the
latter, and differing from the latter in having four instead of three
supraoculars, a divergence parallel to that which obtains between
lynxe and furcirostris. Whether their territories actually overlap
without intergradation is not known, although typical specimens of
each apparently occur in Michoacan. The known distribution of
dugesii is Guanajuato and Michoacan; that of indubitus, Morelos,
Mexico and eastern Michoacan. Duges' record for Chiapas is not
substantiated by any known specimen in museums. Brevirostris
occupies a considerable part of the highlands of southern Mexico.
The species as here recognized is somewhat variable, and lack of
sufficient material the cause of my failure to recognize certain of
the variants subspecifically. The species is known from Vera Cruz,
* A specimen in the Harvard Museum of Eumeces skiltonianus purports to come from
Acapuleo, Guerrero, collected by a ship's captain, H. Davis. The specimen is properly
identified, but is typical of individuals from the neighborhood of San Francisco. If the
specimen was actually obtained in Acapuleo, it had doubtless been carried there from some
port in the western United States. The lower jaw has been pierced near the symphysis as if
a string had been inserted for holding the animal. I am reluctant to accept the evidence of
its presence in Guerrero on the basis of this specimen. Certain other museum records for
southern Mexico are based on specimens of brevirostris.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 53
Oaxaca, Puebla, Durango, Colima and Jalisco. With added material
certain of these forms may be profitably separated as subspecies.
Three other forms are tentatively associated with this group:
ochoterenae from Guerrero, colimensis from Colima and dicei from
Tamaulipas. The last two are known only from type specimens;
ochoterenae from a series of eleven specimens.
It is self-evident that exact limits of distribution of most species
cannot at this time be plotted, and conclusions based on present
inadequate data may have to be thrown into the discard both as
to specific limits of forms, and the interpretation of their relation-
ships, when future collections shall present a clearer picture of
variation.
The presence of the genus in Central America has only recently
been demonstrated through the discovery by Harry Malleis of E.
schwartzei at Peten, Guatamala (three specimens) ; of E. sumi-
chrasti (E. schmidti Dunn) by J. A. G. Rehn at Lancetilla and Tela,
Honduras, in 1930 (two specimens) ; and the still more recent dis-
covery of a distinctive new species, E. managuae Dunn, at the
aviation field in Managua, Nicaragua, by James H. Ivy (one speci-
men). These three species, represented by six specimens, are the
only known representatives of the genus south of the Mexican
boundary. Conjecture as to whether future collections will prove
the presence of Eumeces in South America is futile.
CANADIAN AND AMERICAN FORMS
The general distribution of the genus in this territory is from
southern Canada, south to the Mexican boundary and Gulf of
Mexico. In Canada the genus is authentically reported from
southern British Columbia, Manitoba and Ontario; and perhaps also
from Nova Scotia. It is highly probable that species occur in certain
other border provinces. Only three species are known. Eumeces
skiltonianus is the western form, septentrionalis septentrionalis, the
central form, while fasciatas is found in the east. Eumeces septen-
trionalis septentrionalis has been reported from Canada for the first
time as recently as April, 1934.
In the United States species are known from all the states except
Montana and four New England states: (Vermont, Rhode Island,
New Hampshire and Maine). The apparent absence from these
states lends doubt to Cope's (1900) record from Nova Scotia. When
more extensive herpetological collections are made in Montana, the
presence of skiltonianus will doubtless be demonstrated. However,
the likelihood of extending the range of fasciatus into northern New
54 The University Science Bulletin
England may be doubted, since here, it would appear, there has not
been the dearth of effort in collecting as obtains in Montana.
In the United States and Canada representatives of six of the
fifteen recognized groups occur, each occupying a limited region,
none covering the entire territory.
The Egregius group occupies the most restricted territory. It is
known only from peninsular Florida and the Florida Keys. A
single specimen has been taken in the southern part of Georgia.
The group shares this territory with three members of the Fasciatus
group — laticeps, inexpectatus and fasciatus. This latter group is
widespread, occupying the eastern half of the United States and the
adjoining Canadian territory, the species being restricted in the
west apparently by the reduced rainfall and consequent limitation of
forests. This north-south line approximates the 97th meridian.
The Anthracinus group, which in a considerable measure occupies
the same territory as the Fasciatus group, seems likewise to be
limited in the west by reduced rainfall. Anthracinus appears to be
rare (or absent) without reason from the central eastern states.
A north-south line following roughly the 93d meridian in Kansas
and Oklahoma, then moving somewhat farther to the west in Texas,
marks the eastern boundary of the Obsoletus group, represented in
America by a single species, obsoletus. In the northern part of
the range it does not reach the Rocky Mountains, but in the south
it extends across Texas and New Mexico to Sonora, and north to
Utah.
The Multivirgatus group extends from western Nebraska south
through Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona, in which territory it
is represented by three small species.
Approximately the western third of the United States (including
the adjacent territory in Canada and extending to the tip of Baja
California) is occupied by members of the Skiltonianus group. In
this group are five forms which, while having considerable similarity
in squamation of head and body, and in the young similar color
patterns except on the tails, are very different in size and in the
evolution of the color pattern in adults. One form of gilberti is
apparently a high mountain form, being most common in the high
Sierras in California, while the other, rubricaudatus, appears to be
in the San Joaquin Valley and the lower ridges to the south. I
would regard it as highly probable that these forms were originally
separated by a water barrier and developed through isolation, but
now that the water barrier has vanished, the differences may be
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 55
vanishing also. The variation that obtains between the northern
skiltomanus and specimens occurring in the northern part of Baja
California and southern California suggest that perhaps a similar
condition obtained; that is, a separation of the southern territory
as an island, and the consequent development of a form having the
reduced interparietal inclosed by parietals. With the union of this
territory to the mainland the intermingling of the forms has con-
tinued until the line of separation has become largely obliterated.
Lagunensis in the south may have developed due to isolation by a
desert barrier rather than by a water barrier.
The Brevilineatus group is largely Mexican in distribution, but
extends into the United States in all the border states save Cali-
fornia. These medium-sized species are apparently related to the
Fasciatus group.
EASTERN ASIATIC FORMS
The eastern Asiatic species fall readily into three groups: the
Obsoletus group containing kishinouyei, chinensis chinensis, and
chinensis pulcher; the Fasciatus group containing elegans, xanthi
and tunganus on the continent and stimsonii, barbouri, oshimensis,
marginatus, latiscutatus and okadae on the islands of the east coast;
and a third group represented by a single species, quadrilineatus.
The first two mentioned groups have representatives in North
America. The last species is confined to southeastern Asia.
The discontinuity in the distribution of the genus across Asia
seems to be actual rather than merely apparent. The area oc-
cupied by the northern desert of Gobi, the Tibetan Plateau and the
heavily forested regions of great rainfall in India and Burma, lacks
known species. It may be that in these regions where limited
herpetological exploration has been accomplished, unknown Eumeces
await discovery, which will lessen the hiatus that separates the
eastern Asiatic species from those in western Asia. The fact that
the latter area is populated by members of two groups most dis-
tantly related to the eastern groups, suggests that the barrier is real
and is not crossed by the genus.
The striking similarity between American and Asiatic species of
the Fasciatus group bespeaks a close relationship — a relationship
dependent no doubt upon a former continuity of the territory
occupied by the group.
I regard eastern North America as the most probable place of
origin of this group, and the form fasciatus as the most primitive of
its living species (most generalized type). I do not adhere to the
56 The University Science Bulletin
postulate that would place the most primitive form farthest from
point of origin in this case. It is widely distributed; occupies a
variety of habitats; endures wide ranges of temperature (not of
elevation) and competes with one or two derivative forms through-
out a good portion of its range.
I regard migration from North America to Asia as having taken
place via land bridges joining the Alaskan peninsula with Asia
either at Bering Straits or via the Aleutian Island arc to Kamchatka,
or both. One would need postulate but slight climatic changes,
since the present climate of this coastal region is probably no more
rigorous than that of southern Canada, which has three species of
the genus.
I do not hold that the land bridge so built would include the
Kuriles, the larger islands to the south, or the Riu Kius. The mode
of speciation in these islands is linear, much as would be the case
did they form a continuum with America. However, there is certain
evidence which seems to preclude the above possibility.
What does seem to be the most reasonable explanation of the
present distribution is that the island groups beginning with For-
mosa, Riu Kius, etc., were formerly a peninsula jutting from the
mainland from Fukien (rather than from Korea or Kamchatka) .
The following facts seem to support this postulate: 1. The genus
is absent from the northernmost island group (Kuriles) .
2. Two groups are present on the southern islands nearer the
mainland.
3. Species of both the Fasciatus and Obsoletus groups in For-
mosa and Pescadores islands are so little changed that subspecific
designations appear to be unwarranted.
4. There is a gradual diminution in the character of the irregular
patch of scales on the posterior side of the femur, and it becomes
lost in the northernmost forms.
5. The most northern Chinese species is xanthi, and it is more
distantly related to latiscutatus, occurring on the northern islands,
than to elegans, which is more southern in distribution.
The location of the sole member of the Quadrilineatus group
(Eumeces quadrilineatus) in the southern part of China suggests
that its relationship, if any, with the four-lined Skiltonianus group
in America is very remote. It probably represents one of the more
ancient forms of the genus, a presumption supported by the fact
that only a small number of specimens are in museums, betokening
an actual rarity of individuals, a rather limited distribution, and its
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 57
present isolation. In the case of all presumably ancient species
the number of individuals that have been taken is relatively small;
in the case of the presumed more recent species, particularly mem-
bers of the Skiltonianiis and Fasciatus groups, the numbers of
individuals taken are large. The possibility that this is due to
some other cause has not been overlooked.
AFRICAN AND WESTERN ASIATIC FORMS
A review of the localities at which species of the genus have been
taken in Africa shows that the genus follows the northern coast of
the continent from southwestern Morocco to the upper borders of
the Red Sea, at no place reaching a distance greater than about 500
miles from the coast. This is roughly the African territory assigned
to the Mediterranean Region. The limiting factor would appear
to be the Sahara desert. Elsewhere members of the genus seem to
have been able to adapt themselves to regions where semidesert
conditions prevail, quite as well as to moist wooded regions, but
none are known in true deserts.
The territory occupied seems to follow the characteristic lines
mapped by Engler for the Mediterranean (botanical) Region.
Schmidt (Herpetology of the Belgian Congo) has suggested that
plant distribution is indeed a vital factor in determining the dis-
tribution of African animals. However, that the external physical
factors limiting plant life would also directly affect animal distri-
bution is obvious.
In western Asia the genus is limited in distribution. To the east
it reaches and covers western India and approaches Tibet, but in
these regions encounters barriers of three types: to the north, the
deserts; in the central region, the high, cold plateau of Tibet; while
in the south the tropical character of the country, with heavy rain-
fall, seems to prove an impassable barrier to a further extension of
the range. To the south it doubtless reaches the coastline save in
the region of the Arabian desert.
To the north the cause of limitation is not clear. One would ex-
pect the whole of Asia Minor, and the region south of the Caucasus
Mountains to be occupied, but so far as collections go this is not
true. The northern distribution farther east includes Turkestan
and Eastern Turkestan (Yarkand), but I believe no records show
species occurring farther north than the Aral Sea.
Two groups of the genus, Schneiderii and Taeniolatus, occur in
this territory. The former is represented by several species, ex-
58 The University Science Bulletin
tending over the entire territory with the exception of the extreme
northeastern part, while the Taeniolatus group, represented by a
single species, reaches no further west than Arabia, and does not
cover the entire territory occupied by the Schneiderii group. It
does not occur on Cyprus, the eastern Mediterranean island which
is occupied by a member of the Schneiderii group; nor does it reach
Africa.
Whether the hiatus in the Asiatic distribution in the north-south
central region (including Mongolia, Tibet, peninsular and eastern
India, Burma, Siam and the Malay Peninsula) is real or only ap-
parent, due to lack of collecting, can only be known after a greater
amount of exploration has been done. I suspect that the Gobi
desert to the north of Tibet would serve as an effective barrier on
the north. I am of the opinion that the hiatus is a real one.
It appears that, despite the rather marked uniformity of the
larger head scales, the Schneiderii group consists of five or six
species rather than the three recognized by Boulenger. This is
discussed under the various forms of the group.
HABITAT OF EUMECES
The finding and collecting of the species of Eumeces is beset with
many difficulties, and for a number of reasons. For the most part
these lizards are very shy, hiding underground and under rocks a
good part of the day. Their movements are so snakelike and noise-
less that, save for a few species, the individuals are rarely observed
save by digging them out of the ground or exposing them by lifting
rocks.
In many localities the number of individuals appears to be very
limited, if one may judge by the number of specimens that have
reached museums. Whether this rarity is actual, or is only ap-
parent, due to the choice of habitat and time and place of feeding,
I cannot state. I am inclined to regard the latter alternative rather
than the former as the more probable.
The choice of habitat varies with the species, and the same species
may be able to adapt itself to a variety of habitats.
Eumeces obsoletus is usually found along rocky ledges in the
neighborhood of creeks and streams along which are to be found
some natural growth of timber. These ledges may occur back some
distance from the streams, but as long as the timber remains the
species is present. When the timber is cut away, they may persist
for some years. Where the timber alone is present E. fasciatus
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 59
may be found occasionally below fallen tree trunks and under bark
of fallen trunks, or about rotting stumps where food in the form of
insects and insect larvae is plentiful. In Arkansas, where I have
collected, this was the more typical habitat. Farther east it is often
collected in the vicinity of sawmills in and about the wood refuse.
Only rarely is this form seen in trees, at least in the western part
of its range. On one occasion, in Kansas, a specimen I observed
at the base of a rough-barked tree ascended the bole about twenty
feet. Doctor Ortenberger has written me that during March in
central Oklahoma he found an adult male in a tree, in an old bird's
nest.
On the other hand, the large species Eumeces laticeps apparently
is typically an arboreal form, being almost invariably found in trees.
I believe the absence of any considerable number of young in col-
lections is due to the fact that the small size of the young in the
trees renders them more or less inconspicuous and likewise inacces-
sible. That both young and adults may descend to earth is attested
by occasional specimens captured on the ground. The claws of
this form appear to be more curved, a modification suggestive of
climbing propensities.
In eastern Kansas one finds, besides Eumeces fasciatus, three
forms: Eumeces obsoletus, septentrionalis septentrionalis and
ant hr acinus.
The larger form, obsoletus, occurs most frequently on open hill-
sides where there are some rock exposures or scattered flat rocks.
Here the species burrows in the ground and under rocks; often
runways are observable when the rock is lifted. In the absence
of rocks the species burrows in the open. Here they are found with
greater difficulty. They are rarely seen in the open. Out of some
two hundred specimens captured possibly less than half a dozen
were observed in the open.
In Texas a few specimens have been dug from pack-rat burrows;
one was shot from a rock in the Chisos mountains at high elevation
(near extreme summit) as it issued from a rock crevice, and a
specimen of brevilineatus was obtained a few feet away burrowed
in moss.
Septentrionalis septentrionalis in eastern Kansas prefers open,
grassy hillsides where small, flat rocks offer some shelter. In
certain localities they appear to be numerous, but their distribution
is unquestionably erratic. At Onaga, Kan., where more than one
hundred specimens have been collected, they have with very few
60 The University Science Bulletin
exceptions been captured under small, flat rocks. I have observed
but two moving about in the grass.
Eumeces anthracinus, another species apparently of very erratic
distribution, has usually been found in eastern Kansas in the
neighborhood of small streams or springs. I have observed speci-
mens to take refuge in water when disturbed. They dive in, swim
to the shallow bottom and take refuge under a plant or another
object. Sometimes they swim under water to an opposite bank and
slowly emerge if weeds or other cover offer protection from ob-
servation. In southeastern Kansas, near Baxter Springs, several
specimens were observed moving about in the open, in sunlight,
feeding on insects.
Eumeces brevilineatus is likewise quite diurnal, and a large pro-
portion of the specimens I have taken were observed usually in the
neighborhood of small streams or springs moving about during the
day feeding. In the type locality (the Marnock farm near Helotes,
Tex.) numerous specimens were seen running about in brush and
leaves on the edge of a tiny rivulet. One specimen, previously
mentioned, was taken at high elevation, 8,000 feet, on the highest
peak of the Chisos mountains, and not near any surface water. It
is apparent that elevation is not a pertinent factor in its distribution.
Eumeces skiltonianus likewise appears to have a wide vertical
range. It occurs on the seacoast near sea level; and it also may
be found up to elevations of 8,000 feet in the mountains. In com-
pany with my esteemed friend, L. M. Klauber, I captured a num-
ber of specimens in small meadows near the summit of Palomar
Mountain in the northern part of San Diego county. The specimens
were surprised while running about in the grass, or were found
ensconsed underneath old posts or boards.
The large western form, gilberti gilberti, apparently is a mountain
dweller exclusively, while the related gilberti rubricaudatus may
occur in the valleys between the high Sierras and the Coast Range.
Whether either of these forms is in any measure arboreal, I have
not ascertained.
In southern Texas tetragrammus, a form closely related to
brevilineatus, is very shy. I have never seen adults of this form
moving about on the ground. All specimens I have collected were
encountered while excavating in pack-rat burrows. In northern
and central Texas septentrionalis obtusirostris was found in moist
localities about gravel pits or along pond or river banks. They
were not moving about, but were routed from under leaves or
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 61
collected refuse under trees or in decaying brush piles. Here they
were found in company with Leiolopisma unicolor (Harlan) which
was especially numerous, and with Potomophis striatulus, a small
snake which occurred in some localities in almost unbelievable
numbers, especially in the wet trash in the gravel pits near Waco,
Tex. Two obtusirostris were captured at night on a log near the
edge of a small pond. Both took to the water, but were captured
when they emerged.
The small egregius is a lowland form, hiding in the coral rock.
The Mexican copei was found in lava rock near Mexico City, and
in the pine forests of western Mexico (state) under bark and slabs
where logging operations were going on. Occasional specimens
were taken from under rocks. Indubitus seems to be likewise a
denizen of the pine forests, occupying habitats identical to those
of copei, being very common where it occurs. However, I have not
taken copei and indubitus in the same identical localities. They
attain an elevation up to 10,000 feet and probably do not occur
much below 6,000 feet.
A small form of brevirostris was of very frequent occurrence in a
barren lava field near Totalco, Vera Cruz. The specimens were
discovered under lava fragments. None were seen in the open.
North African and eastern Asiatic species are adapted to semi-
desert habitats and all are terrestrial or fossorial, and confined
largely to land having a relatively low elevation. Quadrilineatus,
managuae and schwartzei, are probably lowland forest dwellers,
but whether arboreal or terrestrial is a matter of conjecture.
Longirostris is an inhabitant of the low, coral-bordered Bermuda
Islands.
FEEDING HABITS
An examination of the stomach contents of numerous preserved
specimens and specimens observed in captivity show that the food
preferences are usually not strongly defined. The food consists of
a very extensive variety of insects and insect larvae, Arachnida
and occasionally small crustaceans. In a few specimens traces of
plant material have been observed, but I regard this as being most
probably of accidental introduction in the diet. Probably the most
surprising fact about the diet of the forms examined is that ants
are absent. I have found no specimens of this ever-present insect
among the stomach contents, nor small sand grains or pebbles, the
usual accompaniment of the myrmecophagous diet.
Some of the larger species, notably obsoletus and laticeps, are
62 The University Science Bulletin
known to capture and engulf small vertebrate forms. I removed
the remains of a Cnemidophorus sexlineatus from the stomach of an
Oklahoma specimen of obsoletus. From a captive specimen of
laticeps I have removed a young adult fasciatus which it had con-
sumed during shipment from Imboden, Ark., to Lawrence, Kan.
Obsoletus, placed in a cage with fasciatus, will often kill the latter,
but I have not observed any part devoured save a freshly severed
portion of a tail. Hartman (1906) reports a Crotaphytus killed
and eaten. Out of a large group of some eighty specimens of
obsoletus kept in captivity, a considerable number learned to eat
small fragments of ground beef placed about the floor of the cage.
Meal worms, Orthoptera, Diptera and other insects were taken
with avidity. The animal is very crafty in its movements. When
a moving worm or insect is sighted the animal crouches somewhat
and then moves forward craftily and noiselessly. When the victim
is approached closely enough there is a sudden jerk of the head, the
insect is seized and after a few chewing movements it is swallowed;
usually but little attention is paid to dead or motionless insects.
After being kept a short time in captivity they are quite undisturbed
by one's presence, and feed with equanimity.
DEFENSE HABITS
Like many other animals, members of the genus Eumeces, when
annoyed, react with a defense attitude that appears to be a generic
attribute. In wild specimens of Eumeces fasciatus, a male when
moving about may encounter another male. When this occurs,
usually both assume a defense attitude which is evidenced by arch-
ing the back, rising, and lifting the weight to the front part of the
feet as if to attain height, after a greater than normal inflation of
the lungs; this may be repeated two or more times. Occasionally
one, more aggressive than the other, approaches, and the other takes
flight.
In captive specimens, I have observed the same activity in speci-
mens of obsoletus, skiltonianus and laticeps.
Usually captive specimens become tolerant of the presence of
others of their own or other species after a time. They even lose
some of their fear of the presence of man. In tame specimens the
defense attitude may be evoked if one places a hand near them.
They rise on their feet to as great an extent as possible, arch their
backs, move their tails slowly, inflate their lungs greatly and expel
the air so forcibly that an audible hiss is evident. This latter
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 33
activity may be repeated several times while the animal remains in
the same tracks; or, moving mechanically, it may change its posi-
tion by slow steps, keeping the head directed toward the hand or
other invading object until some distance from it has been attained.
It will then run to another part of the cage. Frequently, touching
or scratching the sides of the body will cause the lizard to assume
the arched attitude without the hissing reaction. Sometimes a large
beetle placed near a tame specimen will cause it to react and assume
a ''fighting" or defense attitude, accompanied by hissing.
Two males in the same cage with a female often engage in fights.
Usually one is more aggressive than the other. One will seize the
other by the throat or neck, perchance by a limb, and will hold
tenaciously as the other tries to escape. If the one attempting to
escape is held by the tail, as is often the case, that member is
frequently severed due to the frantic efforts of the captive to escape.
When large snakes are placed in cages the skinks appear to
avoid the intruders. Occasionally a small snake, such as Carphophis
or Diadophis, is seized and held, the bite resulting in the death of
the snake.
BREEDING HABITS AND LIFE HISTORY
Obsoletus breeds quite readily in captivity. I have observed the
courtship of the form on several occasions. When my presence was
noted by the skinks the courtship usually ceased. The male maneu-
vers so as to bring his body alongside that of the female, and then
rubs his body against the sides of the quiescent female. The
latter frequently responds by a pressure of her body against that
of the male. Occasionally a male follows a female about the cage,
the female moving slowly ahead, the movements somewhat tensed
and mechanical. Several times males were observed holding onto
the tails of the females or dragging them by the tail about the
floor of the cage. If the female became impatient and escaped she
was followed and again seized by the male.
Hobart Smith {in litt.) describes the position of copulation as
follows: "The male was on the left side of the female, which was
in the normal position on the bottom of the cage. The male had
the head and forepart of the body partly across the body of the
female, holding on to a portion of loose skin on the side of the fe-
male's neck with his jaws. The male's tail was crooked about under
the tail of the female at right angles to the latter, the ventral
surface of the tail turned somewhat forward, but not turned a com-
64 The University Science Bulletin
plete revolution. One hemipenis was inserted. Vibratory move-
ments were quite noticeable in the male. They were in this position
when discovered, and were observed for three minutes and twenty
seconds after which time they separated."
Sexual activity has not been observed by me in other species
kept in captivity; however, fasciatus and septentrionalis do so breed,
since fertile eggs have been laid by captive females of these forms
in my vivarium. The time ensuing after copulation before dep-
osition of the eggs has not been recorded in the oviparous forms.
Ovoviviparity has developed only in certain Mexican forms of
the Lynxe and Brevirostris groups. It is known in Eumeces lynxe,
brevirostris and dugesii. The first record which I can find is that
of Duges,* who, writing of Eumeces dugesii Thominot, states, "Si se
puecle juzgar por una observation unica, los creo viviparos: los
chiquitos nacen con un resto de vitellus colgando de su cordon um-
bilical y el amnios arrollado a modo de cintura en la region sacra."
Hartweg (Copeia, 1931, p. 61) records ovoviviparity in Eumeces
lynxe. His material consisted of a single female, containing six
young, measuring from 44 mm. to 46 mm. in length. Hartweg
describes the position of the young in the uterus and body cavity,
not being aware that this distribution was due to the fact that in
my examination of the specimen I had removed certain of the em-
bryos for study of size and coloration, and that they had not been
returned to their original position in the uterus. It would appear
that the young were nearly ready to be born, as practically no
yolk matter remained attached to them. Originally, all were in the
uteri and none free in the body cavity.
One specimen in the United States National Museum (No. 30213,
Eumeces brevirostris) contains a series of four developing embryos.
The specimen is in a poor state of preservation, and the yolk
material has disintegrated so that none of the embryos is attached
to the yolk membranes. The embryos are about 30 mm. in length.
The uterine walls are rotted so the young appear to be loose in the
coelom. They show, as yet, no color save the eye pigment.
Still another specimen of the same species (U.S.N.M. No. 30089)
shows the presence of four embryos, but here, as in No. 30213,
the yolk material and the uterus have disintegrated and four
small embryos, about 26 mm. in length, appear to be free in the
body cavity in a semiliquid yolk.
These data seem to prove conclusively that Eumeces dugesii,
*La Naturaleza (1), VI, 1882-1884, p. 362.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 65
lyn-xe and brevirostris are normally ovoviviparous. None of the
species in the United States, Asia or Africa have as yet been found
to be ovoviviparous.
This condition in America is paralleled in the genus Sceloporus.
Few of the species occurring in the United States appear to bring
their young forth alive, while many Mexican species are known
to do so.
The condition of both oviparity and ovoviviparity is likewise
typical of certain other genera of the Scincidae, notably Mabuya
and Leiolopisma, species of which, in the same locality, may exhibit
both conditions. Leiolopisma pulchellum pulchellum is oviparous,
Leiolopisma scmperi, ovoviviparous; Mabuya multicarinata, ovip-
arous, Mabuya multifasciatus, ovoviviparous, in the Philippines.
The latter two species occur in the same localities.
The oviparous species usually deposit their eggs in moist earth
beneath logs or rocks of sufficient thickness to protect the eggs from
too great heat from the sun. The eggs are usually not completely
covered with earth. It was found in the case of eggs laid by
Eumeces septentrionalis septentrionalis in captivity that if the eggs
were completely covered by moist earth they invariably rotted. If
only partially covered, they developed quite normally.
The eggs of Eumeces fasciatus, laticeps and obsoletus are at least
in some measure incubated by the skink. The body is placed about
tne clutch and this position is maintained at least for the greater
part of the time the eggs are incubating. This characteristic has
been observed in obsoletus in the case of a female in Oklahoma
which was brooding a clutch of ten eggs. This is the only clutch of
this species I have found.
Captive specimens deposited the eggs in loose earth beneath rocks.
The eggs which were removed as soon as found to other incubating
grounds were apparently never brooded, at least not immediately
after they wTere laid.
Noble and Mason (1932) give an excellent account of the brood-
ing habits of fasciatus and laticeps.
5—1123
66 The University Science Bulletin
GROWTH
The growth pattern of the various species and subspecies of the
genus Enmeces appears, so far as investigation has gone, to be of a
very stable nature and characteristic of the species. Throughout
the range of a species the data show a variation in maximum size
of but a few millimeters and this should diminish with a larger
number of individuals available for measurement.
I am of the opinion that occasional cases of gigantism may ap-
pear, as is true of many other organisms, but I have not observed
it in this genus. The supposed great local differences in size in
fasciatus and skiltonianus of many authors is due to the failure to
discern that two or more distinct species were involved.
The taxonomist should not overlook the fact that a change in a
gene producing a form whose maximum bulk is three or four times
that of the parent stock is quite as "specific" as one that produces
a postnasal or splits a postmental. I consider maximum size and
the growth pattern a pertinent part of the definition of a species.
However, the necessary description can only be written when a very
considerable amount of material has been subjected to careful
scrutiny, and careful data recorded. Data on the snout to vent
measurement were recorded for most of the individuals of all the
species I have had available. Data so taken, when plotted, show
the individuals falling into groups which I interpret as representing
age groups. This is particularly true of those forms that live' in a
territory where a well-marked winter season occurs which produces
hibernation. The same may be true in regions where distinct wet
and dry seasons occur. The majority of specimens collected in the
United States were obtained during the months of April, May and
June. Those taken in other months were greatly in the minority,
although specimens were examined that had been collected each
month in the year.
As a check on the sum total of the data from specimens of a
species taken at various times of the year and in numerous localities,
I plotted the measurements of a series of individuals taken at the
same time of the year (May) and in the same locality. The
measurements thus taken fall into the various groups as shown in
the total data and approach the average size for the data groups.
When two or three such series check in this manner, it lends much
weight to the postulate that these groups are age groups. When
data for the two sexes are plotted, the numbers representing meas-
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 67
urements for the adult females are usually a millimeter or two larger
than those for the males.
As the total amount of such data is very great, it is not feasible to
publish it here. However, the following table shows a summary of
the growth data for live species. It is obvious that the figures may
be made more accurate with large series from single localities, but
I believe the averages are not far from the expected size for any
given year of life.
Growth table for species of En nieces
Year 1st* ?.d 3d !,th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
fasciatus 27.5 33.6 40.9 48.1 52.2 56.9 60.3 62.7 65.7
laticeps 35 44.2 53.5 60 66 76 85 90 96
incxpectatus 28 33 42.2 48.2 54 57.5 60.1 63.2 66
skiltcmianus 26 32.4 39 45.3 50 54.5 58.2 61.7 63.8
g. gilberti 32 40 46 51 60.5 68 74.6 80 85.8
Ytar 10th 11th 12th 13th l',th 15th 16th nth 18th
fasciatus 68.3 70 72.3 74.9 77 80
laticeps 100.3 105.5 110 114 117.5 124
incxpectatus 69 71.4 74.3 77 .... 83
skiltoniamus 66.4 69 70.3 72 75
g. gilberti 90 95.2 100 106 113
* In September ; other years June.
SPECIATION AND MODE OF EVOLUTION
The species which I believe represent the more ancient members
of the genus belong to the Schneiderii, Schwartzei, Taeniolatus,
Longirostris, Obsoletus, Egregius and Quadrilineatus groups. These
are so regarded largely because each is now isolated from its most
closely related group. The Taeniolatus, Longirostris and Quad-
rilineatus groups are monotypic, the last two widely separated from
their nearest living relatives. There may be some doubt whether
Taeniolatus is more closely related to the Schneiderii group or to
the Schwartzei group. I am inclined to regard the former as the
nearer relative.
The Schwartzei group has three forms, all apparently very
strongly differentiated, while the Schneiderii group has six forms,
all lacking strong differential characters. By reason of this the
latter is presumably the more recently developed stock of the above-
listed groups. I regard it quite probable that the genus originated
in Asia, later spreading to America and Africa. The stock of the
four- and five-lined groups appears to be for the most part of much
more recent development, so regarded largely because they are
contiguous at some point with a related group; they appear plastic
and as yet show less specialization from the generalized ancestral
type. I regard the modern five-lined skinks of the genus in eastern
68 The University Science Bulletin
Asia as having been derived from American forms, since the mem-
bers all belong to one group, and all are quite closely related to each
other, as well as to the American forms of their group, and all with
a minimum of specialization.
The American forms have differentiated to a much greater extent,
suggesting a longer sojourn in their present similar environment.
It is possible, but not certain, that the four-lined group originated
in southeastern Asia, and has spread to North America.
The island derivatives of Eumeces elegans show less modifications
from the parent species than one usually regards as specific. How-
ever, I prefer to use specific rather than subspecific names for forms
on isolated island groups which are definable and which cannot
intermingle with other similar populations.
Inasmuch as the criterion of what constitutes a namable form is
constantly changing, it seems probable that when the reptiles have
been studied with the same amount of material as mammals, we
will doubtless see far more named varieties than I have regarded it
wise to recognize at this time. It seems quite likely that at least
certain forms of E. skiltonianus , laticeps, brevirostris and multi-
virgatus will be separated on the basis of variants already known.
There are no strong trends in this group toward specialization of
the limbs, as is evidenced in several genera of the skinks, such as
Brachymeles and Chalcides, and which appear to be due to ortho-
genic evolution; nor trends such as one finds in Mabuya and
Tropidophorus toward modification of the scales with strong keels
and spines. Single scales may become modified along orthogenic
lines (lateral postanal), and occasionally groups of scales (fusion
of the dorsal rows) . Striation of dorsal scales has appeared in two
remote groups. Variation that obtains appears to be more sporadic;
and similar variations from the generalized type are brought about
by fusion (or dropping out) of elements or by the breaking up of
elements. There is a tendency for both dwarf and giant forms to
appear. Habitation of small islands has not had very great effect
on size, or at least no very consistent effect. Longirostris, on the
Bermuda Islands, is a relatively large form. Kishinouyei, a small-
island species, is very large and equally as large as its related
continental species. Barboari, however, likewise an island form, is
the smallest member of its group. On the other hand, egregius,
dicei, parvulus and parviauriculatus, all continental species, have be-
come dwarfed in a variety of habitats. There seems to be no en-
vironmental factor in common stimulating the development of
large size in laticeps and gilberti.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 69
The number of scale rows hears no consistent relation to size.
True, most of the smaller species have fewer rows than their
related larger species. However, the number of scales is as much
reduced in certain members of the Schwartzei and Schneiderii
groups, certain members of which attain a size greater than any
other members of the genus.
SEXUAL DIMORPHISM
No striking general sexual dimorphism is evident in squamation
in Eumeces. However, in many species the sex may be determined
on the basis of special scales and color characters. In adult males
the proximal ventral portion of the tail is somewhat fuller and
more rounded due to the presence of the hemipenes. In a number of
species, notably certain Asiatic members of the Fasciatus group, a
lateral postanal scale is strongly modified. This is true to a lesser
extent in members of the Obsoletus and Skiltonianus groups. In
these Asiatic forms of the Fasciatus group the scale bears a strong,
well-defined keel which is wanting or dimly evident in the females.
In the Obsoletus group the scale is somewhat enlarged and mound-
like, often bearing less pigment than the adjoining scales. The scale
in several other groups is more or less modified in the males, but
the difference is usually much less evident.
As a general rule, in forms in which there is color dimorphism,
the female tends to retain the juvenile coloration, or, if this is lost,
it is lost at a time later than in the male. In most, if not all, of
the members of the Sumichrasti, Fasciatus, Longirostris and certain
of the Skiltonianus and Obsoletus groups, the juvenile lined pattern
becomes dim and in older males finally lost completely, while more
or less of the lined pattern is retained by the oldest females. An
exception to the latter rule obtains in Eumeces gilberti gilberti and
gilberti rubricaudatus. In these forms the females take on quite
faithfully the same color and markings as the males (except the
reddened head) , but do so two or three years (sometimes more) later
than males of equal age.
Old males of the four groups mentioned above usually have the
temporal region more or less inflated, often quite abnormally dis-
torted, apparently reaching the greatest development in Eumeces
laticeps. .
During the breeding season males of many species display a
reddish coloration on the head and sides of the neck and chin. This
varies greatly in shade and intensity in various species, likewise in
70 The University Science Bulletin
individuals of the same species. Sometimes this red coloration is
more or less permanent on the heads of the males. I have not ob-
served it on the heads of the females.
The body length of adult females (axilla to groin) is propor-
tionally longer than in males, at least in proportion to the length
of the limbs. Thus, the adpressed limbs of females overlap less or
are separated by a greater distance than in the males.
In females distended with eggs or young, the scales, due to the
stretching of the skin, appear to be somewhat larger than in the
males.
CONSIDERATION AND EVALUATION OF SPECIFIC
CHARACTERS USED IN DESCRIPTIONS
Data listed in the descriptions may be in a measure misleading
unless the significance and variability that may be anticipated is
considered; hence the following discussion of characters.
Rostral. The rostral reaches to the top of the snout a greater
or lesser distance, and the area of the part seen from a dorsal view
is usually a constant character. In the drawings, due to fore-
shortening, the part visible may appear less than the description
states. When there appears to be a variation in the relative size of
the visible part of the rostral and the frontonasal, it is due to
variation in the size of the latter scale.
Nasal. The nasal scale is in most species of Eumeces divided by
sutural grooves which emerge from the anterior edge of the nostril
and continue to the upper edge of the scale, and from the lower
anterior edge of the nostril, continuing to the rostral or first labial.
The nasal scale may be shed singly or may break at the suture; if
together it usually may be separated by a touch. Sometimes the
scale lacks the suture, no or only a slight depression marking the
position of the suture, and the scale does not break at this point.
The latter is the expected condition in E. septentrionalis septen-
trionalis.
Normally the posterior part of the nasal carries the part of the
scale flooring the nostril; the anterior part, only the anterior turned
down rim. When a postnasal is not present, there is usually a small
area of the scale behind the nostril ; when present, the posterior part
is narrow, forming merely a rim about the posterior part of the
nostril. I presume that the normal postnasal is formed chiefly
from the nasal, although its position may occasionally suggest a
derivation from the first loreal. Occasionally the anterior loreal
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
71
preocular -
Superaliaries —
posterior loreal-. "•■
onfenor loreal
postnasals
nasal -^^
rostral^
mental
,- upper secondary
temporal
> tertiaru temporals
■f '/oiver secondary
temporal
prirnaru temporal
p post labials
upper labials
" lower~ labia's
rostra/
- supr~anasals
- -frontonasal
prefrontal
- ■frontal
y~ supraoculars
■frontoparietal
parietal
■*"-- interparietal
upper' s^c on dor-y
■temporal
- nuchal
upper palpebral series
1 Super ci liar i es /'
C- - postoculars
x' postsuboculars
,' lower palpebral series
pre sub oculars
D
Fig. 4. Head plates of Eumeces. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal
view of head; C, ventral surface of head; D, region of eye.
72 The University Science Bulletin
may be segmented transversely in forms where no postnasal occurs,
and gives the impression that a postnasal is present. That this is
not the case is evident by noting that in such cases the upper part
of the loreal is separated from the labials — a condition that does
not normally occur in any species, but does occur frequently in
E. latisciitatus.
Postnasal. This scale is relatively constant when present, and in
species where it is normally absent, rarely appears. However, in
multivirgatus, a species in which the scale may be regarded as
normally present, it is absent on one or both sides in about 10 per-
cent of the specimens. One may, however, expect occasional excep-
tions to the general rule in practically all species. The variation
is likewise great in E. obsoletus, being absent in the south, but
present in numerous northern specimens.
Stjpranasals. Constancy of size and relation to adjoining scales
is the normal expectation as regards the supranasals. They are
usually in contact, separating the rostral from the frontonasal ; how-
ever, the supranasals may separate, and in the case of E. septen-
trionalis septentrionalis this condition occurs in more than 20 per-
cent of the material examined. In forms having a variable fronto-
nasal the size of the prefrontals rather than the supranasals is
usually affected. This separation of the supranasals occurs only
rarely in other species and normally occurs in none.
Prefrontals. These scales, differing in size and shape in various
species, are likewise quite variable within most species, and in some
species it is difficult to say whether the normal condition is to have
the scales forming a median suture (separating frontal and fronto-
nasal) or to have them separated, leaving the frontal and fronto-
nasal in contact. In Eumeces laticeps, one may definitely say that
the prefrontals are normally in contact, being separate in less than
one percent of the specimens. E. jasciatus, on the other hand, has
these scales extremely variable, reaching 78 percent separate in
certain localities, and as low as 5 percent in other localities. When
in contact the scales are usually distinctly larger than when sepa-
rated, and the shape of the posterior part of the frontonasal and of
the anterior angle of the frontal is likewise modified.
Frontal. The general shape and the relative width and length
of the frontal are only moderately constant, since the separation of
the prefrontals usually causes a greater length. A rare anomaly is
the transverse segmentation of the scale. This I have found occur-
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 73
ring in at least ten species. The type of E. lynxe lurcirostris shows
this division, hut it is douhtlcss merely an anomalous condition.
Many species may occasionally show small portions segmented from
the posterior part of the scale. Anomalies have been observed in
several species which permit the frontal to touch the interparietal;
in E. tat niolatus this is presumably the normal condition.
Interparietal. In very young specimens this scale is almost
invariably proportionally larger and more prominent than in the
adults. Apparently the actual shape of the scale may change as
the specimen grows older. In most species the scale is separated
from the frontal (see above paragraph) and is in contact posteriorly
with the nuchals. In a few species the normal condition is for the
interparietal to be separated from the nuchals by a union of the
parietals. This is true of several Mexican species, and the transi-
tional condition is evident in E. skiltonianus in the extreme southern
part of California, where a considerable precentage of the specimens
shows this condition, which apparently becomes the normal relation-
ship in Baja California.
Supraoculars. The number of supraoculars is uniformly four
throughout the greater part of the genus and anomalies producing
more or less are rare. In E. dugesii, E. lynxe furcirostris and E.
egregius, however, three is the normal number. In most descriptions
of E. taeniolatus, algeriensis and schneiderii, the number is usually
given as five; this is due to the fact that the small vertical scale
terminating the superciliary series has become greatly enlarged
and has been rated as a supraocular, while the same scale, invariably
present in other known species, is considered the terminal super-
ciliary. To be consistent the scale must be interpreted the same
throughout the genus — all having five (four in egregius, etc.) or
none having five. I choose the latter interpretation.
Superciliaries. The number of superciliaries is quite variable,
but in general character they are constant for a given species. The
posterior ones of the series tend to segment or fuse (as the case may
be). The expectation is for the anterior one to be in contact with
the prefrontal and only rarely does it fail to be so. Normally, too,
it is separated from contact with the frontal, but occasionally they
may touch. The last two of the series are normally in contact, but
occasionally the last (vertical) one may be separated from the
preceding one by the fourth supraocular; or a small postocular
may intervene. This latter condition is typical in E. egregius.
74 The University Science Bulletin
The median superciliaries are in contact in most species with
the upper palpebral scales bordering the edge of the eyelid, while
the anterior and posterior ones are separated from the palpebrals
by small granules. In some forms, however, practically all the
palpebrals are in contact with the superciliaries (E. schwartzei) ,
while in the Schneiderii group all are separated by one or more
rows of granules, thus permitting greater movement of and giving
greater area to the upper eyelid.
Prestjboculars. This term is applied to the small scales lying
between the anterior corner of the eye, the labials and the posterior
loreal. Two is the usual number (rarely, anomalously, one or
three). In E. schwartzei, altamirani and managuae, however, the
normal number appears to be three.
Postsuboculars. A series of small scales bordering the lower
posterior edge of the orbit separating the temporals and labials
from that part of the orbit is so designated. The scales of this
series are usually variable in different species. In E. obsoletus this
series and the presubocular series may actually appear continuous,
due to a slight enlargement and the presence of darker pigment
in the small, light-colored, opaque scales of the lower eyelid. An
anomalous condition due to segmentation of a portion or portions
of the subocular labial may produce this same continuation be-
tween the two groups (observed in E. laticeps) . The continuity
of the presuboculars and postsuboculars is normal in certain African
and western Asiatic species.
Temporals. The group of scales occupying the temporal region
is somewhat difficult of interpretation and heretofore the termi-
nology has not been adequate for accurate description. However,
these scales must be considered as important and as pertinent to a
description of a species as any other scales on the head. The num-
ber of these scales varies somewhat with the species. Four is the
normal expectation. The most anterior may be considered as the
primary temporal, and is usually small, single and normally present
save in E. egregius, E. dicei and possibly colimensis; the next
(posterior) are termed the secondary temporals. These are two
usually, the upper one bordering the parietal; the other just below
it, is the lower secondary, which is in contact with the primary
save in a few species where it may be separated from it leaving the
upper secondary in contact with the last labial. In this case the
scale may be pushed back or may be interpreted as wanting. The
tertiary temporal (occasionally divided) is usually a vertically
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 75
elongate scale bordering the upper secondary temporal and extend-
ing down behind the lower secondary. The temporals for any given
species may be regarded as constant as most of the other head scales
and in many species may be diagnostic. In E. ochoterenae there is
considerable variation in the relation of the last labial and the
upper secondary temporal; very rarely is this variable in skiltoni-
anits.
Parietals. These scales, due to their great irregularity of shape,
are somewhat difficult to describe to bring out specific characters,
yet differences are usually in evidence on a comparison of two
species. Usually their relationship, whether in contact or sepa-
rated, is diagnostic; an exception is Eumeces brevirostris as here
interpreted.
Loreals. Two loreals are present, an anterior and a posterior,
the former of which is usually vertically elongate and higher than
the latter. The length of the posterior is usually greater than its
vertical height. However, in certain species the anterior reaches no
higher than the posterior, and is a constant character.
Boulenger et al. have regarded the large scale following the nasal
in taeniolatus {scutatus Boulenger) as being a third loreal. I in-
terpret this as a postnasal.
The posterior loreal is occasionally found with a posterior segment
(vertically segmented usually), while the anterior is found oc-
casionally transversely segmented (frequently in E. multivirgatus
and E. septentrionalis septentrionalis) .
Preocular. This is a small scale lying between the first supercil-
iary, the posterior loreal, and the presubocular, against which the
anterior palpebrals of the upper and lower lids abut. It is followed,
above the palpebrals, by one or more granules diminishing in size, or
by a continuous series across the lid, as in African forms.
Postoctjlars. A pair of small scales lying at the posterior corner
of the eye, inclosing partially the posterior palpebral of both upper
and lower lids, is so designated. The upper may enlarge to such
a size that it breaks the continuity of the superciliary series.
Scales of Lower Eyelid. Practically all species show an en-
larged series of opaque or semitransparent scales lacking pigment
other than white, which are in contact with the lower palpebral
scales. These are usually vertically elongate, rectangular, and
diminish in size from the center. Neither their number nor their size
is constant. These are separated from the pre- and postsuboculars
76 The University Science Bulletin
and the subocular by from one to four rows of very small scales
which are usually flat, and either juxtaposed or imbricating. The
number of rows is usually fairly constant for the species. In certain
forms of the Schneiderii group the enlarged scales may be in two
series, reduced greatly in size.
Upper Labials. This series is considered as terminating with a
large scale whose posterior edge lies some distance in front of the
ear and is separated from the ear by one scale, a pair of scales, or
in some cases, several (four or five) pairs. In some published
descriptions these small scales are counted as labials, and, where
only a single scale appears, it is quite similar to those of the labial
series, and may actually partially border the corner of the mouth.
For the sake of uniformity the last labial counted is the large scale,
invariably the second following the subocular labial; the scales
following are regarded as postlabial or preauricular scales. The
general characters of the labials are diagnostic in many cases.
The anterior part of the series (three, four or five) may be vari-
able in many species; for instance, five is the usual number in E.
laticeps and only rarely are four present ; four is the normal number
for E. fasciatus, but the number five appears rather frequently. In
E. egregius, rarely also in E. anthracinus, the number may be re-
duced to three. The relative height and the length of the labials,
perhaps more especially of the subocular, are relatively constant for
a species.
Lower Labials. This series of scales is likewise variable in
number, and the count is made from the mental to the largest
elongate scale which appears to terminate the series, but which may
be followed by one or more smaller scales, concealed below the large
(last) upper labial.
Mental. The scale for a given species usually is constant as to
the extent of its labial border and its depth.
Postmental. The mental is followed by either a large, single,
undivided scale, or by two scales formed by a transverse division
of the large single scale. In most species one or the other of these
conditions is constant save for an occasional exception. However, in
E. fasciatus, where the normal expectation throughout the greater
part of the range is two postmentals, occasional individuals may be
found with a single, undivided postmental, and in the extreme
southwestern part of the range (Oklahoma), this condition may be
present in 40 percent of the individuals.
Taylor: The Genls Eumeces 77
Chinshields. Tlicrc is a very remarkable constancy in the gen-
eral relation of the chinshields following the postmentals; these
consist of three pairs of scales, the first strongly in contact medially
(rarely not); the second pair separated by a single small scale;
and the third pair separated usually by three scales. In E. egregius
there are only two pairs of chinshields normally present.
Postgenial. I use this name to describe the elongate scale
bordering the lower labials posterior to the last (third) chinshield.
This scale is usually constant, and in the greater number of the
species is bordered on its inner edge by an elongate scale shaped
somewhat similar to the postgenial, though smaller, and which
likewise borders the posterior edge of the third chinshield. This
scale, in certain Mexican species, is very different, and appears as
a broad scale, distinctly of greater diameter transversely than
longitudinally, and is constant for the species. This condition ob-
tains also in certain African forms. However, the elongate scale
rarely may fuse with the postgenial, resulting in a wider postgenial,
which is then bordered by the adjoining scale which is wider than
long. This fusion has probably brought about the condition in the
Mexican species. In Eumeces skiltonianus the fusion takes place
occasionally.
Scale Rows. The variation in the number of scale rows is con-
siderable, and it varies at various parts of the body. Thus, in the
region behind the ear, there is a postauricular series of four or five
vertical rows which are sharply set off from a series of lateral
neck scales by their smaller size, and by a definite line denoting a
different direction of the scale rows. This series of neck scales is
then set off posteriorly from the suprabrachial lateral shoulder
scales by another line usually running up from the anterior point
of insertion of the forelimb onto the shoulder (usually diagonally).
Posterior to the insertion of the arm in the axilla is an area, small
in some forms, larger in others, with tiny granular scales, which
may also border the arm insertion dorsally; behind this there is a
radial series of scales, running upward and backward, which usually
continue diagonally a distance equal to the length of the forelimb
and sometimes farther. These are, however, somewhat irregular in
their point of termination and occasionally one terminating nor-
mally anteriorly will be continued to the groin, thereby increasing
the scale count at the middle of the body. Sometimes the inter-
calated rows may terminate near the middle and a count one or
two scales farther forward may vary the count by two rows.
78 The University Science Bulletin
The greater number of species vary considerably so that in some
species a variation of as many as eight scales may occur in the
counts; and they may vary as much as six scales in a group of
specimens from a single locality. However, this is greater than is
usual and a variation of two rows is the more normal expectation.
The number of scale rows about the base of the tail is fairly constant
and is usually very different in most species from the number about
the body. In some forms the number may be nearly the same
(counts should be made from the first widened subcaudal). In the
region posterior to the insertion of the hind limb there are in most
American, Mexican and eastern Asiatic forms, no granular scales.
In the African and western Asiatic species there is usually a con-
siderable area in this region covered by tiny, nonimbricating scales.
When the limb is laid back on the side of the tail a pocket-like de-
pression is formed along the side of the anal region.
In most species the scales on the side of the body form parallel
longitudinal rows. In two forms, E. longirostris and E. obsoletus,
the normal condition is to have well-defined diagonal rows on the
sides of the body. However, in the latter species, in the extreme
southwestern part of the range, the scales may be parallel on the
sides in some of the specimens. In all species the scales in the
axilla form diagonal rows.
In certain of the western Asiatic, Mexican and Central American
species the two median rows appear to unite, forming a single
median row for a part of the distance on the back; in the African
forms the two median series are much widened, but never unite to
form a single median series.
In many species, on the dorsal surface of the neck following the
nuchals, the scales are wider than the succeeding scales, and in the
Taeniolatus and Schwartzei groups, where several pairs of nuchals
are present, the succeeding widened scales between the nuchals and
the median widened series have been likewise called (erroneously)
nuchals in the descriptions of certain authors.
In numerous species the termination of a lateral row is marked
by one or two considerably enlarged scales; the ventral scales on
the breast, too, are usually very considerably enlarged.
Preanals. The anterior edge of the anus is usually bordered by
six or eight scales. These consist of a median, frequently somewhat
thickened pair, more or less greatly enlarged, with two or three
scales on each side, diminishing in size. In the Taeniolatus,
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces 79
Schwartzei and Schnci(hri) groups, the inner scales overlap the
edges of the outer pairs. In all other species the outer scales over-
lap the edges of the inner, except in longirostris, in which the second
outer overlaps the median as well as the adjoining scale.
Lateral Postanal. In the males of most species there is present
a more or less differentiated scale lying at the posterior lateral
border of the anus. In certain eastern Asiatic species the scale bears
a flattened spine or keel. The scale, however, in most species is larger
and may have a slight convexity or increased thickness. The scale
is prominent in E. obsoh tus, and to a lesser extent in the species of
the SkiLtonianus group occurring in California. It is probable that a
glandular area is present under the scale. In several species the
-exes can be determined by this character, since it is undifferentiated
or less differentiated in the female than in the male.
Si bcaudals. The width of the subcaudal scales in relation to
that of the adjoining rows is a constant character and very little
variation has been noted. When the tail is regenerated, the char-
acter of these scales changes and in species wdiere the subcaudal
-cales are not widened in the original tail, they may become greatly
widened in the regenerated part (true especially in Eumeces inex-
pectatus). The number of subcaudals varies somewhat, but within
a relatively small range.
Scale Pits. The scales on the sides of the posterior part of
head, the scales of the sides of neck, body and base of tail and the
scales on upper arm and leg are usually pitted with two or more
small pits near the posterior part of the scale. These may be
rounded or set in a short distance from the posterior edge of the
scale or may form a groove to the posterior edge. Often there are
more than the typical two on scales of side of neck and body while
invariably the scales in the posthumeral and postfemoral regions
have more than two.
The head scales likewise show evidence of pitting, but this is
often not evident. Only a few forms have the dorsal scales pitted.
The pitting is less distinct, occasionally quite obsolete, in old adults.
Color Description. The names median, dorsolateral and lateral
light lines are self-explanatory. The sublateral usually is very low
on the side, and when present is never conspicuous. Usually it
disappears before any other line.
Secondary Lines of Color Pattern. The young are nearly al-
ways quite dark, black-brown, or actually black, a color that
80 The University Science Bulletin
changes in intensity even during the first year, the tendency being
for the pigment to segregate towards the sides of the scales (less
frequently to the posterior part of the scale) , thus leaving contrast-
ing lines in the ground color. These light and dark lines are re-
ferred to as secondary, and when present never have the clean-cut
distinctness of those forming the primary color pattern (multi-
virgatus). Sometimes, too, the darker pigment on the head will
tend to arrange itself so as to appear to form the "bifurcating"
head lines. These are always less distinct than when these form a
part of the primary pattern.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
81
1
a
"3
CD
a.
/.
E
j=
c
■—
-•—
'5
c
a
_c
a
j.
01
43
a;
cS
-•-
c
cjc
C
c
c
J=
c
'3
-~
as
>.
S
-
—
&
c
c.
»
*—
w
c
c
c
*?
w
s-
£
<^
Q
0)
a>
fc
=
Cj
*
5
<
53
—
ft
DC
3B
5"
—
a.
c
o
'—
%—
-
w
c
c
CO
c
03
S3
«
CD
Cj
"ta"
GC
4=
CJ
CS
c^
ft
en
c
o
w
-*—
ea
a>
=
CD
^3
c
t3
—
DC
-
-
CS
—
in
c
C eS t" 5
> 2
-ill
c
oo
-d
c
3
of
c
CJ
>
o
c
gj
- >.
- S3
= Z :
ft L
a. z
oo g •-
'£,£.! r-
—
02
J3 ^
■ -X _* X £
'•" • =
= s
c ■£
P"
J-4"
crj -
CO
0
K>>
>. T3
.
(0
s _.
CO
c.
c —
—
V
>
o
43
<D
<
a;
>. -
t«
a> -
CD
o
J* -
_=
^~
"C —
52
I. c
£ i-
.2 ,
■- i.
& x
c q
oo g O
.£ a s
C QJ O
4) > •-
s = s
"3 3 °
S £ ■£
S >, o
9> 3 O
j: « -r
^ 3 o
_ ... *-
j.
CC c "^
« I £
5 c <3
i- 2 .'
£ c 2
g * °
w so
i O
oc C.
J p
i is
"S S3
§3
^ a _ ^
~ O
_ a
* -s
o -8
5 e
c.
00
S S
- s
^ J3
c 2
O ■—
" o
r. O q
'5 '/ B
C c
0, »
*n ^*
« OJ
OQ
b d
=3 *
p ~
° 03
IS"!
o —
_ -
— .a oj 3
< -
CJ 03
- c
o b
c o
c. —
7 -
Si-uS
5 5
= ^c
c ~
■t S
g I
C3 tC
n
-3 c
— — T X C ^ —
oa — t- —
c. — c
i: -g ■
o _ fc
X
- £ i
S- - C3
> 3 C
° 5 <r-
h © a
- E 1
.S JJ E
■ » -
-i •= t
7! r- <-
S ® OS
"5 ft
s - >>
S c -
QJ X .—
I ^ :
a =3 U
c u c
5 x i
- X
—
o
—
CJ
s-
X
=
-
O
-E
**"'
c
OQ
o
E d
- c
a 2
Cy 3
JC
>1
7
03
C.
o
oj
o o
"B °
si C
C 3
c. c
3 .. 03
5 2 ■*
03
M J3
^ g
— OQ
O —
OJ
CJ w
03 C
~ -
i E
^ o _
_ Q. o
C 3
a o
3s-
* 11 s
0) s 3 B
slog
00
-C ■-
03 OJ
§ g
I '5
: - - c3
"S ~ s
C 3 .3
.X i K
K - O 4)
=3 ^ d
u u E 3
5 OJ oj
m >- O 2
t. - ^ J3
OJ ^ oo -+>
K C -S d
„ ~ O o
-5 cj * ,— '
5- "3 ■
■g c J »
03 O .C g
3 d 3 >
03 •— S j
t- ^ 03 03
2 d
— c
d c
O 3
tj r cj *"
~" 2 d x
"3 -g - »
g | 8 3 I
- > » c, "-
* -- t = £
X •— w
O —
O
CO
5 OJ g
- -C
— c.
2 u
3 Oj
o S-
>- Q.
— d
OJ ^-
X o
_ E — t
_ _ w cj
O ^ ^ m
' ■! C K
— .5 ~ c
■- c d to
is c •" •-
• -. tr x
/. bt 3 >
U) o S O
bt C >-
3 X I- r
£ % s -
C. "— 03
X
c3 a
- o
£ ?
C3 r.
— I
£ .5
£-=
— c
— 03
.-
CJ
" <
P) d
I *-
OS ^
1—1 ffj
•a u
^~ d
c -
03 "■ c —
x ^ C. ^
c C X . -
O 03 .^ C,
£ i P '
O i_ -.
~ r c3 £
- - - M
CL M t.
- £ c c
■2 -g 03 O
03
- " = X
0? OB C "°-
a 3 a |
^ o ? =
C m
O x
>- 03
— —
o3 cj
C c
0) cc
oj
bl
CJ I —
O
00
9
I 5
fc s a
O "cj »
u •— 3
-* d _
X O -
•S e •= #
5 CO "
? Si ■»
n * P
O L, ^
14 03 C
M .S a
.S 'Z Kl
03 X
cj s
— o
„ J-
M
Ji! da
u cc
03 I
*3 03
ji
x c3
- C
E 8
cr O x
S - x
~ a c
03 C X
bt - <_
£ C .3
J! c3
03
X =3 ~
r 3 o3
c x —
>. ^
o K
Z
Q
P
- -
a>
c o
2 s
~ o
03
C.
E
o
03 -X
J= 03
9 S
3 CV
d x
03 C
CJ —
CJ —
O 53
■- o
3 ^-
9 ^
Jl
— -c
= 2
g 03
~ —
O OS B J-
— d »
1*8
E .g I
„. ej <5J
3 K
P -,-
J3 -
- J d
CJ O
-d -a £
= 03 5
O .
fe P «
_ o
.1 £
X 3
d . 03
03 j? CJ
bt o3 f
3 s M
X o
3 3
X
0i -^
03 2
d
M 03
— JZ
~ -
03 _
3
■S 03
x Jji
r
g CJ £
3
'5
■a
03
2 «
5|
° E
ej • ~
d s
O 5
>> c
■c =
OJ
-
33 -
X d
bt .3 _
-3 3- -3 '3 ^
— 3 X
- OJ
O .
3
03
03 ^
o 2
3 O
X 3
03
03 J5
cj —
a
X bl
03 ?
■8 x
ir £
o3 a
o. ..
o
C c ^
0]
J3
s
oj
B
o
01
-3
03
3
e*
o
5_g
E §
c >
73 >•
E ^
o
Cj 3
OJ £
C CO
O _
o.s
w. —
OJ J
Sb.5
'a is
CS bt
* £
oo O
3 p
8
Cj .
8-3
8 0j
3J3
Efi u
* bt
3
3
(j — 1123
82
The University Science Bulletin
D
I
s
O
H
o
w
s
w
o
CO
w
o
w
Pm
CO
W
a
H
O
CJ ♦i
SO 3
3. °
71 d
00 OS
9 S
a) en
3 is
1(2
£, O ci oo
TS c3
"3 CO
"3 —
OJ
S-
o
-
3
to
o
Q
03 w
e
00
11
a
3
a
0
0
o
CO
CJ
CJ
i.
0
cj
00
00
'5
ft
-i
5
.2
-
CO
Cj
>
33
_^J
E
a
■f a
to a
.5 S
S3 oj
"« a
. o
03
a B
S 5 'H
M S oo
C C OJ
a d -a
O 3 oo
j-, £ -o
O — ' a
■si" ;
O «•-.
*-" o
> 0) CO
.3
C a
73
oj «~
_>>
a <
3 ^
00
D
00 oo
- —
a
CB 03
o
.. J3
OJ
00
o
* 3
2 3
X)
- —
©
*^ .■
^S ci oo
>-> sf "3 13
u o
a «
O M
sS
~~ -
_r oj
"3 a
a
a
a •
o>
I '
oo
-o g
. a
03 «
Ml ..
a t.
O 03
u v
03 oj
£ -9
is °
03 ,£3
-3 5
00 3
a es
5 a
-a °
OJ to
a Jt
»> 2
-I
.■a &
to 3
a .
O 13
si
o _
a o
00
3 O
oi
d
a -a "E
S3 73 O
o a —
o a,
oj =■
'i 5
a m
O QQ
73 «
.2 a
— 03
<5
Q
Q
a cj
c3 .(J
^ 03
a 3
to K
W •
CO
>i
OJ
0
73
iC
a
0
3J
00
OJ
O
5
so
0
~
>> 03
3 £
• S OJ
a <_
o *>
00 S
=3
so
a
o
o
73
■S >>
03
a
° J5
a ^
a .a
> 00
o <
>«^
03 — .
so
- Q
o
m ?3
oj ^
o
|S
al
to fi
h e
° s
OJ 3
■a
a
a
oj
a
■5
o
M
.a
J3
00
13
CJ
03
3
3
73
o
73 >
-o a
_ «>
"3 2
a o
73 M
3 t.
.-y o
to oj
§^
T o
a OS
ss-s
*3 a
53 >.
a —
03 03 ^
«£ Is
s
12 .
3 w
fc hi
Q
Q
to
1>J
o _
a a
OJ ^3
< 3
5 Q
2 :-
a t
•r *
a *s
>> S
to a
W o
CO
OO CO
Eh tl
oj «
5 «
1-
0J
-
to
a
2
03
-«--
00
eu
'4=
0
OJ
5 2
bi) <u
c3 2
^ -^ -v §>
.2 -e ^3
(-1 J_. --H
a cj
5 3
o s
■s o
3 '
O 03
S a
o 03
OJ
03 ^3
a _, 03
00 a cj
i3 ^ B
a
00
OJ
-«
00
a
CO
-
si
"a
0
_>.
"oj
CJ
£h
03
CJ
00
03
3
.2
73
OJ
a
a
0
CO
S3
"a
a
0
—
a
<*-
CJ
.0
o
oo 00
• O
a -
5 &
a .0 2
o
a a
00 3
o
CJ ^»-
a >>
10 oj
r- 3
a 00
o a
-a
t) OJ
oj a
.2 S
O o3
0 E
0 O
a y=,
o a
■•3 a
3 O
13 '^
-H OJ
o -a
a a
a ~
OJ OJ
t -a
o
"-3
to ^S
0 OJ
o ^
u .2
a<=
a
"2 * ■"
.a -a 00
J3 0J.2
*) a oj
1 ° s
■°-* *
a3 g J
a £? *
^ a „
-t-5
o
-a
^ 01
^5 -^ OJ
73 oo .a
OJ o3 =
tO 00
OJ u-
a o
a
J3
C4-H O
51 i J
G ^- C
O 02 CQ
la 5 cq o •-:
03 .2
S a
a o -3
CJ — -
■0 m -^
Oj CJ oj
~ — a
a -^ — •
..03
x tn a
oj
4.
3 3 — -33 &
3 M^
a
a
to •« oj
tO 03
a -3 °
0 §
00 cl
oj
oj a
>> 03
"3 S
Z 3
i §
o .5
* -a
■a a &
.2 »
■a — oj a
r>> ^ cj tn
r3 >> » <;
3 o3 »— « a
^^ £ 3
a o oj
.a
O c3
CJ OJ
ii =3
73
a
03
O 1
00 JL
g -3
00 3
oj" —
m a
•a M
.5 a
o
J3
00 -<
/.
OJ 73 O
5=
73 O
33 =
>,£
■° OJ
"8 2
a-
3 a
73 -o
a a i
CC — 3 03 ^
0 -J o
00 oj °3 OJ
-a o.
o
05
~r
>- OJ 1 ^"
0 "3 "3 73
oj o «1
« m a 'si
5 a «ffl
- S3^
^ « •- §
I * &1
O 03 S.
o _. — a
B « -9 «
VJ
a
S3
_CJ
a
S
"o
si
J3
GO
00
S
O
03
O
5=
>>
43
o3
^3
O
>i
OQ
a
^J
«*-
OJ
73
O
0
OJ
fc-
- —
Ci 03
» 73
OJ r-
^5
3
d S
a o
03 00
SO S o
a 03 73
a a oj
e "a
a •- -^
o- -
> a -3
O 03
>> M o
•° o S
a
OJ 00
o "2
OJ
D 73
SO „
si a
» 3
so S
£-, f-J
>. 03
^ of
a ? a 0 -_
03 a
S 13 s
3 03 3
o
_3 S
o OJ
i2 a oj —
^ o a —
1 2 a
r a
3 3
.a oj oj
— -a rf
CJ -^ ^
■a Q 73
0 "^ a
00 J; c3
.i3 .2 —
'3 'S 03
a v, •-
J OJ
2 « -3
•t ca oi
S 13
a 5
. o a
i & *
s £ >i -^ ^
03 OJ
a *»
oi ^^
U O
03 +3
03 £
73 03
3 m
a T3 5?
.H -
■3 '3
S; si
j3 "i a
2? 2 s
tic
«.s
S .a
2.2.
£ 2
S -a
a3 c oj ^3
O
n w
fe
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
83
(35
c —
<U to
3'g
■ -» 1)
a §
a 5
03 a
of ;-
E _
o ^ J2
S-.
b
CJ
.
il
*-.
t-
C»
CJ
V
■s-.
-
£
bl
a
/.
^
S 03 O
— . o
bfl oo i*
2 Ijs
Si U 53
»- «__ o
.5 -C St
°o -i X
fcH £ o
O aj "3
2 = 5
-►> T3
~ j=
.2 ^ -
« 5
g O B
a T .2
3 S
T3
03 i-
CD —
3 =3
3D *d
_
T3 2
§ O
S -5
— B
- -
ti *
— J2
"2 o
3 a-
* -
OQ
hi o
« §•
x U
03 ^
0
—
tN
O
tN
—
CN
""
/.'
-
'
^
O
0
(a
**1 —
« S
a a
2 ft)
QQ O
,o 3
o •-
~ :a
60 S
a S
- tu
>f s
.2 ft)
03
O «
3 !S
a i
03 £
a a)
jj "3
Cj 00
* •£
cj o
So
n
3 OJ
*". *^
• — t-
J o
0J a> o
t, s cj
_a o x
-A; CJ 0J
3 oj
" i
a .S
— 03
tm cj
— 03
„ o
a-i
0J v~;
rl A.
3
■— _ _tt m g
o E S -: s
o
OJ
O
03
3
■3
a
J.
£
>
— "
33
3
^r
a>
c
a
• - 03
o tu
O ~
00 oj
O OJ
^ A3
03 ~ M "S
• ^3 03 — • 03
■=3 o?S £ ^
— p
O Q 00 -•
^^ r- fl\ n
O 03
s -s
.S "3 a
« = n ■
a so T3
c3 0) c
!l
sa
>
cu 'S
t- — • .s »
— 6C
„ -a
3 g-*
v ^T! aa y
S
• - oq a
4) — — w
t- 03 — -
« — o3 to
5 ? = =
a * - t
a so
03 a
3 "ft
oo a
OQ o3
0J
a
o
O
>
o
OQ
"<J
cj sB c
"3 S-S
J.
/-
X
<o
B !> rl W
O ? — -
oq *^ . - =:
33 03 CO ft)
OJ 00 OJ
— o3 a
- "s =
os o i:
oj a a
r- _ o
■a
0J
is £
-At (-. ^
ffl » C
"3 'S ■*
<< -3 O
o £
2; .2
o
"A3
o °
a <
O A-
• - a
03
--3 °
► s|
-^ ^i is
Of."
3 03 £
>> —
IT oj
.2 >
2a|
a .= 2
o — a
60 u S
.2 S cq
a 3 w
•a °
^ a £
cj — < 03
s S|
2 01 3
0Q A"
•a e "
a a »
03 » 60
8 -a °
AA t^ LH
03 oj '2
QJ "^
a 2
o3 a
cj •-< J- —
^^ 0J
S ^ S S I
3 ~ •- a o
*a ^, ^r ^ a
«*A 00 O |A
* •= ° " s
O a A.
2, "a a
"2 js a
0J 0Q O
a = 3
« .2 r:
> to oo
O 3J O
- ^ c
* - ^3 ^T
In C3 ♦-
J7 - G)
O « 0)
■3-3 &
a2 -
00
03 '-°
■" OJ
c3 +j o
-3 *a
~ 0 3 oo .s
60 •"* 3 ^i a
2 - o
S M «•
•a a •:
oj a —
60 o E
s >> s
"a .2 o
OJ _ oo
o h ■
J3 0J 0J
en a
A" 00 A - FH
O _ g oo 0J
"T 2 a S «
>> a ^ ? oj
-a g ja
60 03
a a
'a -a
■a oj
.2, a
-3 "3
OJ S
. oj o3 a
a « °
%• • «
o a -. a
3 o3
03 '
OJ
oo js Js £
a ° i3
a 03 o3
03 Q,
•" AJ
g a
o a
03
a £
a a -S
03
a
03
OJ - -
Jr °° •>
At n J
03
O
(A
03
13
a
03
0J
"3
a
oj
>
"3
-a
tA
03
■S
o
SO ^-a
a so
a »
-a a
a .-
OJ — «
aJ aj
CJ O
a -a
:a o3
OJ J3
.a o
A >> ^
S "^ -
O o to
'el -a s
CJ A
03 c a>
— « "
TJ o^ AAJ
5 £ a
.5 ' ■*
S a S
S a a
a1 a
.2 »
B *■
o3 ta
e Ji
3 3
>» 03
a oc
i*8
o >
■° 5
a >-
2 >>
a ^3
.a ea
* 3
co
§. 2 6f
0 JJ _0J
t~ g
hfin
° 2 to
0J G 12
a -a 'S
° £ 5
w * J
'-T 2 «
SjSS
oJH S
a 3
a S *)
03
•a
o
s.
03
a o
oo x
IS
"to C
— o
^^ E
a t. o
> a K
§ a -
g » -
0J
0J
'3 "el
CJ
^ -3
03 h
^ s
03
CJ CO
00 £a
2 a
-* "3
2 a
-a
5 s
60 2
•-H 00
OO
!>. c
^A ri T: •—
cj oj
~B "3
£ o
a _,
oo oj
3
00
- OJ
- a
zz
■5
03
3
E
..
00
AJ
Lh
OJ
-5
oj
ta
«
3
.A
CJ
OQ
CO
CN
I
•a oo O
cj JS o
> .3 •§
t< 13 oj
3.23
_• "as
>. —
■a a
r> o3
a-" PI
03
0J A^
a 2
OJ **A
03 o a
00 »7 "
03 <*
a
1 o"
<«> u a. S
oj o ja a
3 " 2
2 i? -S W
•S J3
o „
O
o
o
03
(A
a
a
03
Q
Q
o3 r
CJ A-I
02
CJ
o
33
84
The University Science Bulletin
b .IT J3 "0 •
K o =• c s
3 <D ^ 3
.2 a ° 2 »
1:2 S -.«
3 <p *"" s-' u
«? .9 J 1
3 M g.ci
0> *J^ — IC
-C - c8 .
* S a §
I'S-i *
-° 3 .3 <u
„- -° >
e
Ed
P
z
z
a
i
z
z
<
o
w
fa
O
W
S
£>
H
a
o
H
Ph
02
fa
H
O
H
><
fa
s
.0
-2 >
0) Di O
a -b "3 -S
3 •»■- 03 c3
-O .. O _
« >,&2
c "o ~ "S
o o ft -2
JD C ci
° ^ V, a
^"S ft E
ip C 3 p
3 CO £
'S "3 » in
— 3 to c
ID 3 t> ~
t. 0 os rt
. I- — w
10 ,-" t. *
cd o S .-
s "o x t: ~
a .1 "3 <D c8
SS os c -a
J3 CN t. <u oj
<n - — ~0 3
S •" •- J-1 s
cd Ji; 3 cd cd
> o 1) C£
cs « > T -S
M . « 2
co — ^ T3 en
c3 > C 3 ce
- « K § -B
*i °^ — u c
is^ S 3 <d
■.- 5 B
X'
- 9 ■ 8
* £ -'C "2
^ o OJ Bj c
4 g s S S
S1 <7 '" g ■"
§ .& M «S S
.= 3
•« co
S
o c
c «
^-" =c
e8 .
X ID
o 2
a £
c
■5 E
c •„-
o J5
c —
J- o
c g
li 5 i
ti "C ^_
c c °
" C Oy
^ fl) t)
O IN
ft .
2 *
fc P
C3 CD
08
*i """ ~Z
-a
£. m
o
<
6
c
to
C8 t.
en _£;
73 ^ C
lis
0) « >
(8 ,^ s- o
S W O <D
bfi -CO
£ S fc S
.^ l-M —
"8 «? 1 !
- E g °
c, _o *l
-e E
c *
<c E
=S <
^ *~ -
O O
£.=
CD
E 05
a — '
^ J
C C ©
C3 — '
v — ce
T3
o8
K3
O
ft
C
o
a
3 M 60
° JJ 3
E 5 e
id rt ^
* l! u
'o M ~*
« « »
C (J »
s E
— c
0) c
E o
ID 00
o P
T3 en
CD 08
— . C CD
3 « — S
r* "w' I
.2 e ? ■»
"O 08 > C
CD — IE ti
£ £ ■- >
° . S3
ee -3
II
T3 05
cu t^
rt •— CD £,•
a;
^ 03 CO
=3 X
.. 08
o £
c c
M 3
»-; 2
o g
05 £
« 3,
T3
3- .9
O 08
CD
CD -
'c8 en
g CO
02 J£
03 .-
3 in
<n J3
3 3
■- -a
■<*■ 08
N c
>. •-
- >>
<c —
<N -
08 5
o c3
» ft
3
CD
-O
CD
3
CD
-o
o
ft
£
CD
08
T3
3
O
ft
ft
3
3
O
M
C
5 «=
^3 T3
X! 3
OV 5
3 «
M O
a tj
_ 03
3 o
08 CO
^ Cm
ID **
£ -o
3
» =3
~ 08
in
■- 2
= £
O 08
CD .9
"S O
M
3
CO
3
C
P3
3 CO -
V ° 5
2 ft 02
■3 . H ^
s £ ° ■
J^ £ £
^j:- e
3 » g „
S la >- »
CD tn «
08 ~
ft 3
>, O
T^ u
c8 — c3
ID
3
•~ ce
S -5
>> ®
t. _ 00
T3 1
c -^ '£
O <D ^
CD * £
c- — . o?
<D T? 'D
> ID CO
o
CO
CO
3 S d
E -I £
3 -C
Be
S « |
m a "«
5 3 »
* O »
o O g
CD 08 S
£ £
03 CD
tf 06
E >
3 3
- S
.38
3 3 <D
^- 3 N
3 • —
o 3 <°
^ ° H
O M tj
id .9 £
a « -
co c CO
i, h IN
O 3 I
.3 *— -^
S 3 «
In £ cd
O 3 >
3 3"-
O c8 cd
m cd , c !J
__ 3 "C 3 08
3 >
>- O
£ -°
"*" 03
.* .2 *
C 3
■B -r
B a
08 CD
°- %
CD
-O m
CD
3 '-
I s
CD 03 -^08(3;
3 S _D 3 -
s a
2
■V x.
•° a
08 ~
< S
=3 <
3
3 a
5
&
o
Z
o
fa
CD
_- CO
e I
o
II
3
O
— u CD
a "3
CD
-*j CD
CD 08
>,8
"8-E
3 3-
a o cd
*» S -B
j; CJ D
M 3 „_
SS O
— ! » ID
T3 "
.!s oo
^±>
§1
/-. CO
3 3
J3 •-
CN
3*
O
CO
a
S
o
J3
H
i
E
* ^ - tS
j? S
2 » E
3 -g co
m .. #
O T3 O
s cd a
.. a o —
t, 0) — «
id T3 cu ~
» -3 e 3
j s2 .2
M >> _ «
3 ■— 03 ^
2 1 55.2
■b -9 -g M
— * ^^ 03 i—l
TS JS
3 03
3 v
a S
>-» 3
co ^
a
cd
aJ js 3
+3 CO
3
3
3
03*
£
b -a
CD 3
.3 o
♦^ "^
-3 3
.5" =3
T. "3
CD ^
3 -^
J2 CD
.3 J=
"en 5 o
co co -rt
c3 <D ^
ft CD
D O D
3
£ _>> O
to
c8
03
3
<p .- .^.
o "S n
C MS
- 3
co
CD
ys ^>iJ
"31 js
u be
O 3
« O
S^
^ "o
>> ID
a co
03
'3
3
a
03
C8
■B S ~
43 Cu
3 S CO
oo t" 35
ID ■- .
— 3 CD
^ CD
3 03
13 X
CD ID
> -a
C3 CD
03
u
JS
CD
i
01
CN
C
3
o
^j a
03 —
o 03
<— » £
° « £
.S So
II o .
co -3 CD
3 ...2
c8 '—' en
^ O E
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
85
a
H
D
g
O
O
Z
z
<
S
a
CO
a
u
w
o
CO
g
o
a
Ps
CO
K
H
O
><
H
oo
S cm
- 3
5 S
x 2
o ts
~ 3
7 *
C _
? -
E £
: -
o a
■aJS
- .' -
•=.£■*
* - «
>■ * S
- = e
Sit
£ o fe
»i «
2* *
- t. J3
__ 4) -*^
2 58 O
O ~ =
C. c3 _
b c
= o '3
a o "
o o ^
x 52 ej
- — —
a o
a -
- ~ f,
■- fe .3
- ' -
sag
4. o P
tc
■ ~
~. Z -
a jt o
* ■» &
I- "= o
s - >-
"3 -O >>
c _2
- s «
S y CJ
§ >< '3
ja: .
7 5
2 %
0 >>
S ° 3 .2
*" >> o
3
-3
=3
l]
5 4>
^ c
-u C3
cm o
3
4.
2 £
** X
> =3
>>.2
2 *
5 5
00 —
41 41
.■S c
* a
. - -
cm ^
a
00
1^
0> 0) -— .
Cf — -
<~ •- 2.
^ J O
a o
_ =8
O
3 -r
- i
u X X
l "l
- 7 c
c: » X
J N o
~ 5 °
2 2 x
Eh 4)
4) 4> ^H
- ~ «*
- ?.
S ° c
=8 x £
- .- 4)
~ X "£
3 — 5
s-s|
- .S X
^ c* ^"
4) 38 S
sis
^ o ,;
= >>.2
. .2 = -
3 "S § g
s
CO
£ =
3
:3
a,
-
3
^2
i5 '3
-^ S »
41 K)
O r-
>. B
o •-
4)
£ =3
c3 —
4) C3
-^ C3
M - •
C u
•r o
~ ft •
c8 2
- -
| 5
o M :
M '-S ■
■5 " ,
33 T
41 c8
.S "3
— 41
o
—
>. 3
J s
o
cm
3 J^
C 41
« -
00
os
CM
4> ^
— cj '3
= '* -
— * »=
« a S
oo
CM
O = 4)
£ 1 o
s. 2 »
3 - 3
- - = R ? ~
3 Ji
4i eu
3 "5
3 0
5 - .
4i ■:
a i
CO -
4> i-l
_Q 4)
O >
- — s -
I g «=3
g .S to
3 "S •
- _ ■=> 3 ?:
fc 2: - =
g - J = -
=- ^ ~ - s
" o •- o a
a co _b • - «)
— _• o 3t3
5 » Q o ^ *
.3 =
t- t: ■"
2 o •»
S c s
= - ;
X 5 3
3 s
45 "
X X
4)
X
>, ii
-3 "
O
J2
i — i cj X H i«
o c
h 3
C =3
° s
OQ
>> .
=8 00
— ^
_2 —
3 "
■i ri
M 00
.a "3
-2 —
u 2
c8 3
41 C
X
E o
— 2 ^
11 -3 2
DD S fH
2 3 £
a .3 ■*»
i ji C c — ^
C ri S3
-I g
"3 2 H
u 2
O- c8
'X — 3
lit
oo
"8<
- 5! >>
= -=' £
c » ^
■a « %
o a. M
- . -
•- X J)
O —
a 3
C3 *- 00
tit ^H
.2 -3 —
1 ^ 2 _
, 5 « S
Q, *- 41
.3?
'3
O
-a
3
2
41
— - 5
6 -5
.2 3
x £
41
P. "5
M
0)
X
s
2-3-
■ - n
"3 -
- s
t 5
a o
2 °
C3 2
"3 '"
4) _>i
2 5
- c8
5 °
x -C
41 _
2 S
§22
41
3
9
EN £
N 5
•- "3
cm
.a c,-
■w o
-. h t*
-^ -— *J K x
3 cm
>> 4!
b 4) — •
=3 C3 ..
— Si
5^
.5 a c c J
— — o 2 °
<B <o 8 S o
S «
3 4)
c3 x
J3
^»2
O ce _
^
- E
"3 °
§ a
a S
>. -2
X •- 41
Cj ^- *^
v- -3 =8 c3
41 41 .
S* 'S X
«' 3 J
-- a o
™» ^i t^
n 01 H
41 •-
r: —
O ^>
z
O
o
86
The University Science Bulletin
p
g
z,
o
o
-a)
o
02
w
o
s
w
o
V.
a
o
w
Pi
02
w
w
H
o
H
w
(V —
J3 bf
& '8
bo >>
a xi
a oo
-7* C3
? o3 .
"* a
00
c >>
3 c3
C3 09
o *»
o2 O O.
-2 3
03 3
3 "
O
&3
* §
a ° £
*> S "8
-° e c
£ a °
c « .2
x J3 -
■3 I *
« " o
E 21
CN
J- o
-3 3
E .a
02
CO
co o3
03
bo
a
a
o
<D
oo
cd
CO
o3
H
W
11 3
• tS °o
BO W VH
oo
3 J? OJ
a o -s
3 t*
o eg
a; a
a g
■5 oo
g ■
9 a
3 a
a; -j
>■. 2
e8 "^
■a .3
co £
00 ^
a &
o ..
£ P
*-> CN
-^ p co
CO O N
CO
w
~ o ~
co -^
* 9
£ 8
« 3
S'-s
CD fl
CD >U
a —
o
CO QJ
CO
C
CO
0
—
t- CQ
Fh
,a
bC ^
o
B
0
-
o
CQ
M
\A
C3 J2
Pi
►"5
>"5
Pi
oo
CO
CO
3
-
0
1
<0
_c
CN
>,
3
C
it
CM
«
m
3
3
H
O
c3
"e*
3
a
A
0Q
<u
O be co ^
£ a
a a
* c -■ ? s
o
a
oo E
CN 0)
T3
3 .3
CS C3
W P5
■-1 .. -w QJ P, OQ
o H oj o C3
X,
. -*^
O ■£
CN P
g ^
•^ 3
«S ^ vj %j ^,
ft g
co £
1 ■*
C3
a
CD
3 T3
CO dJ
^ &
DQ _C
C 4»
a, •— u. >,
cu co
E-c"
s £
i/i eg
CD 73
.- a;
c3 be t-
u C .5
« o 5
0 S -2
eo C3 3
>
O
—
03
cu O
03
01
cu **
3 qo
■a e
3 ..
2 T3
3 C3
- o
0C t.
cn j:
I
S c
CN c!
. C
K5
£ "o o
'5 .2 ^
bt
M >i
to
3 3
■S O
2 =3 E
S §
g o -
co o
-
CO
3
0
Z
E
CO
>,
£>
fc-
>>
t-
c
—
0
~
O
.-
00
C
CI
03
3
c
-
CO
-
O
<-4—
E
00
«*1
3
00
—
O
—
GO
0
>,
"■"'
CO
0
JZ>
>
~r.
CO
:s :
o — .
a £
JO oj
Si »i
« o3
a .
^ Si 32 _ a? o
03 co 00 3
00 00 O
bC .2?
3 m
3 O
a
■ 00
S 3
a a
Co o
§■?.
CO
CD
CO
03
X -^
2 "3
.3 >-
o o
3 a
CO >>
'2 03
* l '
+-> DQ
CO cu .
* &
o a
« be
^ £
CN ~
03
-LT 3
03 t? '
00
03 Ji
■a c
^. o
o .0
>> 3? bO
~ -• t-t 1
. O c3 03 1
O
so
S -a
5 5
co rt
CD -^
S &
3 ^-<
00
CO >
10
00
CO
O <4)
.2 S
x s
00 [vj
^ _«s -e >,—
£ "3 -2
co a
QC> 3
03 ^1
.2 >>
03 g
Pi E
O 03 _>>
flJ ..CD
« **r co
S j= £
>> * S
a — £
3 ci m
co 3 cn
o .2
S 0?
0
e
3
c
(U
O
i 03
_ E
03 co
L- . — ,
O C3
a *-
c a
- -
= 3 .£
3 "C
O 03
OX 3
§1
O
CD
t*-
fl
~
03
Fh
_=
43
03
«
a 0
£
.. 0
3
« CO
2 'S
&q
3 CO
*s
00
|e
£: 00
o3 ti
ki
2 §
« O
3 •"
a
^ 00 CO
^ d co
5 E "
o -r >>
" c3 -3
-3 o
3: P 00 c ^
o3 «J
■S 03
O 03
.2 a
— 00
3 CD
O >o
to o3
to «J
— . Ti
2 3
X 00
3 >,
^- "B
°o§
= 3^ 03 -
co 9 ft 3
J2 o3
3 -C
2 3
^ 3
O —
O n oj
fO ).
O -3 2
C •£ .=
ca ^
a a;
5 ft
CN .3
0Q
M
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
87
;
OS
«o
»o
•*
—
09
3
o
00
—
.-
u
0)
e
e
c
CD
0
-
o
-
"■C
3
-
-
bl
c
7
3
0)
c
03
-
i
ja
r
•J
—
3
."74
,*°
0)
.^
C -O
u
*—
£
J
a.
V
^
+3
Is
-
c
c
~s
In
C
03
c
B
o
00
_o
'^
1.
ao
a
t-
~
-
-
_
^
3
ft
u
t-
ja
c
**
C
EC
s
o
[-1
i.
V-
c
-
2
-
-
-
'3
o
K)
a
o
-
o
•
r.
c
s
c
-
-
♦j
~:"
1
or
~
X
a
■^r
s
r.
o
— i
Q
V
c
BE
—
o3
3
-
s
•—
5
go
x
-
*—
3
■~
i-
"I
=
♦3
83
-
■♦3
+3
3
to
C
a
X
O
.
o
o
B
^>
"3
=
"3
—
c
7_
o
-
43"
u
"*■'
o
o
o
X
-
3
-
ao
E
>
43
s
o
C
"oQ
X
QQ
QQ
a)
—
3
2
=
'a
a
a
CN
1
CN
1
oo
o
o
O
QQ
0J
_
IM
o
CO
O
c
s
t-
—
s«
' "
c
OS
O
/
m
a;
00
J.
o
o
a
■J,
_-
OQ
o
^
43
*o
-
»
^C
O
i.
-
QQ
O
-
u
43
e3
7
o
o
-—
t*
03
o
u
-
0
do
-
ao
-
?3
00
_
2
C
-
-
--
-
-■ o
~
—
TO
OB N M
-- |M
OB -rt C
S. oj »
p, .a 0
■a -s ^
i £ 2
3 O g
° ° c
OB 2
— •* &
cj 43 a
I » 8
i- C ^
73 S «
La*"
ao 5
£ 'S.
« t-
c o
OB u
_ <»
c3 C
*^ r;
■C o
03 —
§ S
— ao
OB C. O
fc- ^ OB
| ftg
5 S 03
£
o O
03
c a
— CB
o ^r
-2 03
60 O
* >■ S -3
«5
4f
a.S |
^ O «
OB O co
> T3 3
°£ e
«^|
S cS "°
£ a o
c la 5
§ £ §
1 O^
•S OQ
3 "-'
3
"o S
7. 3
t».2 o
J3 "- £5
m £ 2
03 W
a t-
"^ S »
03 £ .2
«x S
^3 -43 .
c .- x
S CD 03
m £ w
OB g .-
C it "^
•— O 0B
M OB
.3 a ^
03 0B ^
o M co
O 00 H
S d °
CB oo 3
S --oo
3 "O • -
0B ^B*
C 3 0B
03 0B po
B3 -O
3 O)
_• B
m c d
4B OB .2
h O n
& s| ,
^ -^ § s -
3 "0 » cu
p 0B
*= ~
u 3
C3 •-
3 co
O O
° o
3 3
._ OB
-3_3
S &= ft
CO "O
OS"
BOB
.- " <u
5 g ^
o3 o -*->
6 § »
TJ ~ -3
— <* "S
i
M
Eh
JS PL,
SB
" 03
a .
2 -3
G A
o §
—
a
03
& X"
£o
& £
-° ft
.§ ;
~ i* •
OQ *" ■
& -
° 3
<~ 3
S3 S
CM
N
°2 'G
<D 00
00 w
^i £
TB
OB •-
3 >>
CO
05
Z2 s
"o e
s s
3 ~
2 *
G <u
!^
& -S-
M T3
x 3
CtJ
ft
•2 J O
43 33
O -3
3 3
03
33
te S "
O 3 O
fcH X ^
03 M Q
O 3 w
" a .2,
3 ft o3
^ri o3 pq
"3 t> —
>§ > 3
^ O cj
1-5
>-5
S E
.. X
X OB
S .5
o —
c
<N
^ M C3
03
CB 03
X —
- T3
CO 3
cn c«
2 "o
? to £
IS <* o
3
&9
o
>-4 •» >-.
bO
tn G
G <u
w ao
M S
3 ft
•-S -B
c3 03
S c
I!
X
32
w ir: <
4-^ x >
3 ^:
— -
3 x
c3 j2
3 •-
-a
CB CB
J3 3
43 CB
o ~
O
CB 3
43 T3
.. 3
x 03
03 iD
33 3
ft
„ ft
OB 3
a
OJ
TO
CM
S S
I5
n 3
« 3
"3 O
Sis
CN H
CJ. «
V
*-t OB
"~ J3
*44 43
OB .
3 T3
CB 0B
OB ft
■B 03
— 33
—i X
?B 3
S 3)
0B O —
Cfi
OB g
ft 3
X
p
93
E "3
3 P* 43
B ■"
§ &
3 c
3 ^3
o a
3 CB J£
a £
C3 00
o g
03
ft '
.3
' M
-a —
Ob x
3 x
i T3
> 3
2 c o
& ""
en - « 43 o
*3 r*! ^ X •— '
CB 0B
O 14
X
o
03
3
S3
X
. O
T3 ft
33 *_
ft 33
- — »
4- -73
3 OJ
'Z 1
ft -a
= s
i; IS
3 ^
CB TJ
o
o Tb
3 CB
CB 3
4- CC
3 V
£ e
0B »-2
33 <1
O 3
§2
03 ^^
»•„;«!
u D C
■2 = -3
S ft
ft^> 3
3^5
§ g E
ao G CD
CO CB -
x •-« n
?% s
a ,2 £
03
K
o o
c
ft
IE
O
a
Ed
88
The University Science Bulletin
a
Ed
D
Z
Z
o
o
z
<
s
o
CO
o
a
o
3
o
w
(X,
CM
w
x
Eh
O
w
3
B
OJ
J3
*3
C
o
M
E
3 53
o
>>
-8 S
oj a
c c
oj o
"P 00
CJ ."
3 p- oj
» e .2
cu
J3
O cj
cj
-fcJ CO
g O
*~ co
.X fi
cs h
o3 rv
a "
03 T3
a-T
— CD
03 >
Oj ^
-a a, j
OJ
-* .
15
S 2
.ti £
* s
-J m
.fi CD
ti >
s °
|5
fi r3
0)
3 3
co
M X
cu a
DO 3
s o
5 §
... f*
JS OJ S
^ go
° « s
~ * I
.- — r3 - —
CU JD
» oo°.
e
o3 :
-• "3
£ OJ
- OQ
CO
cu
"3 £ - S — 5?
so
B
cu
"3
CO cu
* "5
CJ-
>.
~a
1
>>
03
>>3.
0)
CO
a
[3
13
-o
S
a
03
a
CO
—
CO
<D
*J
V
ja
03
CJJ
*o1
° I «
Sag
I >■ -
C3 ou .3
o c ..
O- co co
cu ^ -
-^ 03 03
>> -O co
fc- g OJ
i2 <3 03
■3 o
a — co
O 03
oj g oj
k S 2.
J oj c3
M c3 S
B
ja
65
§ B "
oj -a
03
- 5
03
a
=
o
5
—
CO
«
oi
3
s
O
3
a
t-
Bq
0)
a
03
OJ
B 3 -3 "K
O
a
OJ
J3
O "3
a
3} CO
S3
OJ jo
£ J3
03 .a
aj o
*- o c o ^r-
• -H f. ~-
— n m
•S a-2
„Q 03
03 — «
~ — - m
a °
a a
Z -3
03 CU
C- +-> CO
co cj o3
'M -3 — •
h -g 03
03 jj t,
h OJ Z? 03 OJ
3 ®
03 o3
"g 03 ■-
B l. w
. M |
t - ~
M cu -
CJ OJ ki
a .
o •-
>. S
a a
<* 2
a °°
co
03
03
o <u
a si
—
CJ
03
a
o
y.
a ""
a «
S m •
>> J
03 .
a <s
o
^ £-? c3
B o 03
» ft-'
? C to
— —
2 S
*^ OJ
ja in
O 5a
"*- 3
-r
co
co
o S
a bo
a ■
co .3
.2 -
=3 2 '
cj 3
CO O
**i co
03 *J 3
- _S fl
o "?, o
— g oo
J2 Z £
^ .a .«
flj 03 qj
a "oo -^
o3 O
^ a ja
oj -3 ^~ —
03
a
— .. OJ
cu oo --
O -3 Cv
> J
3
—
03
— 13 d
a
8£
3 -
CN
a IS
>> 'to
■Jl "5
S5
00
oo
3
o
SS
OJ 03 CJ
2 I S.
-23
ea a -s
fc. 03
OJ T3 J3
•^ a a
o3 co ^
O, ^
-a s
03 3
a &q
03
O
Ba 2
3 o —
3
OJ OJ
cj) .a
03 *
"3
OJ
s — «i
OJ t- -*^
■3 2 —
-h O (D
OJ
OJ
M 00
2 >>
-rt 5 ~
03 co ja
B 3 ^
-s" °
OQ CO i*_.
"IS
a - co
oo CO oj
> T;
O
a
o
cu
OJ oj
3 03 03 rT
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
89
00
co
. c
■o 2.
33 03
2 >
cj
a -°
— -o
so 9
E s
- r:
- —
T3
C
oo i
cn
4 °°
m .
»!=
Is =
o ^
2 3
?? •<
r. "3
• c
a a
•3
L-
03
H
o
"3
3)
-3
u
■3
«
> t.
o ^
r
-
3
Q)
i - —
OJ <N -.
j3 ^ >
00 K '«»
• — — -fc»
*> a
2 o
£ = -o s
I-
2J
- m
op
•=■2
5 8
03 <J
CO
m
n
* S
u o
z >,
o °>
» S
_3 — <u
x O
* IS
a -S
- -
- 7
3 ~
= 3
"3 .3
0J ?
.- 3
4) t.
a a
" "3
to 3
3 03
O 05
■•-> 3
o • ~
o =
^ z
O^-O
.5 « 5 -
ft c &
_>> ig TjS
CO
'« oJ "c3 3
33 ~
p K
o »
« M a
2 e £
# 3 O
CO cp 0Q
is
OJ ~
"fi §
ft3
0J 99
5 ■
♦^ oj
O 3
00 =
03 S
"3
S &>
— a
03
o x
3 03
0J
SO
— — JH — ' =
.a »
^ c
03 p. s-.
J3 -S
^ ■ I
"■a 1
>, S3 o
03 J? ~ — 1-
■5 °
Qi t-
O
^3 T3
1 03
3
O
3 ** M
5 d —
a .2 ■-
o S N
03
= =
■a *
0Q "3
O 03
— a)
t»l —
i "B T3
- n »
3 -" fcc
"2 -b ^2
™ «a -t=
•2 ■= '5 ^
=1 - .
.5 2 Z
u 2 *" '-'
5" SF - "3
oT 3 i >
oc O ^ 0J
^ > 6X Z
- -1
« — .
OS
s .a
O 03
03
' <
h4
h4
O OJ
- 3
OJ 33
— 5 03 ^
t: 3
OJ t~,
1 03
oj ii,
o 00
- ^i
'S. "3
*-" cj
92
3 N
O I
*>- "*
O T3
— 3
*^ 03
03
s -^
■3 s
OJ u
ft a ^
oj . 5
00 >» 03
o
OJ w
- i
O OJ
* 2
-2 .5
T3^
J 2
CD %>
oj &q
Z
0 & d
1- " 3
J. ~ -
333
- ? o
•S a S
73 .2 -S
O OJ
O" K
^ m O ^ OJ
"3 33
c x : m
0 3 m
g - o5
« >.
t. T
— 03 Tl
4> "3 ..
O = §
« S £
•3 "3 X
■ 3 O
03 OJ .2
• 0J
00
o "
■gzs
CD
o J
Q
0J
00
g w
B -2 C
o £ 2
e — sa
5 "3
2 5
.2 ;2
-^ ^
03 -
C 03
o
CM
n
I s ?
■<= 3 O
— o — '
3 X ■„
=5 5
§ d 2
Q0 C3 *5
T. «
3. ~ OJ
- .«
CJ -53
3
- ^ -^ *3
^03
oj a •»
tT _2 ^
03 "3 co
"^ .-. cy
" i5 e
"3 t. 3
— 2 ^
" S
3 3
•03 "
h 3
O 3
- OJ
^ 0J
o —
£ 03
0J O
_ o
33 -^
3 00
O i* 3
>> 03 -3
"S -I
B § o
5 ~ Z
IT
03
M t. 3
= a 5r
63 *C n
n = r
o o
- «
.. 03
3 •-
q ^2
0Q *3
03 o3
tJ OJ
S ft
C. 3
3 -
« s
03 O —
^.- >• _
>» OJ O
O
cn
ci
"2 i
03 CJ
— O
-3 pQ
!h * °3
03 .5 "o
S a
co
*> o
3 "3
03 ..
— u
O 8
2 S
» 5
OJ =
& ^
.2 03
00 OJ
1 °
^ to
.- cu
00 c
g ^:
o .§
00 -Z
I
s —
I °
OJ _k
3 "o3
.. J3
T3 0J
£ 3
00 3
CD
0J -
- ~ .3
•3 „ —
o3 ^
0 03
X OJ
■ — —
ao 03
•». *
-I
11
03 3
= -3
a 3
0J 03
m 03
- 3
O
O 53 <
il Q ««
^ 3
> 2 w --
o s a
e 2-
■^ — r
cj v^ «
• S' 0J • =
£ g £ T
Si -S -3 £
.f ■?
*C3 3
03 "1
I"
I a
Ph
3 i-S
3 = JS
S3 S U
■3 x
.- 3
x.2
3 k'
o o
» -
. C
c3 a>
-*^> ao
■" CJ
_, 3
« - c
2 03
3h
o -3
— 0J
A 33
a
o
fa
90
The University Science Bulletin
c
m
&
g
&•
A
o
o
o
K
s
o
w
§
p
w
fa
o
co
K
O
fa
fa
cc
fa
a
H
O
H
w
oo
Ol
w
^
m
1
a
a
'3
tn
PQ
-
3
o
IB
03
O
s
o
-a
C3
fa
OS
CO
« .2
M o3
03 S
ea
O
3
O
cj
o
e
a
6
§ — ^ as
- cq
d |
o s
3 «
j3 g
c <D
Mo
c co
d °
O 13
O CD
s a
+z i— i
a u.
CO .+3
£ .a
n. M
3 , co
1 * g
^ a> do
X! C3 CO
■— (-.
!"§
§§
a>
O, a)
_o s
CD —
s s
!l
3 ^
X oj
o3 CJ
fli ?3
M
03
3
O
•* 03
(3) X
03 £
~ o
03 ^
CD CD
M .S
C o3
c ■
I a
c g
t c
<3 o
03 J3
Oj o3
O O
03
C3
en
CO .w
■o gi
i Z g
-T* - 00
0J ■ -o
> 03 5
-73 ^ O
- s «
.5 c
03 w *"
bi CO **?
oj -w o
"3 ^ o =3
£ -2
— ft.
o j3
•^ * fe
E o
? «
CD
§.5
o ^
oo 3
c o
co <£
a; O
be +-
£ *
03 03
.« ft ^
ft OJ 'E
^ - —
-
Z ^ >, in
o3 o3
a
a) a>
00 ^ r-
©Cm
C 03 03
- * B
l- o —
ai o3
" s «
03 « 03
~ .S O
13 — O
C -^ C
- s s
>i CP
£ 5 ^
-
OQ
3 p
a>
(3
a
a>
^3
O
'^
M
oi
T3
=
C
i
~
•o
t-
03 N3
ft 'S
- cj
OJ to
03 ■
ft
o co
-S O >i
C m
03 S
-i- M
c o3
„ O
>
03
C 3
.S c
- 03
a «
03 s
— ' Xi
s3 ^.
03 *»
a -*
O 03
"c . £
O t,
£ E
1-5
1-5
O 03
03 £
a oj
O 13
ft • r
oj o
r— 13
+j a.
u —
S o
-t-- T3
CO
^ &
S i
O OJ
o> cc
ft J3
'/. o
° 0)
0) X
QQ
03
o
C 03 03 >
O T3 = '
CO -7- ^ 2
S «j _
S ft >> 2
S S « ^
03 £ >h o
>>^S oj
oo
C33
(N
~ 5
S «
a I
3 S
3
o
ft
03 oj
2 -^
c O
.- 03
ft »
OJ
k^ CD
^3 J3
3 3
m O
3 CO
co
03 "ri -
OJ -^ 03 OJ
crj 3 CO *h
° £
OJ *-"
co 13
_ a
V a
CD CD
H
.2 ~
'-a "S
o J?
-b "3
-*J 03
•t- 3
S o
§1-
-*^» IK
2 P
*5 M
o
o
PQ
3 OJ
O >
.;-, OJ
bi o
ft-C
_ E
■»/^
3 D
■l-t *^s
■3 g
oj -g
03
a
a
a
s o
03 3
X o
O 03
E 3
c
CD o
.2 03
CO b-
^H ft
3 «
3 CD
•" CD
a o
CO ^
CD
M .
cl K
hQ
d
>1
03
M
o
a
o
M
s
"§ 1
03 <1)
— .R
S s
oj 5
S £
3
o
CO
o3
ft
ft
3
3
CD
O
03
H
a
3
CO
O
03
£
M
O
W
■^1
P3
CM
"S ""
0J CD
3 Ml
CD CD
T3 3
'S '«
03 to
"3 2
M S
3 ca
2 s
£ 3
co <*>
O 3
cd 6q
o
ft
S
b. J3
03
13
C
§ i»
O
3
ft s
3 i:
• - 3
t-< oj
£^
■e °
l, o3
o »
OJ
oo
CM
ft &
O OJ
co -^
OJ -o
= °
-S 3
3 -
M <g
3 c
Ml *
!3 s
03 (D
3 H T3
0J » 3
? "^ 03
OJ o
ax g
03 "3 "^
CO g CD
03 ft £1
CO
O
Ph O
fa
fa
Q
Q
Taylor: The Genls Eumeces
91
CN
a
I
03
OJ
3
O
o o
r -'
° s
— I
be 3
JJ .Q
C3 E
"5 =3
:. —
_ 3
O ~
cj
CJ 3
a
o s
oo
oo
<u 3
« a
—
'5
X
CN
c
PS
— -r
—
-
a =
a —
o -
«-. 'J*
cS
CJ *w q;
■ - -
^< CN
TO rt
M CN
3 C
a |
— *-
- =0
-— • - -
> —
2 I*
CO JS
■s-g
M
oj
O
o
c
* K]
03 OJ
— u
- 0
= 5?
m
.2 -
cj oj
o —
ft a
^ *-^
^ ._
S o
2 ^
c o
_ -a
£ -S
s Bq
T3 C
- r
c ea
- 1.
2 -=
oo to
co ■fl'
k. bo
/.
o
ft <u
3
■ J2
B
OJ
- -
J >
"a '^
- u
•— -°
o ^
ca
Ed ~
2 «
— *
= s
o g
'■% s
o
.2 g -S s o ~ o>
•5 §
— *-•
■a J
3 t-
O O
*7 t£
C 3
x —
C '>
bo x
C 4) ^>
a "3 *
T* ^J >
= - 2
C e3 O
3 oj OS
O
- ..
G 4.
— ■ —
.- — -
- - >
3 ~ £
*<*
>, r
- —
3 oc
3 J
C 3
O ec
»"! S
si
^ 2
03 •«
OJ •-
3 s
a r3
3 ^2-
£6
i o
93 ~
S C
Z: 5
_ DO
3 _,
< =
M
u
3
c
03
>
03
s
O
s
03
s
<
■5 S C5
00
iJ £
3
-a P
Q « «
3
_ CO
03 w
"S u
c a
o -§
'E o
"3
U
o
■3
-a
3
-
3
•S&J
03
3
03
o
^3
3
- S
oj 5
c. S-
1-3
OQ
00
-^ t-.
•
—
03
03
o
a
B
OJ
—
CO
c
-
=
g1
-
o
*= X
a i-i
X
9 C —
O. oi 3 n -
3 t-n O ~ S
« <5 CJ HH 1-J
oo o
cj -i'
_ ,—i ^
t; 03 f3
U «i
J2 -
OS 00
N ^ g
- oj .i;
5 ft «
(* "3 «
OJ
3 td
CJ 1-H
OQ
c
a
OS
c
01
<n
O
ft
3
c3
^ =
EG r-4
C
o
ft
in
CN
E oj
ro 3
. o
SB
o s
oc [5
CN
g _ej
2 E
o
ft
o?
OQ C
_i -
" 00
O I— I
OQ
7.
OJ 0J
I, p-1
^ -a
3 3
tl 03
o3
ft
03
3
T3 -3
So
« 3
I g
2 oq . CC
OJ
03
— ft -='
OS ft o3 sa
2 ^ cj ^
03 1^ oo
C
I O
ftl
o
fe
fe
92
The University Science Bulletin
o
■-D
to
CM.
m
cn
CO
to
OS
(N.
o
z
o
O
<
5
s
p
w
fa
o
P-,
X
a
w
Eh
o
H
>H
w
3
61
J3
OX
B
o
J3
H
^n go
c3 "3
c a !
.2 —
'co QQ
C3 i-H
8 2
3£
3.2
S «
— a
o g
O as
O) CJ
■n a3
O !*
nw
s .
O rQ
CO
CO
ca --
"I*
03 C^
O
QQ
A o
3 >-
L. CJ
"~ OQ
•a • -
J 8
_o
X
73
X
X
03
a
a a
-
os
2 s
.5 m
03 —
M 2
T3
C 3
a
-
3 5
3 *~
- ^
S 3
:~^
03
is
03
a
o
■8 *
g *
2 g
03 «
-9 t-
S o
03
■3
oj J3
-
CO
o
12
is
O
S
3D
01
CC
.ft
03
o
u
—
l<
o
0J
•
00
03
N
OJ
to
CN
CO
N
IN
GQ
H
'cO
B
.5
-
a
03
E
03
co
OJ
QQ
OJ
2
—
s
"o3
"o3
-
c
IT
03
ej
02
«
0J
7
"ol
s
03
hi
1-3
1
02
>J
S
o
1-1
M
£
c
s
S
ox
e 3 h
— ^
o S
CJ 3
oj
-a "=■
OJ 2
oj gu
-» QQ
0
a
r3
03
. „
—
•0
0
a
o3
—
03
OJ
u
J3
*J
a
OJ
OJ
03
0
C
— -
53 "3
L- OJ
o3 »
"3 >>
6X 1;
C -o
.3 -c
I- >
03 £1
3 —
& 03
S 3"
« *
T3 ?
C u
o OJ
Oj o3
CO CJ
u VI
OJ
ft ~
ft
o
O
c
=
a
3
-3
3
X
OJ
Eh
C3 -OS O C
SI
o S
ft ^
OJ
-0
O 03
03
t»
s -2
o 3
v ^ 19
a J
3
0
3
J2
02
ft
'
03
t-t
OJ
si
>
0
0
ft
b<
ft
0
_oj
„
La
ja
OJ
CJ
>
3
O
O
■*a
j>>
O
■3
-t^>
03
0
u
"3
J3
GO
OJ
JO
OX
B
u
0)
GO
-0
.ft
OJ
a
ox
S £
~ o
GO oj
"^ s
-3 <"
3 B
03 t.
tj oj
I 3
02 OJ
02
W
o
o
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 93
TAXONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
SCHWARTZEI GROUP
This group may be characterized as follows: The division be-
tween auricular scales and the lateral neck scales prominent, di-
rected backwards; line separating neck and suprabrachial scales
is anterior to arm insertion; postgenial scales posterior to third
chinshield, bordering labials, not well differentiated; three pre-
suboculars, separated from postsuboculars ; upper eyelid reduced,
the superciliary and palpebral scales in contact; lower eyelid with
three rows of scales.
Terminal pair of lamellae tightly drawn about base of claw?; a
few small tubercular axillary scales; median preanal scales overlap
lateral preanals; scales preceding preanals more or less modified;
enlarged heel pads; no small tubercular scales behind insertion of
the hind leg. Scales in axillary region and behind the hind limb, on
>ides of tail, also on the posterior side of arm and hind limb and the
region behind ear. very strongly pitted with tiny elongate pits or
grooves on the extreme posterior edges of scales; pitting only dimly
visible elsewhere, save in postauricular region; four or five pairs
of nuchals, followed by several paired scales which in turn are fol-
lowed by greatly widened median plates on back. The third
supraocular is widely separated from the frontal, the frontopari-
etal touching second supraocular; ear lobules prominent, distinct,
rounded, all strongly in contact. Three anterior superciliaries
widened and elongate, diagonally placed. Broadened subcaudals
preceded by four paired scales. Regenerated tail has greatly
widened scales above as well as below, separated from each other
by five, two or one row of lateral scales, depending upon the point
where regeneration is begun.
Three species, all large (120mm. snout to vent), are considered
as belonging to this group, which is confined to the southern part
of Mexico and the northern part of Central America. I am con-
siderably in doubt about their closest relationship. They resemble
taeniolatus of India and western Asia, in the broadened median
series of dorsal x-ales and general plan of markings, but they differ
from it in numerous other characters of equal import, so that it is
not impossible that the two groups arrived at this character in-
dependently.
94 The University Science Bulletin
Key to the Species of the Schwartzei Group
PAGE
A. Limbs widely separated when adpressed. General color above light brownish with
eight dark, narrow dotted lines on back. Scales in 17 rows about body ; 67-69 scales
in a row from parietals to above anus Eumeces managuae Dunn, 104
AA. Limbs more elongate, touching or barely failing to meet when adpressed.
B. Color olive-bistre, lighter anteriorly; three broad, dark stripes, a median and two
lateral, beginning on rostral, continue on back and sides where they break up
into series of quadrangular spots; a light line on side of head. Scale rows 21.
Scales occiput to above anus, 62-33 Eumeces schwartzei Fischer, 94
BB. Light yellow brown, lacking broad stripes anteriorly; occipital and nuchal region
without markings: scales, with small dark dots, in 19 rows. Scales occiput to
above anus 59 Eumeces altamirani Duges, 102
Eumeces schwartzei Fischer
(Plate 1; Figs. 5, 6)
SYNONYMY
1884. Eumeces sclnvartzei Fischer. Abh. Nat. Ver. Hamburg, VIII, 1884, p. 3, p!. VII, fig. 1
(type description; type locality, Island in Laguna de Terminos, Bay of Campeche
[Mexico]); Giinther, Biol. Cent. Amer., 1885, Oct., p. 33 (spelled schwartzii; refer-
ence to type description); Boulenger, Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 382 (data
from type description; spelled schwartzii); Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc, XXII, Jan.
to Oct., 1885, p. 170 (key characters; spelled schwarzei) ; Cope, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus.
No. 32, 1887, p. 46; Boulenger, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1894, p. 725 (lists a speci-
men from the West Indies from Christiania Museum; spelled schwartzii); Shattuck,
the Peninsula of Yucatan, Carnegie, 1933, App. A, p. 575 (spelled schwartzii); Stuart,
Occ. Papers, Mus. Zool., Univ. Mich., No. 292, June 29, 1934, pp. 13, 14.
History. The type specimen from "einer kleinen Insel in der
Laguna de Terminos (Campeche Bai) " reached Hamburg, Germany,
apparently as a stowaway in a cargo of dyewood. When captured
it was sent to the Zoological Garden in Hamburg, and later, at its
death, to the Naturhistorische Museum. When described by Fisher
(1884), it was named in honor of E. W. E. Schwartze, an officer of
the Zoologische Gesellschaft in Hamburg.
The type description is a good one and is accompanied by a
figure in black and white showing scale characters and markings,
together with some smaller line figures. As regards scale propor-
tions and finer details these are inaccurate.
The species has remained a great rarity in collections. A single
specimen in the British Museum is labeled "West Indies," doubt-
lessly an incorrect locality. A single specimen is in the University
of Michigan collection (Nio. 68226, Chichen-Itza, Yucatan, Mex.),
three in the U.S.N.M. (Nos. 71380, 71409 and 71948), all from
Guatemala, and two in Harvard from Yucatan and Guatemala have
been available for study.
Duges' species Eumeces altamirani, described in 1891 from "las
regiones calidas del Estado de Michoacan," seems to be a close
relative of Eumeces schivartzei, while the recently described man-
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 95
aguae Dunn is more distantly related. Duges, at the time he
described his species, was unaware of the description of this species
by Fischer, as was Dunn unaware of the Duges species when he
described managuae. Duges figures are notoriously poor in detail,
and the true relationships are hard to determine. My examination
of the type of altamirani, while not wholly satisfactory, causes me
to retain it as a distinct species.
Diagnosis. Eumcccs schwartzei is a large species of the genus,
characterized by the presence of a postnasal, a single post mental,
two supraoculars touching the frontal, four or five pairs of very
broad nuchals, followed by about ten pairs of scales somewhat
narrower than the nuchals, which in turn are followed by a broad-
ened median series of scutes about five times as broad as deep.
A broad, median, dark stripe beginning on snout is lost on the back;
a broad lateral dark band from snout to hind leg; this is not of
solid color posteriorly, but breaks tip into rows of quadrangular
spots; beginning on the tip of the snout, a lighter line of ground
color follows the canthus, the supraocular region and along the side
of the back where it becomes widened and lost; toes and fingers
with four complete series of scales throughout their length.
Description of species. [Drawn from three specimens from the
United States National Museum: 71380 Chuntuqui, Peten, Guate-
mala; 71409 and 71948, Remate, Peten, Guatemala.] Rostral wider
than high, the part visible above relatively small, more or less
rounded behind, not forming a median angle; supranasals large,
forming a broad median suture, laterally in contact with the nasal
and postnasal, the posterior suture with the first loreal greater
than that with the frontonasal. Frontonasal large, longer than its
distance from the end of the snout, touching laterally the first
loreal and the prefrontal, narrowdy touching the frontal posteriorly ;
prefrontals more or less quadrangular, forming subequal suttires
with the two loreals, the first superciliary and the first supraocular,
narrowly separated from each other; frontal about once and three
fourths as long as broad, not forming sharp angles at either end,
touching laterally the two anterior supraoculars ; between the frontal
and supraoculars is a very distinct groove which continues back
onto the frontoparietals; frontoparietals small, forming a broad
median suture, touching laterally three supraoculars; interparietal
scarcely larger than a frontoparietal but usually more elongated
(enclosed by parietals in U.S.N.M. No. 71948 and separated very
narrowly in U.S.N.M. No. 71380) ; parietals diagonally placed, four-
96
The University Science Bulletin
sided, the ends of equal width, the inner side very much longer than
outer.
Nostril directly above the labio-rostral suture, pierced between
the two parts of the nasal scale; the posterior part narrow, form-
ing the very narrow rim and floor of the nostril, the anterior moiety
about one third the size of the postnasal; postnasal relatively large,
sometimes approaching the size of the combined area (including
nostril) of the two nasals, usually extending as high and its lowest
point inserted slightly between upper edges of the first two labials,
broadly in contact with the supranasal; anterior loreal very high,
6
Fig. 5. Eumeces schwartzei Fischer. Mich. U. No. 68226. Chichen-
Itza, Yucatan. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 17.6 mm.; width, 16 mm.
extending nearly half its height beyond the posterior loreal; the
latter is longer than high, the elevation anteriorly greater than
posteriorly; three well-defined subequal anterior suboculars follow
the second loreal; four supraoculars; eight superciliaries; four
posterior suboculars; four or five semitransparent enlarged scales
on lower eyelid, separated from subocular by three or four rows of
small scales ; upper palpebral series forming sutures its entire length
with the superciliaries; 9 upper and 11 lower palpebrals; preocular
small, lanceolate, separating the first presubocular from the first
superciliary, and followed by two small scales; eight upper labials,
the last very much the largest, the fifth smallest; eighth separated
from the ear lobules by three or four pairs of postlabials, the
anterior largest; primary temporal moderate, rectangular; upper
secondary narrow, elongate; lower secondary very large, triangular,
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 97
touching primary; tertiary temporal separated from upper secondary
by a scale, and from the ear lobules by two or three small post-
labials.
Mental followed by a single, unpaired postmental; six enlarged
lower labials, the first two touching the postmental; three pairs of
enlarged chinshields, the first pair in contact, the second pair sepa-
rated by a single scale, the third pair by three scales; no well-
defined postgenial, the scales following third chinshicld scarcely
distinguishable from body scales in two specimens; in a third there
is an elongate, narrow scale following, which reaches to near angle
of the mouth.
The number of scale rows varies on the neck just posterior to the
ear, from 33 to 36; shortly in front of the foreleg the count reaches
as low as 26; the count about abdomen is 21. The dorsal series
following the parietals consists of a series of four to five greatly
widened nuchals, six or seven times as wide as deep, the anterior
usually not as wide as but deeper than the succeeding scales; these
are followed by ten or eleven pairs of scales about four times as
wide as deep, which continue to a point on a level with the insertion
of limbs; from here the dorsal surface is covered by a single median
series of broadened scales four to five times as wide as deep, which
continue to a point as far back as the groin. Total count from
occiput to above anus is 60-63; scales on tail not differentiated save
on underside where they are distinctly widened, their posterior edges
strongly curved; the widened series separated from vent by five
paired scales; 11 scales about base of tail at beginning of widened
series; lateral body scales vertically elongate, larger than ventral
scales; rows of scales following the insertion of forearm small,
forming somewhat diagonal rows for a short distance, but on sides
they form series distinctly parallel to dorsal scales. Scales in the
postauricular region very small, the number around ear opening
21-23; three auricular lobules, directed back; the scale following
the eighth upper labial is somewhat enlarged, with a superimposed
scale, the two separated from ear by a second pair; 14 scales about
the arm near insertion and about 20 scales around hind limb just
above point of insertion; six scales bordering anal flap, the two
median only moderately enlarged and overlapping outer; no dif-
ferentiated lateral postanal scute at corners of vent in either sex;
a strongly defined, large, padlike wrist tubercle; the palm has about
13 enlarged scales with numerous intercalated smaller ones; the
lamellar formula of fingers: 6; 10; 12; 11; 9; the heel is bordered
7—1123
98 The University Science Bulletin
by five scales, the two median largest, the inner more than twice
as large as outer; these preceded by about 10 enlarged, rounded
scales intermingled with smaller ones; the lamellar formula of toes:
7; 11; 14; 16; 11; lamellae smooth; toes encased by four longitudinal
rows of scales, the terminal ones bound about claws. Scales elabo-
rately pitted, each lateral and dorsal scale with numerous elongated
pits near the posterior border.
Body rather heavy, elongate, with the limbs strong, well devel-
oped; the adpre^sed limbs of adults not or but scarcely meeting on
the sides of the body; the average width of the body contained
about five and one half times in snout to vent measurement. Head
moderately slender, not conspicuously widened in males, the eye
relatively small, its greatest diameter contained about two and one
half times in its distance from the tip of the snout.
Color and markings. Above, the general ground color is a varie-
gated olive-bistre, slightly clearer anteriorly and probably ap-
proaching cream in life; a broad, dark brown to blackish stripe,
pointed anteriorly, begins at the rostral, widens, and continues
back to the shoulder or farther, then narrowing, becomes broken
up into one or two series of disconnected quadrangular spots;
rostral light; two light lines have their origin here and continue
back along canthi, above eyes, and along the sides of the back
where they are lost in the general color of the back; after the
shoulder is past they develop regular black spots on alternate
scales. A dark lateral band begins at nostril, passes back involving
eye and upper part of labials, and the upper part of auricular
opening; it then passes along the side of the body, where it gradually
breaks into series of dark and lighter spots, forming five discon-
tinuous lines; a few lighter flecks appear anteriorly on the dark
band and lighter flecks are prominent on the sides; posterior dorsal
part of body and tail (unregenerated parts) marked more or less
regularly with quadrangular dark spots; chin, throat, belly, under-
side of tail and underside of limbs uniform greenish or dirty
cream; narrow longitudinal dark stripes on limbs; sides of neck
and lower labials with dark vermiculations; lower part of upper
labials immaculate, appearing as a white line.
Variation. The type has not been available for study. It is
obvious that the type is a much smaller, probably much younger,
specimen than those which I have examined. The most significant
difference in the type and the specimens studied is the very much
narrower head, it being less than half the length (possibly an error
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
99
Measurements of Eumeces schwartzei Fischer
Museum .
Number.
Sex
Snout to vent
Tail
Snout to foreleg. . .
Snout to ear
Snout to eye
Width of head
Length of head.
Width of body
Postanal tail width .
Axilla to groin.
Foreleg
Hind leg
Longest toe
llainb.
type
78
128
15
6
14
19
27
Mich.
68226
d1
112
127*
36
20
8
18
18
22
15
64
26.5
37
12.5
I S VM
71948
M.C.Z.
29238
113
127*
37
20
8.5
16.5
17
24
15
65
28
40
12
L13
35
19.5
9
15
IS
13
65
24
37
12.5
U.S.N.M.
7 1 409
9
118
78*
39
20
8
16
19
24
14
68
U.S.X.M.
71380
d"
120
133*
42
23
11
19
19
24
15
67
28
39
13
M.C.Z.
24504
?
120
35
20.2
9
16
18
16
68
27
39
13
* Regenerated partly.
Type, from Laguna de Terminos, Campeche; 68226, 29238, Chichen-Itza, Yucatan; 71948,
71409, 713S0, 25404, Peten, Guatemala.
in measurement). The limbs overlap when adpressed. That the
limbs overlap in the small, younger specimens is the normal ex-
pectancy in this genus, even though they are separated in the adults.
A specimen in the Michigan University Museum, No. 68226,
agrees in practically all essential scale characters. The regenerated
tail shows two stages of regeneration; the older proximal part has
the scales very irregular in size and shape, while the distal (more
recent) part, 50 mm. in length, has throughout the greater part of
its length only a single dorsal and a single ventral series, which meet
laterally. The first pair of chinshields is separated by a single
scale. The color agrees save that the shade varies; thus the areas
between the black stripes on the head are almost a dove gray, but
fade to the leaden gray of the back; the limbs are brownish gray,
the scales with darker spots forming lines, eight on forelimb,
eighteen on the posterior.
The following additional variation is noted in the six specimens
studied: two have the parietals very slightly separated, the others
have them in contact. The number of scales from occiput to above
vent are from 60 to 63, the first number occurring five times; the
upper labials are invariably eight. Nuchals and the scales between
the nuchals and the beginning of the large median series are: one,
100 The University Science Bulletin
4-5 nuchals, 12-11 smaller body scales; one, 4-5 nuchals, 10-10
smaller; one, 5-5 nuchals, 11-11 smaller; two, 5-5 nuchals, 12-12
smaller; one, 5-4 nuchals, 12-13 smaller scales. No variation was
noted in the supraoculars save that two were partly fused in one
specimen. The postmentals, loreals and labials preceding the sub-
ocular are constant. The frontonasal is broader than long in two
specimens, the length and width equal in four; the frontonasal
touches frontal in all specimens; two supraoculars are in contact
with the frontal in all specimens. All have three presuboculars,
and four or three postsuboculars. The limbs fail to touch in all,
by a distance of from 5 mm. to 10 mm.
The scale rows about the body show the following variation: On
neck behind ear, 32 to 39 ; on narrow part of neck, 26 to 29 ; behind
arm, 29 to 31; around the middle of the body, 19 to 21 (19 occurring
only in one Guatemalan specimen) ; 15 to 16 about base of the tail.
The scales surrounding the ear vary from 21 to 24, 21 in two speci-
mens, 22 or 23 in two, and 24 in two. The superciliaries are 8-8
save in one specimen, which has 10-8. Ear lobules are three or four.
The subdigital lamellae of fourth toe vary from 15 to 17, 16 being
the most frequent number.
The pitting on the posterior edge of the scales is very prominent
on posterior side of foreleg; on the side, above and behind the fore-
leg; on the posterior side of hind leg and on tail behind the hind
leg; also in the postauricular region. The pitting is but dimly evi-
dent on neck and sides of body. There is a faint suggestion of
striations on dorsal scales, the striae being located above the main
canals of the scales which are visible in some of the specimens.
The description of the coloration of the younger type specimen
given by Fischer states that the light lines beginning on the rostral
are yellow anteriorly, becoming more rose posteriorly, giving a rosy
tone to the last two thirds of the back. The broad, dark lateral
streak on the sides of the body is mixed with yellow and rosy light
spots. The markings agree in most details with those previously
given.
Remarks. The species apparently is most closely related to
altamirani. These forms, together with managuae, constitute a
clearly defined group whose relationships are with western Asiatic,
rather than with any other group on the American continent. (See
discussion under the Taeniolatus group.) Fischer (1884) compares
it with Mabuia brevirostris (Eumeces brevirostris) as the most
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
101
closely related species in the New World. However, the relation-
ship with this form is no closer than with any other known species
outside of its own group.
Little is known of its habits. Two labels, on National Museum
specimens, with notes by Harry Malleis, their collector, which state:
"caught in a trap" and caught "in hot sun" in trap, suggest diurnal
habits. Whether the species is ovoviviparous could not be de-
termined from the specimens examined. I presume that it is an
arboreal form.
73 '
J.
?5w 1
»r
•
J u
■ ■■'■ ^5^^'V
l
D * 1
i \
09
-
■ oliam/fan/
• sctnwar-tzei
<s<^
or
oo
9S-
,o
Fig. 6. Distribution of the species of the Schwartzei group in Mexico
and Central America
Distribution. The records available suggest that schwartzei is a
lowland forest form, occupying the lowland territory east and south
of the isthmus of Tehuantepec, to and including Guatemala.
Locality records.
Campeche: Island in the Laguna de Terminos. (Type locality) (Hamburg
1; type).
Ytjcatan: Chichen-Itza (M.C.Z. 1 Shattuck) (Mich. 1).
Guatemala: Remate, Peten (U.S.N. M. 2, H. Malleis Coll.); Chuntuqui,
Peten (TJ.S.N.M. 1, H. Malleis Coll.); Uaxactun, Peten (M.C.Z. 1).
102 The University Science Bulletin
Eumeces altamirani Duges
(Plate 2; Fig. 6)
SYNONYMY
1891. Eumeces altamirayii Duges. La Naturaleza, (2), I (18S7-1890), 1891, pp. 485,486, pi.
XXII (in color) with 6 figs, (type description; type locality, "regiones calidas del Es-
tado de Michoacan," Mexico; Altamirano Coll.); (Platypholis is suggested as a generic
name, but not used); and idem, (2), II, 1894, pp. 480 and 485 (Apatzingan) ; Boul-
enger, Zool. Record, 1893, pp. 1-38 (notes that Platypholis Duges is preoccupied by
Platypholis Boulenger, 1890).
History. This species was founded on a single specimen which
was discovered in the low part of Michoacan (regiones calidas) and
forwarded to Alfredo Duges by Dr. Fernando Altamirano, then
director of the Instituto Medico Nacional. Duges published a good
description in either the latter part of 1890 or the first part of 1891
(probably the latter), together with a hand-colored plate. This
figure is satisfactory for the general color markings and the body
contour. The details shown, however, are very untrustworthy.
In a later publication, Duges lists the form and gives Apatzingan
(Apatzingan de la Constitution, Michoacan) as a locality, pre-
sumably referring to this as the type locality, since no additional
specimen is mentioned. The author appears to have been unaware
of the description of Eumeces schwartzei by Fischer, published in
1884, and considers his species to be related to Eumeces hallowelli
Bocourt, and makes a comparison of the form with Eumeces Bo-
courti Boulenger.
I was able to make an examination of the type specimen, now in
the Alfredo Duges Museum, Guanajuato, Guanajuato, Mexico, and
concluded that it represents a species distinct from, but most closely
related to, Eumeces schwartzei. It is more distantly related to the
recently described Eumeces managuae Dunn.
Diagnosis. A member of the Schwartzei group. A large species
lacking typical dorsolateral or lateral light lines; likewise, lacking
a median line bifurcating on head. General color light yellow-
brown, with small blackish spots on the scales; no elongate black
stripe on head continuing to middle of the body. Three or four
nuchals, followed by 12-11 widened body scales, in turn followed
by 45 very broad, median scales, making a total of 59 from pari-
etals to above anus; median preanal scales very large, their edges
overlapping the small adjoining scales bordering the anus; heel
plates not greatly enlarged; parietals inclose the interparietal;
four supraoculars. Scales in 19 rows; one postmental; one post-
nasal; eight upper labials.
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces 103
Description of species* (from the type, an unnumbered specimen
in the Alfredo Duges Museum, Guanajuato, Mexico).
Rostra] moderate, triangular, wider than high; supranasals in
contact, forming a suture slightly more than half their length;
frontonasal large, broadly in contact with frontal, forming sutures
with the anterior loreals, which are smaller than those with supra-
nasals or the prefrontals; latter pentagonal, their sutures with the
frontal only slightly smaller than those with the frontonasal; sutures
with the two loreals nearly equal, as are those with the first super-
ciliaries and first supraoculars. Frontal angular anteriorly and
posteriorly, relatively narrow, touching two supraoculars; fronto-
parietals in ('(intact (their size cannot be determined because of a
wound; the same is likewise true of the interparietal); parietals
narrowly in contact behind the interparietal; latter followed by a
small scale narrowly separated from it by the union of the parietals,
and partially separating the first pair of nuchals; nuchals wide,
three on one side, four on other.
Nasal moderate, followed by a single postnasal; two loreals;
three presuboculars, four-five postsuboculars; primary temporal
forming a suture with the lower secondary, separating the eighth
labial from the large upper secondary temporal; tertiary temporal
present; eight upper labials; three superciliaries touching first
supraocular; last of the series large (regarded by Duges as a fifth
supraocular) ; postmental single, followed by three pairs of chin-
shields, the first two separated by a single scale. Ear opening oval,
with four lobules on the anterior border; lower eyelid with six en-
larged semitransparent plates.
Scales in 19 rows about the middle of the body, the nuchals
followed by 12-11 widened body scales which are followed by 45
large, transversely widened scales, making a total of 59 scales in a
row from parietals to above anus; median preanal scales greatly
enlarged, the outer smaller, the inner scales overlapping the outer
scales; plates bordering heel not so large as in schwartzei; lamellar
formula for fingers: 6; 10; 12; 13; 9; adpressed limbs widely sepa-
rated. Character of scale pits not discernible.
Color (in alcohol). General color light yellow-brown, with a few
scattered black dots on the head; the occipital and nuchal region
lighter than rest of body, and without marking; the median dorsal
scales are of a darker shade than those of neck, each scale with one
* In my examination of the type I was not permitted to remove the specimen from its
container; as a result much of the detail must necessarily be omitted.
104 The University Science Bulletin
or more small, blackish dots, placed more or less irregularly, not
forming lines; along the sutures of the median series an unspotted
line extends to the tail, outlined by a row of brown dots along the
middle of the first lateral scale row, one dot on each scale; a second
unspotted line follows the first and second scale rows with a broad,
brown band, darkest on neck, and is flecked and reticulated with
lighter color; on the sides of the head, it is represented by a series
of heavy brown dots or spots on the edge of the labials; the fifth
scale row has a series of dark dots from axilla to groin; unregener-
ated part of the tail with brown dots on each scale; on the re-
generated part these are scattered ; apparently unspotted below.
Measurements* of Eurneces altamirani Duges
Head length 15 Body width 17
Head width 14 Tail (reg.) 99
Body length 68
Remarks. As I was unable to make a complete examination of
the type, much detail is lacking in the description. It differs from
both schivartzei and managuae by the very different color patern,
but is undoubtedly more closely related to schivartzei.
Distribution and locality records. Only the type locality, Apat-
zingan, Michoacan, Mexico, is known. (See Fig. 6 for distributional
map.)
Eurneces managuae Dunn
(Plate 3 ; Figs. 6, 7, 8)
SYNONYMY
1887. Eurneces taeniolatus (Non Blyth) Boulenger. Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 383
("India;" Brief description).
1933. Eurneces rnanaguae Dunn. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., 46, 1933, pp. 67, 68. (Type de-
scription. Type locality Managua, Nicaragua.)
History. This striking species, since the publication of the third
volume of Boulenger's catalogue, has been masquerading under the
name of an Indian species, Eurneces taeniolatus. In this work a
short description of a specimen is given, but no locality data other
than "India," and no collector's name is given.
Owing to my discovery that Eurylepis taeniolatus Blyth and
Plestiodon scutatus Theobald were founded on the same types, it
was apparent that Boulenger's specimen belonged to an unnamed
species. In 1932 Mr. H. W. Parker, of the British Museum, kindly
furnished me with photographs of this specimen, which were clear
enough to permit a detailed study of the scales as well as the color
* From Duges.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 105
markings. It was obvious after an examination of the photographs,
that the relationship was with Eumeces altamirani and Eumeces
schwartzei, rather than with an Indian species, and that the species
was an undescribed form, probably from Central or South America.
Apparently no further specimens reached any museum until
1932, when a specimen was discovered in the aviation field at
Managua, Nicaragua, by James H. Ivy, and forwarded to the
United States National Museum through Dr. S. S. Cook. It was
described by Dr. E. R. Dunn, Mar. 21, 1933. The type is now
U.S.N.M. No. 89474.
Dunn called attention to the fact that, "In some ways each of
the American Species [i. e., Eumeces schwartzei and E. managuae]
is more like one of the Indian species than it is like its American
relative." It is presumed that he meant that managuae was more
like taeniolatus Boulenger than it was like schwartzei; but he did
not consider the possibility that they were identical. Dunn gives
a key to a part of this group of Eumeces, based upon the number
of nuchals, placing the two American species (he does not consider
Eumeces altamirani Duges) in a group having 14-17 pairs of
nuchals; the two presumed Indian forms in the group having 4-5
nuchals. As a matter of fact both the Indian and American species
have practically the same number of nuchals. Dunn has mistaken
the widened body scales following the nuchals for true nuchals, and
these are present in Eumeces taeniolatus Blyth, averaging about 12
in number, which by Dunn's interpretation would give 16 nuchals,
and consequently would not differ in this character from the Ameri-
can forms.
Diagnosis. A large species, a member of the Schwartzei group,
characterized by a median series of greatly expanded scutes, ex-
tending from the shoulders to a point near the base of the tail;
inner preanal scutes overlapping the outer; nostril pierced in a very
small nasal directly above the suture of the rostral and first labial;
upper palpebral series all in contact with the superciliaries; four
pairs of expanded nuchals; two tertiary temporals, not strongly
differentiated; one postmental; a postnasal; three presuboculars;
two pairs of postlabials; large auricular lobules; terminal lamellae
of toes bound tightly about base of claws ; two greatly enlarged heel
plates; subcaudals transversely widened; no differentiated lateral
postanal scute; adpressed limbs widely separated; brown, dark
lined, above.
Description of type. (U.S.N.M. No. 89474.) A large species.
106
The University Science Bulletin
The rostral broad, relatively low, the part visible above forming a
very obtuse angle, and much less in area than the frontonasal;
supranasals large, transversely placed, forming a median suture;
frontonasal much larger than the prefrontals, rounded anteriorly,
laterally in contact with the anterior loreals; prefrontals generally
pentagonal, forming sutures with the frontonasal, frontal, second
loreal, first supraocular, first loreal, and first superciliary, the
sutures varying in length from larger to smaller in the order named;
frontal somewhat rounded anteriorly, with a small pointed tip
posteriorly, which touches the interparietal; frontoparietals much
Fig. 7. Eumeces managuae Dunn. U.S.N.M. No. 89474; Managua,
Nicaragua. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 15 mm.; width, 13 mm.
smaller than the prefrontals (one abnormally fails to touch the
second supraocular, allowing the third supraocular to contact the
frontal) ; interparietal narrowing to a blunt point behind, in con-
tact with nuchals ; parietals about three fifths as wide as long.
Four supraoculars normally (the fourth divided, forming five
on the right side) ; four pairs of broad nuchal scales (the left
anterior small), followed by several widened body scales; nasal
small, merely a rim about the nostril, save for a minute triangular
moiety at the upper anterior corner; nostril very large, pierced in
the nasal directly above the suture of rostral and first labial; nasal
probably not divided, although there is a trace of a groove from
nostril to the supranasal and perhaps another to the rostral (cer-
tainly not to the first labial as is true of most American Eumeces) .
Taylor: The Genl'S Eumeces 107
Postnasal nearly as large as nasal; anterior loreal large, much
wider at top than bottom, much higher than second Loreal; second
loreal a little longer than high; three well-defined presuboculars
(a character shared only with Eumeces of the Schwartzei group) ;
nine-eight superciliaries, the anterior narrow, elongate, as is the
last, and of about same size; a minute preocular, narrowly in con-
tact with the loreal, with two small scales above and behind it; two
very small postoculars; four postsuboculars, the upper large, of
same size as the last superciliary; primary temporal rectangular,
broadly in contact with the large fan-shaped lower secondary; upper
secondary rather angular, bordered posteriorly by the nuchal but in
contact with the upper and larger of the two tertiary temporals.*
Of the anterior pair of postlabials the lower scale is largest;
these followed by a second pair of which the upper is largest; eight
upper labials, five preceding the subocular (nine on right side, where
the third appears to be segmented); six lower labials; mental with
a labial border slightly greater than the rostral; postmental rela-
tively small, narrow; three pairs of chinshields, only the anterior
pair in contact; first postgenial small, bordered internally by a
larger and longer scale; upper palpebral scales small, directly touch-
ing superciliaries throughout the greater part of the series. Lower
palpebrals small, with a series of six or seven enlarged semi-
transparent scales separated from the subocular by two rows of
granules. Line separating the postauricular series from the lateral
nuchals forms a strong diagonal. Ear opening large, with three
(or two) lobules; about 23 scales around ear.
Scales from parietals to above the anus, 69, arranged as follows:
four pairs of nuchals, followed by thirteen pairs of widened body
scales, which are in turn followed by fifty-two much widened
median scales five or six times as wide as long; scales around
anterior nuchal region, 30; about constricted portion of neck, 23;
about axillary region, 25; about middle of body, 17 rows; 13 about
base of tail; lateral and ventral scales much widened; subcaudals
greatly widened, five or six times as wide as long; no well-defined
area of granular scales back of insertion of the forelimb (usually not
more than two short rows) ; a few granules behind insertion of hind
limb; the intercalated scale series of the axillae disappear before a
distance equal to forearm to elbow is reached.
Twelve scales about insertion of forearm; palm with an outer
* These scales, while not occupying the same position with regard to the upper secondary
temporal, appear to be the tertiary scale divided in two. This condition obtains in certain
Asiatic and African forms.
108
The University Science Bulletin
wrist tubercle moderately well defined, with four or five smaller
posterior tubercles, and three large padlike anterior scales sur-
rounded by smaller granules; fingers with four rows of scales to
tip, the formula for the ventral lamellae being: 7; 10; 11; 11; 9.
The terminal upper scale is very small and is, with the terminal
lower lamella, tightly bound about the base of the claw, allowing
apparently but little movement of the claw; seventeen scales about
insertion of hind limb; two greatly enlarged triangular scales on
heel and a single enlarged scale on the sole surrounded by smaller,
granular, slightly imbricating scales; lamellar formula for toes: 6;
9; 13; 14; 9. Toes with four scale series, the terminal ones same as
on fingers.
Color and markings. Above generally a sepia or bistre, the
ground color of sides lighter; the head dark, due to numerous angu-
lar dark areas. Two dark, more or less continuous lines begin on
parietals and continue along the middle of the back, but become
obsolete on the base of tail. A second, somewhat less distinct, dark
line begins on the second scale row while similar dark lines follow
the third and fourth rows to tail, that on the fourth row being best
defined; fifth, sixth, and seventh rows with less-distinct dotted
lines; limbs with dotted lines; scales of tail above, each with a
darker area, not forming lines. The ventral surface of head, body,
and limbs cream white; subcaudal scales strongly dotted with dark
gray or blackish ; upper and lower labials light, each with a strongly
defined dark spot.
Measurements of Eumeces
managuae Dunn
Museum
U.S.N.M.
89474
&
British Mus
Number
53,8, 17,6
Sex
d<
Snout to vent
117
7.8
17.4
33
65
20
26
15
13
15
10
116
Snout to eye
7.2
Snout to ear
17
Snout to foreleg
32 5
Axilla to groin
66
Foreleg
19 7
Hind leg
26 7
Width of body
15
Width of head
14 5
Length of head
14 4
Postanal width
Tail
10.2
168*
Tip regenerated and extreme tip missing.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 109
Variation. The specimen from the British Museum, described
by Boulenger as Eumeces taeniolatus (No. 53, 8, 17, 6) differs for
the most part in only minor details. The supraoculars are 4-4.
(Boulenger has mistaken the last large superciliary for a fifth
supraocular); superciliaries 8-8; upper labials 7-7; the number of
scales around the neck, body, and tail are identical with the type.
Two points of difference may be noted, both of which are within
the expected range of variation. One is, that the interparietal is
inclosed by the parietals, a character which, if found constant, might
warrant giving the specimen a different designation. (This char-
Fig. 8. Eumeces managuae Dunn. British Mus. No. 53, 8, 17, 6. A, lat-
eral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length, 14.4 mm.;
width, 14.5 mm.
acter, while usually constant in Eumeces, is variable also in Eumeces
schwartzei.) The other character is the presence of only five paired
scales following the nuchals instead of thirteen pairs as occurs in
the type. However, there is only a difference of two scales in the
total number from parietals to above anus.
That the total number of broadened dorsal scales varies and
likewise the number of the paired scales between the nuchals and
the broadened scales is shown by the variation in both Eumeces
taeniolatus Blyth and Eumeces schwartzei. In the former the
paired scales are known to vary from 12 to 16 (four specimens) ; in
the latter from 10 to 13 (six specimens) . Larger series will probably
show a much greater variation.
Save for the fact that the color markings of the British Museum
specimen have faded, they are identical with those of the type.
110 The University Science Bulletin
An examination of the table of measurements shows that the two
specimens are almost exactly the same size, differing scarcely more
than one millimeter in any measurement.
Remarks. That so large a species should exist in Central America
and remain unknown save for the two mentioned specimens suggests
that the species may even be eventually discovered in northern
South America. Nothing is known of its habits.
Distribution and locality records. Only the type locality is
known. (See Fig. 6 for distributional map.)
TAENIOLATUS GROUP
Only a single Asiatic species, tacniolatus, is here included. It is
characterized by four or five pairs of nuchals, followed first by
paired scales, then directly by a much widened median series of
scales. A large postnasal present; two (rarely one) postmentals;
frontal in contact with the interparietal, which is not inclosed by
parietals. Limbs small, widely separated when adpressed; heel
plates not much enlarged; upper palpebral scales not in contact
with superciliaries; terminal lamellae of toes not bound tightly
about base of claws. Inner preanal scales overlap outer; three
supraoculars touch frontal; two presuboculars; last labial separated
from ear by about four pairs of postlabials. Twenty-one scale rows.
As remarked under the Schwartzei group, I regard the fusion of
the median scale series (incomplete in Schwartzei group) as a
character possibly independently arrived at in the two groups.
The form has no close relatives, but it probably has more specialized
characters in common with the Schneiderii group than with any of
the others.
It is quite probable that in the material here considered there is
more than one species. The specimens in European museums
should be segregated and reviewed. (Note comments of Parker
under variation.) The specimen here described differs considerably
from the characters shown in a photograph of the type, but to what
extent this is due to the eighty years of preservation of the type I
cannot say.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 111
En an a s tin niolatus (Blyth i
I' ites i. :> : Figs. 9, 10)
SYNONYMY
1854. Eurylepis taeniolatus Blyth. Journ. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, XXIII, 1S54, pp. 739-740
(type locality, Salt Range, Punjab, India. Theobald Coll.).
1S66. Plestiodon scutatus 1 Id. Extra Number Journ. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, No. CXLVI,
1866, pp. 25-26 (type description; no record of habitat or donor; 2 specimens).
1870. Plestiodon (.Eumeces) scutatus Jerdon. Proi \ t. Soc. Bengal, 1870, p. 73 (Alpine
Punjab on route from Jhelum inu> Kashmir).
1871. Mabouia taeniolata Anderson (part.). Proc. Asiat. Soc. Bengal. 1871, p. 184 (a). pat-
ently this description is drawn from one of the types of taeniolatus).
1872. Eumect >latus Stoliczka. Proc. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, XLI, 1872, pp. 75-76 (Urira,
Northwestern Each); idem, p. 88; Blanford, Journ. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, XLIV (n. s),
pt. II, No. 3, 1875, p. 191; Theobald. Desc. Cat. Rept. British India, 1876, p. 65,
and addenda, p. X, and synopsis, p. X; Murray, Yert. Zool. Sind, London-Bombay,
1884, p. 356 (Sind): Blanford, 2d Yarkand Mission, Rept., p. 19 (Chakoti on road
from Man to Srinagar in Kashmir); Annandale, Journ. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 1905 (New
Series), I. No. 5, pp. 148-150 (Salt Range); Hora, Rec. Indian Mus., XXV, 1923, pp.
369-376 (only types mentioned).
1887. Eumeces scutatus Boulenger. Cat. I.iz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 382 (Sind, Punjab,
Kashmir); Fauna British India. Rept., 1S90, pp. 21S-219 (Cutch); Proc. Zool. Soc.
London. Dec. 1S91, p. 628 (Puli Hatun [Pul-i-Khatun], Transcaspia) ; Nikolsky, Mem.
Acad. Imp. Sci. St. Petersburg, XVII, No. 1, 1905, pp. 184-185; Mikhailovski,
(Yearb. Zool. Mus. Imp. Acad. Sci. St. Petersburg, Russian Text), IX, 1904, p. 41
(Durun, near Askhabad and Bakharder) ; Annandale, Journ. Asiat. Soc. Bengal (new
series), I, No. 5, 1905, pp. 148, 150 (Sind, Karachi Mus.; Rajputana [Bellety Coll.],
X. Kashmir, Chitral [Daly Coll.], Afghanistan [Green Coll.]): Deriugin (Proc. St.
Petersburg Naturalists Soc, Russian Text), XXXVI, pt. 1 and 3, Authors separate
(Andera, near Sumbar, Transcaspia) ; Nikolsky (Fauna Russia and Neighboring Coun-
tries, Russian Text), 1915, I, p. 508 (Reports specimens obtained by Vasiliev, 1904,
Arvaz Pass at Korpet-dag) ; Ingoldsby and Proctor, Journ. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc,
XXIX, Apr. 20, 1923, p. 126 (Kaur Bridge, Ladha, Wana, in Waziristan, N. W.
Frontier Province).
History. The two first specimens of this species were, so far as
is known, collected in the Salt range in Punjab, by William Theo-
bald, who was, at that time, a member of the Geological Survey of
India. In 1854 Blyth, curator of the Zoological Department of the
Museum of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, described the same two
specimens under the name of Eurylepis taeniolatus, at the same
time making them the type of a new genus. The descriptions leave
much to be desired. The characters of the head scales are said to
be as in Anolis pave and Scincus pavimentatus Geoffroy-St. Hillaire,
in Savigny, Desc. Egypt. It is apparent that a very hasty examina-
tion of the details of the animals was made, for later authors have
pointed out errors in the description. In 1866 (1868) Theobald, in
preparing a catalogue of the reptiles in the Museum of the Asiatic
Society of Bengal, describes Plestiodon scutatus as a new species,
from two adult specimens without data regarding locality or col-
lector. It seems apparent that these two are really the types of
Blyth's Eurylepis taeniolatus, since the catalogue apparently takes
112 The University Science Bulletin
no cognizance of other specimens, or of the species taeniolatus.
Fortunately the description is clear and the more essential char-
acters are recorded. The measurement of the total length is some-
what different (9.75 as to 9 inches; tail length, 5.75 as to 5^ inches).
The second of the two specimens may have been measured. In
1870 T. C. Jerdon obtained and reported a specimen, which was
identified as scutatns, from the Alpine Punjab on the route from
Jhelum into Kashmir. This specimen was apparently sold to the
British Museum and is now No. 70, 11, 29, 9 in that institution.
Anderson (1871), while discussing the genus Eurylepis, gives a
careful and a somewhat more extended description of the types of
Eurylepis taeniolatus Blyth. He states: "Both Blyth and Theo-
bald have fallen into some inaccuracies regarding certain of their
characters. The former says that the nostril is pierced in a small,
separate, nasal shield, an error repeated by Theobald. Mr. Blyth
also states that the lower eyelid has a translucent disk, but Mr.
Theobald more accurately describes it as scaley with a transverse
row of large plates. He, however, says the body is surrounded by
23 rows of scales, while the two specimens exhibit only 21 in the
middle of the body, and Blyth limited them to 19."
It is self-evident that Anderson regarded the types of both species
to have been founded on the same specimens, and places scutatus
Theobald as an absolute synonym of taeniolatus Blyth.
Stoliczka (1872) reports specimens from Kachh. Theobald (1876),
in his Descriptive Catalogue of the Reptiles of British India, rec-
ognizes only one species, Eumeces taeniolatus, and places his
species scutatus as a synonym and gives as measurements: length
of body, 3.75; tail, 5.25; totaling 9 inches — the total length given
by Blyth and perhaps an admission of his own error in the original
description.
W. J. Blanford (1875, and 2d Yarkand Mission Rept.), reports
on a specimen, collected on the road from Mari to Srinagar in
Kashmir, which, if indeed of this species, is one of truly enormous
size (18 inches in total length, of which the tail [probably re-
generated] is only 6 inches).
Boulenger (1887) again rescues scutatus from synonymy, de-
scribing the species from T. C. Jerdon's specimen and a half-grown
specimen collected by Theobald, which was then in the British
Museum; and from another specimen lacking all data, he describes
a form as Eumeces taeniolatus. From these two descriptions it
was obvious that two species were involved, a fact that was borne
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 113
out by photographs of the two forms furnished me by Mr. H. W.
Parker of the British Museum. With the publication of the de-
scription of Eumeces managuae by Dunn (1933), it became evident
that Boulenger's specimen was of this species and must have origi-
nated in Central America rather than India. It agrees in practi-
cally all essential details with managuae.
Due to the courtesy of Mr. H. W. Parker, I have been enabled
to examine the type, and unhesitatingly place Eumeces taeniolatus
Boulenger (non Blyth) as a synonym of Eumeces managuae Dunn.
i Note discussion of this specimen under managuae.)
Diagnosis. A large species having a generalized pattern of three
wide, brown stripes on the body, a median and two lateral, which
tend to become obscured with age and replaced by irregular series
of darker angular spots. Characterized by four or five pairs of
nuchals, followed by a series of paired scales, which in turn are
followed by a median series of broad scales five times as broad as
long, extending to near point of insertion of hind limbs; a large
postnasal; two loreals; two (rarely one) postmentals; four supra-
oculars, followed by a much enlarged posterior superciliary appear-
ing much like a fifth supraocular. Frontal in contact with inter-
parietal, which is not inclosed by the parietals; snout narrow, com-
pressed, the portion of the rostral visible above very large, nearly
equal in area to the frontonasal. Limbs small, widely separated
when adpressed; plates bordering heel subequal, not greatly en-
larged; superciliaries separated from upper palpebral scales; inner
preanal scales overlapping outer.
Description of species. (From Field Museum, No. 1868, "Puli
Hatun," Transcaspia.) Head small, narrowed anteriorly; body
elongate, moderately slender. Portion of rostral appearing above
more than two thirds the size of the frontonasal, more or less
pointed behind, narrowly separating the nasals, the anterior por-
tions of which are broadly visible above; supranasals smaller than
nasals, nearly transversely placed, forming a median suture, touch-
ing postnasals, and narrowly (on one side) the first loreal; fronto-
nasal broader than long, broadly in contact with the first loreal (on
one side also with the postnasal) ; prefrontals relatively large,
broadly in contact mesially, forming a much longer suture with the
first than with the second loreal; the suture with superciliary larger
than that with the first supraocular; frontal truncate anteriorly,
forming a very obtuse angle, constricted medially, posterior width
equal to anterior and with a slight rounded projection on its
8—1123
114
The University Science Bulletin
posterior edge in contact with the interparietal; frontal touching
three supraoculars; frontoparietals smaller than prefrontals, sepa-
rated narrowly; parietals truncate behind, in general the shape of
a parallelogram, not inclosing the interparietal, separated or only-
minutely in contact with the fourth supraocular, being separated by
the very large posterior superciliary which appears like a fifth
supraocular; interparietal of moderate size, and of typical shape;
four pairs of broad nuchals; nasal large, higher than wide, the
nostril pierced anterior to the rostrolabial suture, distinctly divided
by grooves, the anterior part very much the larger; postnasal
large (loreal, according to Boulenger [1887]), equally in contact
Fig. 9. Eumeces taeniolatus (Blyth). E.H.T. Collection, No. 4888;
Puli Hatun, Transcaspia. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head.
Actual head length, 13 mm.; width, 11mm.
with the first two labials, much higher than posterior part of nasal ;
first loreal nearly as large as second, higher than second, nearly as
long as high, touching second and third labials; second loreal only
minutely longer than high ; two presuboculars, the anterior touching
two labials ; four very unequal postsuboculars ; one small preocular ;
two small postoculars; eight superciliaries, last as large as first;
upper palpebral scales separated from superciliaries by a complete
series of scales on upper eyelids; three enlarged plates on lower
eyelid, separated from the subocular by three irregular rows of
tubercles; primary temporal of moderate size; upper secondary
temporal large, widened posteriorly ; lower secondary somewhat fan-
shaped, very narrowly in contact with primary; tertiary temporal
elongated, forming a suture with upper secondary, separated from
ear by three scales.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 115
Eight upper labials, the eighth somewhat larger than seventh;
five labials preceding the subocular, the suture of first with the
rostral about two thirds the height of the scale; last labial separated
from the ear by four pairs of post labial scales, covering a distance
much greater than the length of last labial, the upper scales of the
first two pairs much the largest of the series, the others decreasing
in size; extent of the mental on the labial border distinctly greater
than that of rostral; two postmentals, the first much shorter than
mental; first pair of chinshields shortest and smallest, in contact;
second pair largest; third pair much narrower than second, their
posterior edge rounded; these followed by a pair of elongated post-
genial scales, not strongly differentiated from other scales following
chinshields, each bordered on its inner edge by a scale similar in
shape and size.
Ear opening relatively small, with three auricular lobules, upper
much the largest; about 22 scales surround the ear; line separating
the postauricular scales and lateral neck scales, distinct, vertical;
line separating the lateral neck scales from the suprabrachials
arises above anterior point of insertion of arm; about 81 scales
from parietals to above anus: these consist of four pairs of nuchals
followed by twelve paired widened scales, these followed by 57
single median scales, a little more than five times as broad as long;
then follows eight paired scales; 32 rows of scales around neck be-
hind ear; 27 about narrow part of neck; 29 in axillary region; 21
about middle of body; twelve about base of tail; lateral rows
parallel, the scales on sides smallest; six preanal scales, the median
pair very large, almost as long as wide ; the median preanals overlap
the outer scales; the posterior line of the preanal scale not or but
slightly differentiated; small series of scales on posterior anal
border missing; a series of broad subcaudal scales; regenerated tail
with a broad dorsal series.
Limbs relatively small; about fifteen scales about insertion of
arm, with two rows of minute granules in axilla; 21 about insertion
of hind leg, with one or two rows of minute granules behind inser-
tion. Palm with a scattered series of large, flat tubercles, inter-
spered with smaller tubercles; outer wrist tubercle not strongly
differentiated; lamellar formula of fingers: 6; 8; 12; 13; 7. Fourth
toe only slightly longer than third; six subequal scales forming a
continuous series on heel; sole with numerous larger, scattered,
tuberculate scales; lamellar formula of toes: 6; 9; 14; 15; 11;
claws long, the upper terminal lamella hood-like, not tightly bound
116
The University Science Bulletin
about base of claw; toes surrounded by only dorsal and ventral
series save on outer side of the proximal joint.
Color. Above generally putty gray to gray-brown, the median
dorsal area bearing a browner stripe extending to tail, but growing
indistinct posteriorly, bearing quadrangular brown spots more or
less irregularly distributed and not forming rows ; spots more numer-
ous anteriorly; first lateral scale row with a regular series of brown
clots on alternate scales; on sides another brownish stripe covering
part of the second, third, and fourth rows; scales of the second,
third, and fourth rows with brown spots usually appearing on every
other scale, frequently forming vertical series; a few small, whitish
flecks on lateral scales alternating with the vertical series of brown
dots; head colored like body with a few brown flecks along margins
of scales; upper labials generally light, slightly edged with brown-
ish; the temporal scales with definite brown spots; entire ventral
surface immaculate cream, the color extending up to fourth scale
row but becoming slightly tinged with bluish gray; however, the
fifth row has an irregular series of brown spots; regenerated tail
fawn-colored with very small irregular brown spots.
Measurements of Eumeces taeniolatus (Blyth)
Museum .
Number*.
Snout to vent. . .
Tail
Total length
Snout to foreleg .
Snout to ear . . . .
Snout to eye . . . .
Aidlla to groin . .
Width of body . .
Width of head...
Length of head. .
Foreleg
Hind leg
Longest toe
Field
186S
105
24
16
6
69
14
11
13
20
24
9
E.H.T.
4888
98.2
154
252.2
25.2
15
5.8
63
14
10.4
12.2
19
22.5
8.2
M.C.Z.
4370
132
33
16
5.5
86
14
15
22
33
9
M.C.Z.
4493
117
178
295
28.5
14
5
76
13
15.2
23
30
M.C.Z.
7192
104
67
24
7
* Nos. 1868 and 4888, Puli Hatun, Transcaspia; 4370 and 4493, Amballa, India; 7192,
Karachi, India.
Variation. Only a very limited number of specimens have been
available for study. It is apparent that a greater amount of varia-
tion may be present than is shown in these five specimens, and
in published data.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 117
The number of scale rows is 21 normally; a single specimen
(Amballa, Ind.) has 19. Blyth's statement of 19 scales in the type
is contradicted (see History). All the other specimens have 21.
Scale rows behind car about neck, 32-33; about constricted part of
neck. 27-29; about axilla, 29-30; about base of tail, 13-15. Three
specimens have the upper labials, eight-eight; one, seven-seven
(Amballa). Scales about ear vary 20-21; there are four pairs of
nuchals in all; the number of pairs of divided median scales vary
from 12-12 (Puli-Hatun) to 15-16 (Karachi). All show only four
supraoculars, but the last superciliary is enlarged and might be
mistaken for a fifth; postmental divided; postnasal large in all.
Boulenger interprets this scale as a loreal scale making three loreals ;
its position and relationship to adjoining scales makes it imperative
to recognize this scale as the postnasal enlarged. The last labial
(seventh or eighth) is largest; the nasal is of moderate size; the
relation of the nostril to the suture is the same in all; the fronto-
nasal and frontal are separated in all. The frontonasal touches the
postnasal as well as the first loreal; three supraoculars touch the
frontal, and the frontal is invariably in contact with the inter-
parietal; two presuboculars, normally; one in the Karachi specimen.
The postsuboculars are 4-4 or 5-5, the anterior (inferior) ones small,
not well differentiated; ear lobules 3-3 or 3-4; these are usually
somewhat wrinkled or puckered; the formula of the postlabial series
in front of ear usually 1; 1; Vi; Vi; Vi; in one specimen it is H; Vi;
1; 1. The total number of scales from parietals to above anus, 78 to
83, the lowest number being in the specimen from Amballa, India,
the highest, the one from Karachi. The character of the heel and
palm scales is similar in all. In all, the tertiary temporal is divided,
or, two are present, the lower not touching the upper secondary
temporal. The adpressed limbs are separated, in all, by six or seven'
scale lengths. In all, the upper palpebral scales are separated from
superciliaries by a row of granules; and the inner preanal scales
overlap the outer smaller ones; Annandale (1905) points out that
one of the types has two, the other, one, postmental.
The color is generally the same. The stripes apparently are more
definite in younger specimens. The whitish dots on the side vary
in distinctness; the annulation of the tail is more marked in Trans-
caspian specimens.
The very large specimen mentioned by Blanford gives a maxi-
mum snout to vent measurement of approximately 175 mm.
118
The University Science Bulletin
Concerning a British Museum specimen from El Kubar, S. W.
Arabia, Mr. H. W. Parker writes:
"The El Kubar specimen might conceivably be racially distinct, but on the
basis of a single specimen it would, I think, be very unwise to describe it.
The color pattern is more intense than in other specimens, so that the lateral
and middorsal dark bands, instead of being composed of spots, are solid from
the forelimbs forward and the middorsal extends forward over the head to the
rostral; the lower surface of the tail is beset with brown spots like its upper
surface."
Distribution. The present known distribution is western Asia
from S. W. Arabia to Yarkand, including Transcaspia, Persia,
Afghanistan, Baluchistan and northwestern India. It is not known
from Asia Minor or Trans-Caucasia.
Fig. 10. Distribution in Asia of Eumeces tacniolatus (Blyth)O; Eumeces
zarudnyi Nikolsky □ and Eumeces princeps (Eichwald) A. Distributional data
on Eumeces princeps are very incomplete.
Locality records. (In certain cases I have not been able to check
identifications of material on which some of the locality records are
based, since they are in European or Asiatic museums.)
Arabia: El Kubar, S. W. Arabia (Brit, Mus. 1, Bury Coll.).
Transcaspia: Puli Hatun (Pul-i-Khatun) (Brit. Mus. 8, Eylandt Coll.);
Bacharden (Senckenberg 1, A. Zander Coll.) ; Ai Dare (Senckenberg 1, 0.
Boettger Coll.) ; Arvuz Pass at Kopet-dag (Nikolsky, 1915) ; Durun near
Askhabad and Bakharden (Mikhailovski, 1904); Andera near Dumbar
(Univ. of Petrograd 2; Nikolsky, 1915).
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces 119
Baluchistan: Kondalo (Munchen 1. Zugmeyer Coll.); Bela (Miinchen 1,
Zugmeyer Coll.).
Afghanistan: (Indian Mus., Green Coll.; Annandale, 1905).
India: Sind (Indian Mus.); Rajputana (Indian Mus., N. Billety Coll.); N.
Kashmir (Indian Mus., 2d Yarkand Miss.); Chitral (Indian Mus., F. J.
Daly Coll.); Waziristan N. W. India, Kaur Bridge (7 spec), Ladha (8
spec), Wana (19 spec.) (Ingoldsbv and Proctor, 1923); Punjab (type local-
ity. Mus. As. Soc Bengal 2) ; Alpine Punjab on the route from Jhelum
into Kashmir (Brit. Mus. 1, Jerdon Coll.) ; Urira. N. W. Kachh (Stoliczka,
1872) ; Chakoti on the road from Mari to Srinigar in Kashmir (Blanford,
2d Yarkand Miss.).
SCHNEIDERII GROUP
The species and subspecies included in this group are character-
ized by the absence of a postnasal; the palpebral scales separated
from the superciliaries; one or two postmental shields; the more
median preanal scales overlap the outer ones; a rather large area
of small granular or pavement-like scales behind insertion of hind
limb; when hind limb is laid back along tail a small pocket is
formed lateral to anus.
The forms included in the group are Eumeces algeriensis algeri-
ensis, E. algeriensis meridionalis, E. pavimentatus, E. zarudnyi, E.
princeps and E. schneiderii.
The taxonomy of this group, occupying territory in western Asia
and northern Africa, has long been in a confused condition. That
certain forms were long known before the time of Linnaeus is evi-
denced by a form appearing about 1640 in a work by Ulyssis
Aldrovandi (Quad. Digit. Ovip., Lib. 1, p. 660) under the name
Lacerta Cyprius scincoides, a name placed as a synonym of Lacerta
aurata by Linnaeus in the 10th edition of Systema Naturae. It
appears, however, fairly certain that the Lacerta aurata* is a species
quite distinct from the Cyprian lizard illustrated by Aldrovandi.
The first "Linnaean" name applicable to any skink of this group
is Scincus schneiderii of Daudin (1602, Vol. IV, pp. 291-292),
which he describes as follows: "Major, supra lucidus fuscescens
lined longitudinale pallida in utroque latere, subtiis albescens caudd
dwplb longiore." In the synonymy he cites several references
iSeba, Schneider, Gronovius, Lacepede), all to authors who used
names which are non-Linnaean. He states: "J'ai rapporte a l'anolis
* In regard to the identity of Lacerta aurata consult the discussions of the following
authors: Dumeril and Bibron, Erp. Gen., V, pp. 702, 703; Wiegmann, Archiv. fiir Mus.,
1837, pt. 1, p. 134; Gravenhorst, Nova Acta Acad. Leopold Carol., XXIII, pt. 1, p. 321,
pi. XXXII: Peters, Monatsb. Akad. Wiss. Berl., 1864, p. 51. On the other hand, Gray
(Cat. Spec. Liz. in Brit. Mus., 1845, pp. 91, 92) applies the name to a north African
Eumeces, and Giinther (1864, Proc. Zool. Soc. London) applies the name to a Eumeces from
the Dead Sea region; he also does the same in the Reptiles of British India (1864), giving
Persia as a locality.
120 The University Science Bulletin
dore la plupart des synonymes qui ont ete regardes par Lacepede
comme semblables au scinque dore; mais je dois avouer ici que j'ai
cru necessaire de m'y determiner, dans l'espoir qu'on pourra parvenir
dans la suite a eclaircir cette partie reelment obscure de l'histoire
naturelle des sauriens."
One gathers from the text that the skink Scincus schneiderii is
described from a specimen in "la galerie du museum d'Histoire
Naturelle" (Paris).*
This species is compared with the scinque rembruni. He further
states: "Sa couleur est d'un brun clair tres-luisant en dessus,
lorsqu'il court an soleil; mais il ne paroit pas avoir l'eclat de Tor
pendant qu'il est vivant; aussi ne peut-on pas lui paisser l'epithete
de dore; c'est pourquoi j'ai prefere lui donner celle de schneiderien,
. . . La couleur d'un brun clair, que regne dessus ce grand
scinque, est tranchee sur chaque flanc par une ligne droite et
longitudinale blanchatre, que va depuis les bras j usque aupres des
cuisses; le dessous de cet animal est blanchatre, sans aucune tache
et sans aucun grain poreux sons les cuisses. La queue est cylin-
drique, et deux fois environ aussi longue que le reste. Tous les
ecailles qui la recouvrent sont rhomboidales, presque hexagones et
un peu imbriquees."
The measurements given (reduced to millimeters) are: total
length, approximately 392 mm.; head and body, 114 mm.; tail, 278
mm.; hind leg, 46 mm.; front legs, "sont plus courtes."
Shaw (1802), under the name Lacerta rufescens, describes a
species (probably from Seba, p. 112, taf. 105, fig. 3), giving as the
habitat Arabia, Egypt and Cyprus, and placing Lacerta Cyprius
scincoides, Lacerta aurata? L., and Lacerta maritima maxima Seba
as synonyms. It appears that he had not seen Daudin's work,
which was probably published when Shaw's description was written.
The characters offered are as follows: Fifteen inches or more in
length from nose to the end of the tail, color pale rufous brown, with
a paler stripe down the back and along each side; the head is
covered in front with large angular scales ; the body, limbs and tail
with rounded ones ; legs short and thick. It is highly probable that
Shaw's name represents a composite of more than one species, and
cannot be certainly identified.
In 1820 Merrem (Syst. Amph., 3, 1820, p. 71) used the name
Cepedii, based on Lacepede's description of Le Dore. Since the
* According to Dumeril and Bibron (1839, V, p. 703), it is the same specimen which
served as a model for the description and the figure in Lacepede's Histoire Naturelle des
Quadrupedes Ovipares et des Serpens (1788-'90, I, p. 384, pi. 25). It was still in the
museum in 1839.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 121
description is from a specimen which is the type of schneiderii it
is obvious that these names are synonyms. In Savigny's Descrip-
tion de l'Egypte (Histoire Naturclle Reptiles, published presumably
in 1827) appears descriptions of two forms, one, Scincus schneiderii
(p. 135, pi. 3, fig. 3; L'anolis gigantesque), a more or less uniformly
colored specimen with a light lateral stripe; and a second species,
Scincus pavimentatus (p. 138, pi. IV, fig. 4), represented as being
brown with light dorsal lines. Thus, pavimentatus is apparently
the first name for the species having a series of dorsal, light, narrow
lines.
The name Scincus cyprius of Cuvier (1829, Reg. Anim., 2d Ed.,
p. 62) was used for a form occurring in "Levante," and harks back
to the Lacerta Cyprius scincoides of Aldrovandi, and Eumeces
schneiderii, portrayed by Geoffroy-St. Hillaire. Gray (1831) used
the name Tiliqua cyprinus, but I am uncertain whether this was
intended as a new name or is an error or emendation for Cuvier's
cyprius.
Dumeril and Bibron (1839, V, p. 701) describe the skinks of
north Africa under the name Plestiodon aldrovandii, including a
specimen from Bone, Algeria, and two from Egypt, one of which,
if I interpret correctly, served as the type of Le Dore Lacepede,
and of Scincus schneiderii Daudin. In consequence, it is, at least
in part, a synonym of schneiderii. In the list of synonyms is given
one of the forms listed as VAnolis gigantesque and Scincus schneiderii
by Geoffroy-St. Hillaire in the Descript. Egypt; but Geoffroy-St,
Hillarie's other form, Scincus pavimentatus, apparently is over-
looked, or at least no allocation of this name could be found. It
is mentioned on page 629 in a quotation from Wiegmann.
The discussion given by Dumeril and Bibron makes it evident that
Lacerta aurata Linne is a species different from aldrovandii. They
also give a discussion of other synonyms of aldrovandii, but offer
no reason for disregarding the appellation given by Daudin. The
Algerian specimen listed is very likely a specimen of Eumeces
algeriensis.
Eichwald (1839) described as new a species (princeps) from
western Asia ("In ora caspia occidentali, ad montes praesertim
Talyschenses''') . The description (in Latin) is good and refers to
a species with the color of the head, back, limbs and tail uniform
dark gray, and with a lateral light line.
From the foregoing it is evident that, with the exception of the
Geoffroy-St. Hillaires, who recognized two species, the authors who
122 The University Science Bulletin
preceded them, and those who followed for many years, believed
that there was only a single species, and each devised a name of
his own choosing.
It was not until Boulenger's catalogue (Vol. Ill) appeared in
1887 that the name schneiderii was reestablished, the name having
been overshadowed by the names pavimentatus and aldrovandii,
both actually used for all the various forms of the group, which were
regarded apparently as a single species. Before Boulenger's cata-
logue appeared, two subspecies were described: Eumeces pavi-
mentatus var. algeriensis by Peters (1864) from the western part
of north Africa; and Eumeces pavimentatus var. syriacus was de-
scribed by Boettger in 1883. The type locality of the latter was
"Sarona bei Jaffa, Syria." This specimen is referred by Mertens
(who had ready access to the type) to the synonymy of schneiderii
pavimentatus.
As remarked, Boulenger (1887) revived Daudin's name schnei-
derii for the British Museum skinks of the genus (Tunis, Egypt,
Syria, Armenia, Persia, Baluchistan) and retained Peter's pavi-
mentatus algeriensis for the species occurring in Algeria and Mo-
rocco under the specific designation of algeriensis.
In 1899 Nikolsky described Eumeces zarudnyi from Persian
specimens collected by N. A. Zarudny in the provinces of Kirman
and Seistan, Persia. Domergue (1909) later described a subspecies,
algeriensis meridionalis, from Ain Sefra, Algeria.
Robert Mertens (1920), in a paper under the title "Uber die
geographischen Formen von Eumeces schneiderii Daudin," makes
a first attempt to review the group, and he later (Nov., 1924) makes
a second revision. In this latter work he recognizes four subspecies
of schneiderii, namely, schneiderii, pavimentatus, cyprius and al-
geriensis. Schneiderii pavimentatus Geoffroy-St. Hillaire is used
for the Syrian form, including as a synonym Boettger's (1883)
syriaca. For the form from Algeria and Morocco the name al-
geriensis Peters is used, including in the synonymy a subspecies,
algeriensis meridionalis Domergue, as well as Plestiodon aldrovandii
(part.) Dumeril and Bibron and Plestiodon auratus (part.) Gray.
He states "Nach Priifung mehrerer Stiicke aus Nordafrica, bin ich
zum Ergebnis gekommen, dass der Unterschied zwischen Eumeces
schneiderii cyprius und dieser Form [algeriensis] gar kein so grosser
ist, und da diese beiden Formen nirgends nebeneinander vorkommen,
halte ich cs fiir richtiger die westliche Form als Unterart zu Eumeces
schneiderii zu stellen." For the species occurring in Lower Egypt
to eastern Algeria the name schneiderii cyprius Cuvier is used.
Taylor: The Gkxis Kvmkcks 123
The name given by Cuvier is based on Aldrovandi's Lacerta
cyprius scincoides, and on Geoffroy's plate (Desc. of Egypt, pi. Ill,
fig. 3), which would make it in part synonymous with schneiderii.
(The figure of Lacerta cyprius scincoides of Aldrovandi [Quad.
Dig. Vivip., 1663, p. 660] is without any marks of distinction save
for a light stripe on the sides, the scales being drawn with no
attempt at accuracy.)
The typical form schneiderii, Mertens believes, is restricted to a
west Asiatic form. He states (Mertens, 1924a, footnote) : "Hen-
Prof. Lorenz Muller in Miinchen machte mich kiirzlich darauf auf-
merksam, dass der Daudin'schen Originalbeschreibung von Eumeces
schneiderii vermutlich diese westasiatische Form zu Grunde lag."
On what such a judgment is based I am uncertain. I presume on
the meager data given as regards color. I believe beyond question
that the type locality is Egypt or Sinai, as the type specimen, as
already mentioned, also served as a cotype for Plcstiodon aldro-
vandii and was one of two Egyptian specimens mentioned as follows
by Dumeril and Bibron (1839) : "Cette espece se trouve en Egypte
et en Algerie; nous en possedons deux individus de premier de ces
deux pays; et un troisieme qui nous a ete envoye vivant de la
province d'Alger par M. Guyon." Again speaking of the type
of Daudin's schneiderii, they state: "Individu qui existe encore
aujourd'hui dans notre Musee National."
To anyone who has followed the foregoing discussion it must
appear obvious that the confusion in the literature regarding these
forms is almost insurmountable, and, as regards some points, must
remain obscure. The placing of literature references under the
various species must necessarily be subject to uncertainty. The
uncertain references are left in the synonymy of schneiderii.
A more certain judgment of the status of the various forms
of the Schneiderii group can only be obtained when large series
are available for study. My own material is too meager and from
too few localities to determine relationships, or delineate the various
forms without some doubt as to the validity of my judgments.
It is a fact that as regards the general pattern of head scales
there is marked similarity among many of the forms. However,
there are many characters usually not mentioned in descriptions
which may be regarded as important in differentiation of species
as is the head squamation, such as size, length of limb, scale rows
on limbs, intercalated scale rows on toes, postlabial, temporal and
postgenial scales.
124 The University Science Bulletin
It is likely that in these different forms there may be a tendency
to duplicate color pattern. The lateral line and red, orange or
copper spotting is present in several forms, and there is likely to
be similar variation in two or more forms. It appears certain that,
at least in parts of the territory occupied by the group, two or more
forms may be present.
The task of straightening out the present tangle that obtains
should involve an examination by a single person of the material
in all European collections, including all types, if extant, and the
segregation of large series of new material from numerous localities
throughout the range of the group. Until this is done, some doubt
and confusion must remain. I know of no more worthy task in the
field of herpetology.
Key to the Forms of the Schneiderii Group.
A. No lateral line of cream, orange or red on the sides of the body; a pattern of light trans-
verse lines extending to or nearly to abdomen; auricular lobules blunt; two scales occupy
area of the typical subocular labial; postgenial scales small, about as broad as long;
typical heel plates not strongly differentiated from scales that precede and follow;
about 25 scale rows around upper arm, 27 rows about femur; no notch formed by the
second presubocular on the upper labial border; scales more or less striated.
B. Eight or nine upper labials; nasal divided; 70 scales from occiput to above anus;
30 scales about neck and 30 rows about middle of body; 20 to 24 about base of
tail; length of frontal a little less than its distance from end of snout; subocular
labial about size of the preceding labials; pre- and postsuboculars form a distinct
continuous series; median scale rows about one and three-fourths times as
wride as the adjoining scales; four or five pairs of nuchals; on inner side of fingers
the series of scales intercalated between the dorsal and ventral lamellae only at
base, with a single scale near tips, except fifth, where the series is complete from
base to tip; on outer side the intercalated series is complete to tip save on fifth
finger; on toes on inner side one or two intercalated scales on basal phalanx; on
outer side series complete to tip. Above brown, with a series of irregular cross-
bands of cream or orange extending to abdomen; intervening irregular rows of
ocellated reddish spots. Snout to vent 185 mm. (Algeria and Morocco. Plains
form.) Eumeces algeriensis algeriensis (Peters), 146
BB. Similar in many respects to E. a. algeriensis, but scale rows 27 to 28; one pair of
nuchals; fewer scales about base of tail ; 60 to 62 scales from occiput to above anus;
scales of the pre- and postocular series more elongate; snout to vent 124 mm.
(Ain Sefra and adjacent territory. Plateau form.)
Eumeces algeriensis meridionalis Domergue, 152
AA. A lateral line to, and sometimes continued on, tail; pattern of dorsal spots, if present,
not reaching below lateral line; auricular lobules four to six, usually more or less sharply
denticulate (somewhat short in blythianus); only one typical subocular; typical heel
plates differentiated from adjoining scales; postgenial scales longer than wide; less than
25 scales around middle of upper arm; a more or less distinct notch in upper labial
border made by second presubocular; scales not striated.
B. A single postmental. Thirty scale rows around middle of body; 59 or 60 scales
from occiput to above anus; nasal divided; postgenial only slightly longer than
wide; limbs elongate, overlapping when adpressed; olive-brown above, with three
dark brown lines along back from head to some distance on the tail; a broad dark
band along the side of the body, below which is a well-defined pale yellowish band
extending from below eye to some distance on tail; a dark line below this; tail
slender. Snout to vent, 90 mm. (Punjab, India.)
Eumeces blythianus (Anderson), 143
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 125
BB. Two postmentals.
C. Tail red at base; ear with five or siz acute lobules; scales in 26 rows; limbs
overlap when adpressed; uniform brownish gray, with a whitish lateral line;
snout to vent, 111mm. (Southeastern Persia [probably also Baluchistan].)
Eumeces zarudnt/i Nikolsky, 142
CC. Tail not red at base.
D. Nasal incompletely divided, lacking the lower suture from nostril to
rostral; plates on lower eyelids small, scarcely differentiated; 66-68
scales from occiput to above anus; 13 scales around middle of upper
arm; 20 scale- about femur; -1 scale tows about middle of body; 19
scales al out base of tail; pre- and postsubocular series discontinuous
or nearly so; subocular labial not larger than certain preeedin;.' labials,
anterior loreal a little longer than high; on inner side of fingers one
or two intercalated scales, fifth with three; on outer side the scales
half the length of the second, third and fourth fingers; on inner side
of toes one or two scales at base; on outer side the scales extend the
length of first and second toes, half the length of the third and fourth.
Brown with a dim dorsolateral lighter line and a strong lateral cream
line; eight rows of very narrow, discontinuous cream lines. Snout to
vent, 136mm. (Egypt and Syria!
Eumeces pavimentatus (Geoffroy-St. Hillaire), 133
DD. Xasal completely divided.
E. Plates on lower eyelid large, much higher than wide; 64 scales
occiput to above anus; 17 scales about middle of upper arm; 24
scales around middle of femur; 26 rows about body; 19 about
tail; pre- and postsubocular series discontinuous, or those below
eye not differentiated from granules on eyelid; subocular labial
large, slightly longer than high, no larger than certain preceding
labials; anterior loreal much longer than high; on inner side of
fingers, intercalated scales only at base, save on fifth, where the
series extends the length of the digit; on outer side the series
extends the length of first and second fingers, on the third and
fourth on the basal phalanx only; on outer side of toes one or two
intercalated scales at base only; on outer side, the series extends
to tip on the first, second and third toes, about half the length
of the fourth, and none on the fifth. Above uniform lavender
or blackish gray, a light stripe from below eye to groin or on
tail; below on sides very light grayish, becoming lighter below.
Snout to vent, 124 mm. (Territory south of the Caspian Sea.
Transcaspia, northern and eastern Persia.)
Eumeces princeps (Eichwald), 138
EE. Plates on lower eyelid small, scarcely higher than wide; 66
scales occiput to above anus; 15 scales about" forearm: 24 about
femur; 24 scales about middle of body; pre- and postsubocular
scales continuous; 109 subcaudals; subocular as high as wide,
larger than preceding labials; posterior loreal not much longer
than high; on inner side of fingers one or no intercalated scales;
on outer side same save on thumb, where series extends to tip;
on inner side of toes only one or two intercalated scales at base;
on outer side the series extends about half the length of first and
second toes; only one or two at base of third and fourth. Above
brown or olive, the median scale rows a shade darker; light spots
on alternate scales of median rows extending onto tail; very dim
dorsolateral lines; a slightly darker lateral band bounded below
by a cream stripe from below eye; very light gray low on sides;
below whitish; hind leg with numerous spots; a few scattered
spots in the dorsolateral region, or nearly uniform olive or brown
(golden). Snout to vent, 170 mm. (Syria, Arabia, Persia, Meso-
potamia, Cyprus, Egypt. Tripoli, Tunis and eastern Algeria.)
Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin), 12 1
126 The University Science Bulletin
Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin)
(Plates 6, 10; Fig. 1; Figs. 11, 1)
SYNONYMY
(Many of these titles may actually refer to species other than schneiderii.)
1800. Lacerta scincus (non L.) Georgi. Geogr. Phys. Beschr. Russ. Reich., T. 3, Bd. VI,
1800, p. 1876 (Kura); Hohenacker, Bull. Nat. Moscow, 1831, p. 365 (Caucasus)
(possibly princeps [Eichwald]).
1802. Scincus schneiderii Daudin. Hist. Rept., IV, 1802, p. 291 (type locality not given;
presumably Egypt; I. Geoffroy-St. Hillaire, Desc. Egypt, Nat. Hist., I, 1827, p. 135,
pi. Ill, fig. 3 (locality not given ; presumably Egypt ; and figure probably from type
specimen).
1802. Lacerta nafescens Shaw (part.). Gen. Zo61., Ill, 1802, pp. 285-286 (pale rufous
brown with a pale stripe ; apparently based on Seba's figure. Arabia and Egypt,
Cyprus.).
1820. Scincus cepedii Merrem. Syst. Amph., 1820, pp. 71-74.
1829. Scincus cyprius Cuvier. Reg. Anim., nouv. Ed., II, 1829, p. 62.
1831. Tiliqua cyprinus Gray. Syn. Griffith's Anim. King., IX, 1831, p. 68 (Egypt).
1832. ? Scincus officinalis (non Laur.) Dwigubuski, Mem. Soc. Nat. Moscow, 1832, p. 15,
fig. 4 (In Russ.).
1839. Plestiodon aldrovandii (part.) Dumeril and Bibron. Erp. Gen., V, 1839, p. 701
(Egypt and north Africa) (includes type of Eumeces schneiderii Daudin) ; Guichenot,
Expl. Sc. Alger. Sc. Phys. Zool., 1850, p. 17; Dumeril and Dumeril, Cat. Meth. Coll.
Rept. Mus. d'Hist. Nat., Paris, 1851, Paris, p. 164; De Filippi, Viagg. in Persia,
18G5, p. 354; Steindachner, in TJnger and Kolschy's Insel Cypern, 1865, p. 573; Gasco,
Viagg. Egitto, pt. II, 1876, p. 109; Lortet, Arch. Mus. Hist. Nat. Lyons, III, 1883,
p. 187.
1845. Plestiodon auratus (part.) Gray. Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., 1845, p. 91 (N. Africa);
GUnther, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1864, p. 489 (Dead Sea).
1864. Eumeces pavimentatus Peters. Mon. Berl. Ak., 1864, pp. 48, 51; Anderson, Proc.
Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 1871, p. 180; Stoliczka, Journ. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 1872, p. 121;
Blanford, East Persia, Zool. Geol., II, 1872, pp. 387-388 (Pishin, Baluchistan; Sarjan,
S. W. Karman, Southern Persia ; Niriz, East of Shiraz) ; Boettger, In Radde, Faun.
Flora S. W. Caspian Geb., 1886, p. 57; and Zeits. Ges. Nat. (Geibel), 1877, p. 288;
and Ber. Senck. Nat. Ges. 1879-'80, p. 183; Kessler, Trans. St. Petersb. Soc. Nat.,
VII, 1878, Suppl., p. 177 (Transcaucasian Region); Bedriaga, Bull. Soc. Imp. Nat.
Moscow, 1879, No. 3, p. 27; Tristram, West Palestine, Rept. Batr., 1884, p. 152.
1864. Mabouia aurata Giinther. Rept. Brit. India, 1864, p. 82 (Persia).
1883. Eumeces pavimentatus syriaca Boettger. Abh. Senck. Nat. Ges., XII, 1883, p. 120.
1883. Plestiodon pavimentatus Lortet. Arch. Mus. Hist. Nat. Lyon, III, 1883, p. 187.
1887. Eumeces schneiderii Boulenger. Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 383 (Dead Sea,
Jerusalem, Palestine; Kirind, Persia, Shore Kelegar) ; Boettger, Zool. Jahrb., Bd. Ill,
'Syst., 1888, p. 918; Boulenger, Trans. Linn. Soc. Zool., V, 1889, p. 101; Fauna Brit.
India, Rept. Batr., 1890, p. 219; Boettger, Ber. Senck. Ges., 1892, p. 147 (Posten
Bartas, Caucasus); Anderson, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1892, p. 16 (Duirat, Tunesia) ;
Boettger, Cat. Rept. Samml. Mus. Senckenb. Nat. Ges., I, 1893, p. Ill ("Sarona bei
Jaffa," Jerusalem, Syria; Kopet-dagh, Transcaspia ; Gabes, Tunis); Peracca, Boll.
Mus. Torino, IX, 1894, No. 167, p. 9 (Es-salt and Dscherasch); Olivier, Mem. Soc.
Zool. France, VII, 1894, p. 114; Boulenger, Trans. Zool. Soc. London, 1895, p. 136
(Cherb Berrania, Matmata, Wed Kebiriti [North of Chott Fejej] and Gafsa) ; Ander-
son, Contrib. Herp. Arabia, with Prelim, list Rept. Batr. Egypt, 1896, p. 104 (Marsa
Matru; Maryut district, Egypt); Boettger, Jahr. Natur. ver. Madgeburg (1896-1897),
1898, pp. 1-22 (Syria); Anderson, Zool. Egypt, Rept. Batr., 1898, pp. 196-199,
pi. XXV (Egypt. Excellent plate); Boettger, in Radde, Mus. Cauc, 1899, p. 282;
Nikolski, Ann. du Mus. Zool., IV, 1899, p. 399 (Gerri Schotur in Chascht-Adno.) ;
Nikolski, Herp. Turan., 1899, p. 44; Domergue, Soc. Geog. d'Arch. Prov. Oran, XX,
1900, pp. 269-272 ("Sahara, Tuneslen"); Nikolski, Mem. lAead. Imp. Si. St. Peters-
bourg, VIII Ser., Vol. XVII, No. 1, 1905, pp. 185-187 (Caucasus; Dshulfi near R.
Arax; Baku; Beirut; Achal-tieke; Aul Aber [Astrabad] ; Karatay; Balaschuan ; Syria;
Elisabethpol ; Gululi-Dagh; Suljukli; Nuratin, Western Bukara ; Samarkand; Pales-
tine; Kerak, Moawia.); Annandale, Journ. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, New Ser., I, 1905. p. 150
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 127
(Baluchistan); Nikolski, Herp. Caucasica, 1913, pp. 110-112; Faun. Ross., I, 1915,
p. 508 (Numerous localities'); Werner, Verh. K. K. Zool.-Bot. ties. Wien., Jahr. 1917,
pp. 191-220 (Prow Fare, Persia); Mertens, Senckenb., Bd. 2, Heft 6, 1920, pp. 176-
179; Sachs, Bliitt. Aquar-Terr., XXIX, 1918, pp. 281-282; Wolter, Blatt. Aquar-
Terr., XXX, 1919, pp. 15, 339, 353; idem, XXIX, 1918, ]>. 290; Calabresi, Boll.
Mus. Zool. Anat. Comp. Univ. Torino, 38, N. S. No. 7, 1923, pp. 4, 20 (Bengasi,
Tobvuk, Arenaica); Ingoldsby and Proctor, Journ. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc, XXIX,
Apr. 2o. 1923, pp. 126, 127 (Kiighi, Jandola Ko1 Kai, Sarwekai Wana in Waziristan,
Persia); Czernov, Bull. Sci. l'lnst. Expl. Reg. Caucase du Nord, V, No. 1, 1926, p. 64
Erivani Ordubar, Caucasus); Wetstein, Sitz. Kais. Akad. Wiss. Wien., Vol. 137, Heft
10, 192S, p. 7S3; Werner, Sitz. Kais. Akad. Wiss. Wien., Vol. 13S, Rd. 1, Heft 2,
1929, p. 19.
1914. Eumeces schneiderii syriacus Barbour. Proc. New England Zool. Club, V, Dec. 2,
1"I4, p. St! (Petra, Arabia); Mertens, Senckenb., Bd. IV, Heft. 6, 1922, p. 176.
1924. Eumeces schneiderii princeps Mertens. Abh. Bit. Mus. Nat. Heimat. Nat. ver.
Madgeburg, Bd. Ill, Heft. 4, 1924, pp. 284-286, pi. XII, fig. 4.
1924. Eumeces schneiderii cyprius Mertens. Senckenb., Bd. VI, Heft. 5-6, Nov. 1, 1924,
p. 183.
1924. Eumeces schneiderii schneiderii Mertens. Senckenb., Bd. VI, Nov. 1, 1924, pp. 182-
183.
History. The history of this form is given under the discussion
of the group.
Diagnosis. A very large species; generally gray-olive above; two
rows of irregular cream spots on the two median scale rows; a well-
defined cream-colored line from the sixth labial, passing through
ear and on sides above the legs to some distance on the tail; two
scale rows above the lateral cream line darker gray-olive; entire
ventral surface dull cream.
Upper labials, eight; lower secondary temporal larger than upper;
nostril above the rostrolabial suture; two loreals; two presuboculars.
The seventh labial separated from the ear by three pairs of post-
labials; three much enlarged auricular lobules; prefrontals in con-
tact; four supraoculars, three touching the frontal; four pairs of
nuchals; 66 scales from parietals to above vent; 24 scale rows
around middle of body, the median dorsal rows much larger than
other scales on the body; three chinshields; the postgenial scarcely
differentiated; median preanals enlarged, overlapping smaller outer
preanals; a well-defined area of small granular scales lateral to
the anus, behind the leg forming a fold or pocket; limbs widely
separated when adpressed.
Description. (From No. 6521, E.H.T. collection; Haiffa, Syria.)
Rostral high, narrow, part visible above approaching the size of
the frontonasal, or larger ; supranasals are a little longer than wide,
forming a median suture; frontonasal small, not or only a little
larger than the prefrontals, in contact laterally with the anterior
loreal; prefrontals pentagonal, forming a median suture (partly
fused in this specimen) ; frontal much longer than its distance from
128
The University Science Bulletin
the tip of the snout, the sides constricted in the posterior third,
then widening; frontoparietals pentagonal, forming a median suture,
about the same area as the prefrontals; interparietal small, short,
little larger than the frontoparietal; parietals large, angular, almost
inclosing the interparietal; four pairs of slender nuchals.
Nasal quadrangular, nearly as long as high, the scale divided
wholly or partially by two grooves from nostril, one to the supra-
nasal, the other to the rostral; nasal touching two labials, the
nostril above the rostrolabial suture; anterior loreal higher than
wide, much higher than the posterior loreal; no postnasal; normally
Fig. 11. Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin). E.H.T. No. 6521; Haiffa,
Syria. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head
length, 24 mm.; width, 23 mm.
two presuboculars (on one side one scale is abnormal, being broken
into five parts) forming a continuous series, below the eye, with
the postsubocular series, of which there are seven; a preocular,
followed by two or three smaller scales, and these by three rows of
granular scales extending to posterior corner of the eye, separating
the upper palpebral scales from the superciliary series; six super-
ciliaries, the anterior very large, more than two and one half times
the size of the last superciliary, and of nearly same area as the
first supraocular; two small postoculars; three or four small scales
on lower eyelid touching lower palpebral, and separated from the
pre- and postsubocular series by about five rows of granules; four
supraoculars, three in contact with the lower secondary temporal,
which is very large, its posterior margin vertical, much larger than
the upper secondary temporal, which is somewhat wider posteriorly
Taylor: The Genus Evmeces 129
than anteriorly; tertiary temporal present, separated from ear by
three scales, from the upper secondary temporal by a small un-
differentiated scale that might be considered a second tertiary
temporal.
Eight upper labials, the first smallest, trapezoidal; subocular
labial longer than high; last (eighth) largest, but not as high as the
seventh labial; last labial separated from the ear by about three
pairs of scales, which arc somewhat irregular, occupying a space
equal to the length of the seventh labial; three large, and one
smaller, toothlike preauricular lobules as long as the width of the ear.
Mental normally with about the same labial extent as rostral;
two postmentals, the anterior very small; three pairs of irregular
chinshields, the first pair in contact, the third pair widely separated ;
postgenial scales following not or scarcely differentiated; eight
lower labials.
Scale rows parallel; median pair widened, more than two and
one fourth times as wide as deep. Scales about the ear, about
twenty-four; 27 rows about neck; 30 rows around body in axillary
region; 24 about middle of body; preanal scales eight, the median
greatly enlarged, overlapping the outer preanals, which diminish in
size laterally; subcaudals much widened (100 in tail that has been
reproduced) ; a small differentiated scale, with a raised rounded
surface, near posterior lateral border of anus; legs short, strong;
18 scales about insertion of arm; numerous granular scales in axilla;
palm with numerous, somewhat enlarged, padlike, overlapping
tubercles, smaller about base of fingers; lamellar formula for fin-
gers: 6; 9; 10; 12; 8; about 25 scales about insertion of leg; heel
bordered by a series of enlarged plates, preceded by three or four
enlarged scales; sole covered with subequal granules; lamellar for-
mula for toes: 5; 10; 13; 16; 10. Terminal lamellae enlarged
above and below, not binding base of claw; no intercalated series,
the toes and fingers with only a dorsal and ventral series of scales;
pits on scales, if ever present, have become entirely obsolete.
Body much elongated, the limbs separated by a distance equal to
the length of six lateral scales. The body appears quadrangular in
cross section and the tail likewise, the depth of the tail being a
little greater than its width.
Color in alcohol. This very well preserved specimen is of gray-
olive color above; the two median rows are darker than the two
adjoining (second and third) while the fourth and fifth are slightly
darker gray-olive than the median pair; the cream spots on the
9—1123
i::n
The University Science Bulletin
CM
m<
^OM
lO
-* m <n os oo -
h OS lO CO oo >o -h
■o
CS
1-1 ^H 01 1-1
i-H CM
rt
I-l OS
§
IN 10)
©
"!o
OS
tO Ifl N r
H © 1-
1 OS CO lO os »o ^h
yfe
lO
o
i-H CM CO i-H
H CM
rt
gos
"5
• oo
■*
m
00 © © CM iO
CD
i-H
CM
H CM i-
S2
<i
oo
lO
iO
«eo
t^
©©©©TtlCMCSTjiOSOO©
Q©
y 00
*-l OS
oo
^H Ol rt< i-
1 rH iH CO iH
rt
<5
Nw
CO
<oooscsooco-*'oscO'-ir~
yS
OS
I-
i-i CM O --I i-H CI CO i-H i-h --I
gos
lO
lO
la
-3
3
«os
OS
OS i-H OS 00 00 >o lO O CO CM o
y£
gos
o
t-l
<N£N©i-lrHCM'*t-li-
i CM
o3
Q
*1as
£co
CO
Ol
"5 © r^ i-i
o
z
CO
CM ^i _ rt
w CM
<d
2rH
re
<i
N_
o
0C
c
co oi
a
1
>C i-l rjl OI ©
<*>
rj©
y oo
1-*
c\
CO CC
1—
CM M< iH rH CM
*— OS
CO
^
u-
3
NCM '
t^
a
0s
CO 10
a
CC
CO i-h CM CO ©
yg
o
CO cc
i—
"
CM -vtl 1— 1 1— I 1— 1
&q
gOs
*+- 1
o
CO
02
N^
,-H
o
CM
t-- N
c
O CO 1C tJI CM.
■4J
Q©
y oo
CM
CN
co cc
CM
o
CO ^i i-l i-H CM
a
5
CD
M
03
i — i
k-l OS
2
CM
N!o
o
a
10,
O), i-
C
c
CM © »0 CO ©
O©
y oo
CO
CN
Tt< 0C
O)
CN
CO -sf rH i-H CM
HOS
CD
^
S
No
-ff
CI
■0
OS CM
CO
CC
• O © t-
og
tH
CM
CO cc
OI
i—
lO l-H .-1
HI-
2
H-,
o
o-
t> oc
r*
co
•*
CO © i-
Wo
CO
u:
Tt
os
CM
CM
c
lO i-l O.
i— 1
IN
,,■©
W
b
;
Cp
c
T
-u
>>
as
>
<D
as
S
as
'a
'S
W
as
-a
CS
as
J3
-a
•a
o
S k"
o
o
o
-♦J
o
O
o
"c
b
e,
CO
'5
O
s.3
43
■*^>
4J
-^
c3
-*3
A
_a
a
-u
J3
OS^Ci
3
3
3
d
em
"as
T>
b
—
■•a
2 S
c
i — i
o
O
o
77h
a
T3
C
a
o:
T3
P
3
cc
-03
a
co
a
CO
a
co
OS
^
o
S
o
i-l
a
<
k
CO
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 131
two median rows are near the outer border and appear usually on
every other scale, forming an irregular row; a few flecks on the
dorsolateral scale rows; on the tail a few appear on the median
dorsal rows; the lateral cream line from sixth labial spreads out
and includes the corner of mouth and most of the ear border, and
on the sides occupies all the sixth row and the outer edge of the
fifth; below the lateral cream line, the body is gray for one or two
rows. Under surfaces dirty cream; lower labials grayish. Head
same as body. Hind limb with cream flecks, above, and somewhat
brownish in the post femoral region. Tail somewhat lighter than
body, becoming cream on the entire regenerated portion (83 mm.).
Variation. A total of 17 specimens have been available in my
study of this form and they agree in the main in most essential
characters.
In no specimen other than the one described are the parietals in
contact behind the interparietals, although only minutely separated
in one specimen (A.M.X.H. 2280).
In all cases save one the lateral scales are parallel. This is Mich.
67251. Abd El Kadar, Lower Egypt, and the scales are arranged in
long diagonal rows on sides. Scale rows about neck vary from
27 to 30, 29 being the usual number about the narrower part of the
neck. The number of scale rows about the middle of the body is
normally 24 (occurring in 13 specimens) ; 25 occur once, and 26
three times. The number of scales in a row from occiput to above
anus is from 64 to 67, 64 occurring once, 65 occurring eight times,
66 five times and 67 twice (16 specimens counted) ; subcaudals
vary in four specimens with complete tails as follows: 122, 128,
130, 131.
The upper labials are 8-8 in all the specimens save a single ex-
ception with nine. The scales about the ear vary usually between
20 and 22. Two specimens have 25; nuchals extremely variable,
as follows: 2-2, twice; 2-3, once; 3-3, twice; 3-4, once; 4-4 seven
times; 4-5, twice; 5-6, once.
Supraoculars invariably 4-4; the first three touching the frontal.
Two postmentals and no postnasal is invariably the case in the
series. The seventh and eighth labials are often of about the same
size; sometimes the eighth is definitely the larger; five is the usual
number of labials preceding the suboculars.
The nasal is distinctly divided in most of the specimens. The
lower part of the suture is not evident in one. The frontonasal is
invariably broader than long. The prefrontals are invariably
132 The University Science Bulletin
broadly in contact; subdigital lamellae vary between 15 and 18, 16
occurring most frequently. The pre- and postocular series are
continuous and the formula is usually 2 + 5 or rarely 2 + 6, in one
case each 1 + 6 and 2 + 7.
Color variation. The following specimens show variation from
the described specimen. Mich. 67251 <? , Abed El Kadar, Lower
Egypt. Large specimen, 151mm. snout to vent; 202mm. tail.
Above gray-olive (the head more brownish), covering about eleven
scale rows; sides and underparts white or cream; faint gray spots
on lower jaw, side of neck and along sides; limbs light olive-brown,
spotted or dappled with white; much white on anterior surface of
hind limb; back spotted with light, arranged in longitudinal as well
as transverse rows (about 23 of the latter) ; spots about size of
scales; last three labials and postlabials covered partly by a large
cream spot. A slight striation is evident on ventral as well as dorsal
scales. Tail with dim annulations.
No. 37291 U.S.N.M., Lower Egypt. $ 145 mm. snout to vent.
Tail regenerated. Brown above with a slight tendency for the
deeper brown color to form dim lines on the scale edges except
along the median line. There are four of these dim, darker lines;
the most distinct borders the first and second scale rows; the areas
between make four very dim lighter lines; those on the second
and third scale rows lightest; a white line from subocular to ear,
widening in front of ear, but not reaching the top of ear; bel.md
ear the line begins from lower half, follows along sides and to u
considerable distance along tail, following fifth scale row, but not
covering it; below this is a gray stripe that fades into the cream
color of the ventral regions; two dim rows of light spots on back,
the spots appearing on alternate scales. A few scattered light spots
on tail.
In the series from Petra, Arabia, the tendency to form transverse
bands of light spots is more pronounced than in Syrian or Egyptian
specimens. Their color in life is as follows: "Rich bronzy olive,
with scattered spots, on the dorsal scales, of the color of burnished
copper, and a light lateral stripe of lemon-yellow or salmon-pink
on the lower portion of the sides, and below brilliant glistening
white, sometimes with a light greenish tinge. The young individuals
are very differently colored. The middorsal area, comprising just
the two rows of broad scales, is entirely unspotted. On each side
of this region there are two narrow dark lines, and then a wide
dusky lateral band from the neck region to the groin. This is
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 133
spotted with white scales. The lower regions of the sides, pure
white in the adults, are mottled with dusky spots." (Barbour,
1914.)
Mr. II. W. Parker has submitted notes on British Museum speci-
mens from Cyprus, as follows:
"Uniform brownish above. A strong white line from upper lip or ear onto
base of tail. Scales 24 or 26 (6 specs., 4 with 24 rows). The only specimen
showing any trace of the juvenile livery has a faintly darker middorsal zone
the width of the two middorsal scale rows, faintly edged with darker brown.
This is separated by a lighter dorso-lateral stripe from a wide dark lateral
stripe two scales wide. This is bordered below by the strong white lateral
line. One adult shows a few scattered white spots on the base of the tail and
towards the flanks."
Distribution. This form, as here recognized, extends apparently
from eastern Algeria and Tunis across north Africa and into
western Asia, and on the island of Cyprus. The published records
of the occurrence of this form are not included, and I am in doubt,
in many cases, as to whether the various specimens listed belong
to this species.
Locality records:
Egypt: (Type locality; type formerly in the Paris Museum); Lower Egypt
(A.M.N.H. 1) (U.S.N.M. 1); Abd el Kadar (Mich. 1).
Arabia: Petra (M.C.Z. 10) (A.M.N.H. 2).
Syria: Haiffa (E.H.T. 1); Mt. Jerusalem (M.C.Z. 1).
Algeria: (U.S.N.M. 1).
Eumeces pavimentatus (Geoffroy-St. Hillaire)
(Plate 5, fig. 2; Figs. 12 and 13)
SYNONYMY
(As has been stated, it is scarcely possible to associate certainly with this form all litera-
ture references which apply to it ; some of the titles listed under schneiderii may properly
belong here.)
1827. Scincus pavimentatus Is. Geoffroy-St. Hillaire. Descr. Egypt. Hist. Nat., 1827,
p. 138, pi. IV, fig. 4.
1834. Eumeces -pavimentatus Wiegmann. Herp. Mex., 1834, p. 36; and Arch, fur Natur.,
I, 2, 1835, p. 288 (genotype).
1883. Eumeces pavimentatus var. syriaca Boettger. Abh. Senck. Nat. Ges., XIII, s. 120
(type locality "Sarona bei Jaffa, Syrien," G. Sinion Coll., 1881).
1924. Eumeces schneiderii pavimentatus Mertens. Senckenbergiana, Bd. VI, heft 5-6, Nov.
1, 1924, p. 183.
History. This species appears first to have been recognized by
Geoffroy-St. Hillaire and his son, Isadore, who describe and figure
the form in Savigny's "Description d' Egypte" as Scincus pavimen-
tatus. In 1834 Wiegmann placed the form under his newly formed
genus Eumeces and the following year designated the species as the
genotype.
134
The University Science Bulletin
Boettger (1883) described a form occurring in Syria, Eumeces
pavimentatus syriacus. Mertens, who has examined the type of
syriacus, places it as a synonym of schneiderii pavimentatus.
Diagnosis. One of the Schneiderii group, characterized by a
slender, elongate body. General color brown above, with a more or
less well-defined lateral line along the side of the body to the groin,
little or no evidence of spots on the labials, and the line from the ear
to foreleg not widened. Scale rows on back with very small, elongated
white dots or dashes on the middle of each scale, save the two median
rows, where the dashes are on every other scale. These white marks
make a series of eight dotted lines on the back. Scale rows, 24
about body; two postmentals; no postnasal; nasal undivided. Me-
dian dorsal scale rows widened.
Description of species (from K. U. No. 11022, "Haiffa, Syria," 0.
Tofohr, collector). Portion of rostral visible above distinctly larger
than the frontonasal; supranasals relatively small, in contact medi-
ally; frontonasal broader than long, in contact laterally with the
anterior loreal; prefrontals relatively very large, much larger than
the frontoparietals, broadly in contact medially, the suture with the
frontal largest; frontal longer than its distance to end of snout,
relatively narrow, narrower than the supraocular region; fronto-
parietals relatively small, forming a median suture; interparietal
small, not inclosed by the parietals; four pairs of nuchals.
Fig. 12. Distribution in Africa and Asia of Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin) ,
E. algeriensis algeriensis (Peters), E. algeriensis meridionalis Domergue,
and E. ■pavimentatus ( Geoff roy-St.Hillaire). Data on E. schneiderii and
E. pavimentatus very incomplete.
Taylor: Tin: (ii:.\rs Kvmkcks
135
Xasal longer than high, the scale with a suture running from
supralabial to the nostril, but no suture is apparent from nostril to
the rostral; from lateral view nostril is directed straight in; no
postnasal; anterior loreal higher than wide, but not or only slightly
higher than the posterior loreal; the latter only slightly longer than
high, and strongly differing in shape and character from the same
scale in schneiderii; two large presuboculars, more or less continuous
with the seven postsubocular scales, of which the anterior are very
Fig. 13. Eumeces pavimentatus (Geoffroy-St.Hillarie). K.U. No. 11022;
Haiffa, Syria. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 19.2 mm.; width, 16 mm. (The rostral extends more to the
upper surface than is shown.)
small, scarcely distinguishable from granular scales of lower eyelid;
six superciliaries, the anterior twice as long as wide, more than half
size of the anterior supraocular; last superciliary large, vertically
placed (lateral view), generally resembling a supraocular, but
smaller; small triangular preocular, two very small postoculars;
palpebrals rather small, separated from superciliaries by two or
three rows of granular scales; lower eyelid with a series of three
small plates only a little larger than granular scales, which are
separated from the pre- and postsubocular series by four or five
granular scale rows. Primary temporal about as large as the largest
labial, the main axis vertical (in lateral view) ; upper secondary
relatively small, narrow, twice as long as its greatest width; lower
secondary very large, its main axis vertical ; the tertiary temporal
vertical, separated from the upper secondary by a scale, from ear
opening by three scales; upper labials eight, the first smallest, the
136 The University Science Bulletin
rostrolabial suture directly below nostril; the first two labials in
contact with nasal; five labials preceding the subocular labial, which
is as high as long; seventh labial larger and higher than eighth;
latter scale only a little longer than high, separated from auricular
opening by a distance greater than its length ; three pairs of post-
labials, diminishing in size; four well-developed, sharply denticulate
lobules in front of ear, directed backwards; 24-26 scales around
ear; mental with a labial border equal to that of rostral; two well-
developed postmental shields, followed by three pairs of chinshields,
none of which are in contact; postgenial small, bordered on the inner
side by a scale of equal size and shape; seven lower labials.
Scale rows generally parallel, in 24 rows about the middle of
body; 33 scales about neck behind ear; 27-28 on narrower part of
neck; about 19 scales around base of tail; two median dorsal rows
widened, the rows low on sides smallest; eight scales border the
anus, the median pair enlarged, the median scales overlapping the
adjoining outer scales; lateral postanal scale strongly differentiated,
rounded and raised; subcaudals much widened; tail vertically com-
pressed; seventeen scales about arm at insertion; an area of small
imbricating scales in the axilla; no well-defined outer wrist tubercle;
numerous large padlike tubercles on base of palm, the tubercles
growing smaller towards base of digits; lamellar formula for fingers:
6; 9; 11; 10; 7; the intercalated scales on fingers are on base only,
save on the second finger, where a series extends to claw between
upper and lower scales on the outer side of digit; about 25 scales
around leg at insertion; behind insertion of limb numerous small
scales; when the legs are moved back a small pocket is formed
on each side of the anus. In the middle of heel two enlarged plates ;
the scales on under surface of foot conical, slightly juxtaposed or
slightly imbricating. Lamellar formula for toes: 6; 9; 9; 16; 9;
toes covered generally by two rows of scales save on outer side of
the three inner toes, where there is an intercalated row of scales
extending completely or almost to claw ; one or two at base of other
toes.
Color. Above brown to amber-brown, the color varying in in-
tensity; the brown color is more intense on outer edges of the two
median scale rows, and gives the impression of two dim, darker
lines separated by a median that is somewhat lighter, with each
darker line bounded laterally by a slightly lighter stripe; a narrow,
more or less distinct cream or white lateral stripe, not evident
anterior to ear; below this a brownish-gray stripe fading into the
ground color of the ventral surfaces.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
137
On the back one notes two series of lighter markings. On the
first and third scale rows are very dim lighter markings on the
outer half (or third) of alternate scales, while on the third row the
spots may be the size of the scale on alternate scales. These are
only dimly visible (more distinct in K. U. 11021). Aside from this
series of markings are series of small white dots and dashes which
form dotted lines on each of the eight dorsal scale rows, the dots
on the median scale rows on every other scale, those on others on
each scale; these flecks continued to near tip of tail, but here they
are more scattered and suggest dim ambulations, the scales bear-
ing the dots likewise being browner than adjoining scales.
Measurements of Eumeces pavimeiitatus (Geoffroy-St. Hillaire)
Museum. .
Number!
Sex
K.U.
11021
K.U.
11022
9
136
134
209*
I45f
9
9.2
22
22
42
43
80
85
17.5
16
21
19.2
17
20
14
12
35
33
59
54
19.5
18
A.N.S.P.
9661
?
Snout to vent
Tail
Snout to eye
Snout to ear
Snout to foreleg . . .
Axilla to groin
Width of head
Length of head ....
Width of body ....
Postanal tail width.
Foreleg
Hind leg
Longest toe
79
148
6.3
16.6
24
46
11.8
14
8
22
31.6
11
* Broken, f Regenerated, fl Nos. 11021, 11022, "Haiffa, Syria"; 9661, unknown locality.
Variation. Only three specimens have been available for exam-
ination, and two agree quite remarkably in markings and scale
characters. A few variations, however, are evident: superciliaries
7-7, 6-6 and 5-5; lamellae under fourth toe 13-14, 16-16, 15-16;
scales from occiput to above anus 66, 66, 68. In coloration but
little difference is noted. The smaller specimen has the head
covered above with white dots, only dimly evident in the adults;
there is a suggestion of vertical lines behind the ear. A curious
anomally occurs in this smaller specimen. The frontoparietals
are completely wanting, apparently fused with the adjoining scales.
In this specimen, too, the first pair of chinshields are in contact
138 ' The University Science Bulletin
and the postgenial is proportionally larger than the adjoining scale.
There are 126 subcaudal scales in the complete tail.
Remarks. This form differs from the typical schneiderii in a
more slender head and body; with a proportionally longer hind leg;
the limbs touching when adpressed or, in younger specimens,
strongly overlapping (in A.N.S.P. No. 9661 they overlap the width
of nine scales). The nasal is apparently not completely divided
and the first pair of chinshields are not in contact medially. The
markings and color are not distinctive.
Distribution. This species is probably confined to Egypt, Syria
and closely adjacent territory, and it appears to overlap territory
occupied by certain other forms of the group.
Locality records:
Syria: "Haiffa" (K.U. 2) ; Sarona near Jaffa (Senckenberg 2).
Egypt: (Geoffroy-St. Hillaire type; present location of type uncertain).
Eumcces princeps (Eichwald)
(Plate 3, fig. 3; Figs. 10, 14)
SYNONYMY
1839. Euprepes princeps Eichwald. Bull. Soc. Imp. Nat. Moscow, II, 1839, pp. 303-307
(type locality "In ora Caspia occidentali, ad montes praesertim Talyschensis" ; type
probably in Moscow); and Faun. Caspia-Cauc, 1841, pp. 93, 116, pi. XVI, figs. 1,
2, 3; Severtzoff, Nacht. Ges. Moscow, VIII, pt. 2, 1873, p. 72; Nikolsky, Trans.
St. Peters. Nat, Soc, XVII, 1886, p. 406; Zarudny, Bull. Soc. Imp. Nat. Moscow,
1890, p. 295 (Murgab, Tedjent in oases of Merve and Peunde).
(The association of further references to the synonymy of this species must needs await
an examination of the materials on which the records were made. Mere geographical prob-
ability will not suffice as a basis, inasmuch as there is likelihood that the territories occupied
by certain forms overlap, nor will the meager details published suffice.)
History. This species was very early referred to synonymy either
under the name Eumeces schneiderii or Eumeces pavimentatus,
being used only by certain Russian authors. It was revived by
Mertens in 1924, but it is doubtful that the forms associated under
it actually belong to Eichwald's species. In the same year Mertens
placed the name in the synonymy of Eumeces schneiderii schneiderii
(Daudin).
Diagnosis. Above nearly uniformly brownish slate to lavender,
the scales showing some scattered gray flecks. An indistinct, narrow,
lateral cream line beginning on the posterior labials can be traced
through the ear and along the sides to the groin on the sixth and
seventh scale rows; below this line, grayish, becoming somewhat
lighter below. Tail above lighter than body ; mental with distinctly
wider labial border than rostral; presuboculars elongate and very
narrow.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
l:!!)
Description of species (from K.U. No. 11020, Transcaspia $ ).
Rostral high, extending as far back on the snout as a line connecting
the middle of the nasals; the part visible above equally as large as
the frontonasal; supranasals moderately large, in contact medially
for half their width; frontonasal much wider than dee]), touching
the anterior loreals; prefrontals large, much larger than the fronto-
parietals; frontal narrow, a little longer than its distance from the
end of the snout (in pavimentatus much longer [.5 mm. to 2.3 mm.]),
the anterior angles more obtuse than in pavimentatus; fronto-
parietals in contact rather narrowly, the transverse width as great
Fig. 14. Eumeces princeps (Eichwald). K.U. No. 11020; Transcaspia.
A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length, 18.2
mm.; width, 15 mm.
as the length (longer than wide in pavimentatus) ; interparietal
rather large, with as great a length as the parietals ; parietals large,
very wide; four pairs of narrow, widened nuchals.
Nasal large, divided by sutures, one from rostral to nostril, and
one from supranasal to the nostril, the upper moiety nearly twice
as large as that in pavimentatus; no postnasal; anterior loreal
higher than posterior; the latter much longer than high, the upper
edge horizontal, much narrowed posteriorly; preocular small; pre-
suboculars relatively elongated and narrow; seven superciliaries,
the anterior larger than posterior; palpebral scales separated from
middle superciliaries by a row of scales as large as or larger than
palpebrals; and anteriorly and posteriorly by a second series which
is inconspicuous medially; four large plates on lower eyelid (much
more elongate than in pavimentatus) , separated from the subocular
140 The University Science Bulletin
by five scale rows; seven postsuboculars, which reach to the pre-
suboculars, forming an unequal but practically continuous series;
two small postoculars; four supraoculars.
Primary temporal very distinctly smaller than in pavimentatus,
its area less than half the upper secondary temporal; lower second-
ary temporal moderately large, with an area not or only slightly
larger than that of upper secondary, and much higher than long;
tertiary temporal narrow, high, separated from the upper secondary
by a scale, from the ear lobules by one vertically elongate scale
and one smaller scale (in pavimentatus by three or four scales) .
Eight upper labials, first smallest, seventh highest, its area about
equal to that of eighth; eighth labial separated from the ear lobules
by about four rather irregular scales, the lower scale in contact with
the labial largest; mental with a labial border much greater than
that of rostral; two postmentals (the posterior broken on right side;
the part broken is fused with the first chinshield) ; normal chin-
shields on right side three, the second narrower and much broader
than other two; the postgenial smaller and shorter than scale bor-
dering it on its inner side and likewise in contact with the third
chinshield; five or six lower labials; ear opening with four large
lobules, their bases strongly overlapping ; about 22 scales around ear.
The scales on sides of body slightly diagonal in axillary region,
but parallel farther back; the scales of the two median rows much
wider than the adjoining, which in turn are larger than the third
row; scales on side much smaller than the dorsal scales or ventral
scales; 28 scale rows around narrow part of neck; 34 in axillary
region; 26 about middle of body; 20 about base of tail at first
widened subcaudal.
Eight anal plates; the median pair very large, overlapping outer
scales, and each in turn overlapping the scale touching its outer
border; a group of small granular scales in the axilla; a group of
granules posterior to the insertion of the hind limb, extending to
the sides of anus, and when leg is pulled back, a small pocket is
formed beside the anus; lateral postanal in female large and fairly
well differentiated (probably much more so in male) ; 64 scales
from parietal to above anus; 110 -f- subcaudals (tip of tail missing
and probably five to eight subcaudals).
Body slender, elongate; limbs well-developed, overlapping but
slightly when adpressed; digits with terminal lamellae not tightly
bound about claw; palm with a series of larger scales diminishing
in size distally, separated from bases of digits by several series of
Taylor: The (Ikxis Kimkcks
141
small granules; lamellar formula for fingers: 5; 8; 10; 12; 6. Claws
very long (perhaps due to captivity) ; heel plates forming an un-
broken series from basal lamellae of inner toe around to base of
outer toe; scales on sole only slightly enlarged; lamellar formula
for toes: 5; 8; 10; 14; 9.
An intercalated series of scales between the dorsal scales and the
ventral lamellae of toes, on the outer side of the first and second
toes, and the inner side of the fifth toe; on third and fourth toes
they arc on the basal part of the outer side only; on the first,
second and third toes the intercalated scales extend the length of
the toes on the outer side; on the fourth they are absent only on
distal phalanx, and are present on the inner side of the fifth.
Color (in alcohol). As in diagnosis. Limbs much browner and
lighter than dorsal color of body; the tail gradually becoming
lighter toward tip; ear lobules light; upper labials light brownish
on lower part, dark slate on upper part; the supraocular region
lighter than the median region of the head.
Measurements of Eumeces princeps (Eichwald)
Museum
KIT.
Number
11020
Snout to vent
125
Tail
193*
Snout to eye .
7.5
22
Snout to foreleg
35
75
18.2
Width of head .
15
Foreleg
32
47
15
12.5
Width of body .
20
* Extreme tip missing.
Variation. Only the single specimen has been available for
study.
Distribution. Known definitely from the region south of the
Caspian Sea. It probably occurs in Transcaspia to Bokhara and
northern Persia.
142 The University Science Bulletin
Eumeces zarudnyi Nikolsky
(Fig. 10)
SYNONYMY
1899. Eumeces zarudnyi Nikolsky. Ann. Mus. Zool., 4, 1899, p. 399 (type description in
Latin; type locality Seistan and Kirman in Eastern Persia, Zarudny Coll.); Yearb.
Zool. Mus. Imp. Acad. Sci. St. Petersburg, IV, 1899, p. 400 (description in Russian;
I am uncertain which of these two descriptions was first published ; both bear the
date 1899).
History. The three cotypes of this species were collected by N.
A. Zarudny on an expedition into Persia. The localities given are
as follows: No. 9339,* Buzman (Urbs Busman) in Eastern Kirman;
No. 9340, Labeab in Seistan; No. 9341, Schur-ab in eastern Kir-
man. The description, while brief and lacking detail on very
numerous important points, does seem to point to a form worthy
of either specific or subspecific recognition. Unfortunately, I have
seen no specimen referable to this species.
The comparison given is with E. schneiderii, but just what form
Nikolsky has in mind I cannot say since he (Nikolsky, 1905) places
both princeps and pavimentatus as synonyms of schneiderii.
Diagnosis. Related to schneiderii; the hind limb about two to
two and one fifth times in length from snout to vent; anterior loreal
one and one half times as high as wide; frontonasal as long as wide;
no postnasal. Scales in 26 rows.
Description of the species (from Nikolsky). Nasal scales touch-
ing two anterior labials; nostril above the anterior third of the
first labial; postnasal wanting; four supraoculars; (the description
notes five supraoculars, but it appears likely that the last large
superciliary is regarded as the fifth) ; frontonasal as long as wide
or length less than width; three supraoculars touch the frontal;
parietals not in contact behind the interparietal; ear opening large,
the anterior edge with five-six acute lobules; diameter of the ear is
scarcely less than the longitudinal diameter of the eye ; two unpaired
postmental scutes.
Dorsal scales of the body smooth, arranged in 26 longitudinal
rows; lateral scales smaller; scales of four longitudinal vertebral
rows much larger than the abdominal scales; scales of the two
middle vertebral rows twice as wide as long; with limbs adpressed,
the toes touch carpus of front foot; subcaudals widened.
Color. Body brownish-gray above, yellowish-white below; base
of tail red above; a white lateral stripe passes from eye through ear
to femur.
* I designate this specimen as the lectotype.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 143
Measurements of Eumeces zarudnyi Nikolsky
Total length 347 Length of foreleg 36
Tail 236 Length of hind leg 52
Width of head 20
R( marl:s. Whether the specimens mentioned by Blanford (1872)
belong to this species I cannot say, but it seems likely that they
approach closer to this form than to the real pavimentatus. These
specimens, nine in all, were collected in southern Persia (save one
at Pishin, Baluchistan). All the specimens from Persia have 26
scale rows. The only other scale data is as follow: "The foreleg
when laid forward in some specimens only reaches the eye, in others
it extends to the end of the snout. The nasal shield is divided in
all my specimens, and two central rows of dorsal scales are broader
than the others . . . The color is olive gray or sandy gray, with
at times golden yellow longitudinal stripes, varying in breadth and
distribution, down the sides. In two specimens from Sarjan there
are dusky longitudinal bands down the back and sides."
The specimens concerned are two from Sarjan near Karman
(Kirman), southern Persia, 5,500 feet, and six specimens from Niriz,
east of Shiraz, southern Persia, 4,000-6,000 feet elevation.
The specimen from Pishin, Baluchistan, has 28 scale rowrs.
It is quite likely that the specimens from Waziristan noted by
Ingoldsby and Proctor (1923) may likewise belong close to this
form, or represent a distinct species.
Distribution. Known only from the type series from Kirman and
Seistan.
Eumeces blythianus (Anderson)
(Plate 8)
SYNONYMY
1871. Mabouia blythiana Anderson. Proc. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 1871, p. 186 (type descrip-
tion; type locality [?] Amritzur, Punjab; Purchased from a Bokhara merchant, who
stated it was obtained at Amritzur).
1876. Eumeces blythianus Theobald. Desc. Cat. Rept. British India, 1876, p. 66 and p. X,
synopsis (short description taken from type description) ; Blanford, Eastern Persia,
Vol. II (Zoology and Geology), 1870-1872, p. 388; Boulenger, Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus.,
Ill, 1887, p. 385 (redescription of type) ; Boulenger, Fauna of Brit. India, Reptiles,
1890, p. 222 (redescription of type); Finn, Proc. Asiatic Soc. Bengal, July, 1898, pp.
189-190 ; Annandale, Journ. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, New Series, I, No. 5, May, 1905,
p. 150 (type locality listed) ; Boulenger, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1898, p. 722
(Afridi Country, Green Coll.) ; Mertens, Senckenbergiana, Bd. 2, Heft. 6, 1920, p. 179.
History. This species has been known for more than sixty years,
having been described by Anderson in 1871 from a specimen ob-
tained from a merchant from Bokhara, who stated he had obtained
it at Amritzur, Punjab. Most of the data published after this time
on this species has been derived from this carefully made type
144 The University Science Bulletin
description. Practically nothing new has been learned of the form.
A new locality was added by Finn (1898) : Afridi Country (Green,
Collector).
The data incorporated here are drawn chiefly from two photo-
graphs of this last mentioned specimen, prepared for me by Mr.
H. W. Parker of the British Museum. These photographs are re-
markably clear and only a few characters cannot be ascertained
owing to the position of the body. A few data are taken from the
type description.
Diagnosis. A member of the Schneiderii group, the dorsal region
olive-brown, with three brown stripes. A well-defined dark brown
stripe on the side, bordered below by a clearly defined, broad,
yellowish line; limbs well-developed, overlapping when adpressed.
One postmental; no postnasal; prefrontals in contact; 30 scale rows
about the middle of the body; the two median dorsal rows greatly
widened; frontoparietals forming a broad suture; interparietal large,
not inclosed by the parietals; about 60 scales from parietals to
above vent. (Character of anals unknown but presumably as in
other members of the Schneiderii group, with median overlapping
outer.)
Description (drawn from type description and data on a speci-
men in the British Museum of Natural History [No. 98, 7, 12, 1]).
Rostral triangular, hexagonal, separated from the frontonasal by
supranasals, which form a broad suture; frontonasal wider than
long, separated from the loreal (touches loreal in type) ; prefrontals
large, hexagonal, forming a broad median suture, and sutures with
the frontal, first supraocular, first superciliary, both loreals and
the supranasal; frontal large, much wider anteriorly than poste-
riorly, the anterior margin forming an obtuse angle ; frontoparietals
moderate, forming a strong median suture; interparietal large,
broad, very sharply truncate behind (wedge-shaped in type) ; parie-
tals large, widely separated behind interparietal, the right seg-
mented, forming an extra scale between parietal and upper secondary
temporal; three pairs of nuchals, the anterior pair largest.
Nasal divided, the anterior part triangular, posterior part sub-
quadrangular; anterior loreal much higher than wide, higher than
posterior, touching second and third labials; posterior loreal higher
than long; two presuboculars, anterior largest; seven or eight super-
ciliaries, the anterior and posterior largest; primary temporal large;
lower secondary temporal triangular, broadly in contact with pri-
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 145
mary; upper secondary relatively small; tertiary small, separated
from nuchal and upper secondary temporal by a small scale, and
followed posteriorly by a rather large scale; eight upper labials,
five anterior to the subocular, the first and fifth smallest, eighth
largest, distinctly larger than seventh, separated from the auricular
opening by numerous scales, its distance from ear greater than its
length. Six or seven lower labials; an undivided postmental, fol-
lowed by three pairs of chinshields, the anterior pair in contact;
postgenials rather short. Thirty scale rows about body (in type),
the two median much widened transversely, those following the
nuchals likewise very wide and much wider than the adjoining
second row; 59 or 60 scales in a row from parietals to above anus;
two enlarged preanals, with smaller lateral scales; tail rounded,
slightly laterally compressed, one and two thirds times as long as
the body; a row of enlarged subcaudals.
Ear large, surrounded by 21 scales; four well-developed auricular
lobules; limbs well-developed; terminal lamellae not tightly bound
about claws.
Color. ''Olive-brown above; three dark brown longitudinal lines
along the back, from the nape to the base of the tail. A broader
dark-brown band from the eye over tympanum, along the side. A
broad pale-yellowish band below it from below the eye, through
one half of the tympanum along the sides to the groin. A palish
dusky band from the angle of the mouth, over the shoulder, and
along the side below the yellowish band. Upper surface and sides
of tail pale, uniform brownish-olive. All the under parts yellowish."
Measurements* of Eumeces blythianus (Anderson)
Total length 240 Forelimb 28
Head 15 Hind limb 38
Body 75 Tail 150
Variation. With the extremely small number of specimens, little
can be known about the amount of variation. Blanford (1872),
speaking of a series of specimens which he identified as Eumeces
pavimentatus Geoff., states: "I find 26 scales round the middle of
the body in all specimens except one, which is from Pishin in
Baluchistan, and has 28, this showing a tendency to a passage into
the very closely allied Mabouia Blythiana Anderson." It appears
that his opinion is based on the key characters of scale rows. I
doubt greatly that the species are in reality more closely related
* From Boulenger (1887).
10 — 1123
146 The University Science Bulletin
than schneideri and algeriensis. Finn (1898) mentions "red spots"
on his specimens.
Distribution. Known definitely only from the Afridi district,
India, Afghan borderland. (Brit. Mus. 1.)
Eumeces algeriensis algeriensis (Peters)
(Plates 9, 10, Figs. 2, 3; Figs. 12, 15)
SYNONYMY
1837. Scincus cyprius (non Cuvier) Gervais. Ann. Sci. Nat., (2), VI, 1836 (1837), p. 309
(listed from Barbarie).
1839. Plestiodon aldrovandii (part.) Dumeril and Bibron. Erp. Gen., V, p. 701; Gervais,
Ann. Sci. Nat., (3), 1848, X, pp. 204-205; Dumeril, Arch, du Mus., VII, p. 219;
Guichenot, Expl. Sci. Algerie Pend. Ann., 1840-1842 (1850), p. 17 (Bone); Dumeril,
Cat. Rept. Paris Mus., 1851, p. 104 (part.); Eichwald, Nouv. Mem. Soc. Nat. Moscou,
(2), IX, 1851, p. 487; Dumeril and Dumeril, Cat. Meth. Coll. Rept. Mus. Hist. Nat.
Paris, 1851, p. 164 (part.) (Bone [Guichenot] and Frontiere S-E de Algerie
[Pelissier] ).
1845. Plestiodon auratus Gray. Cat. Liz. British Mus., 1845, p. 91 (part.) ; Jan, Ann. Mus.
Civ. Milano, Ind. Sist. Rett. Anf., 1857, p. 6.
1862. Plestiodon cyprium Strauch. Mem. Acad. Imp. Sci., St. Petersbourg, (7), IV, No. 7,
1862, p. 44 (St. Cloud, Le Sig and Arzew).
1864. Eumeces pavimentatus var. algeriensis Peters. Mon. KSnigl. Preus. Acad. Wiss. Berlin,
1864, pp. 48-49 ("type^description") ; Boettger, Abh. Senckenb. Nat. Ges., XIII,
1883, p. 120 (separate p. 28; discussion and numerous localities given).
1873. Eurneaes pavimentatus (non. Geoffroy-St. Hillaire) Boettger. Abh. Senckenb. Nat.
Ges., IX, 1873, p. 140 (separate p. 20) (redescribed from Morocco); Boettger, Ber.
Senck. Nat. Ges., 1880-1881, p. 145.
1887. Eumeces algeriensis Boulenger. Cat. Liz. British Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 384 (N-West
Africa); Boettger, Cat. Rept. Samm. Mus. Senckenb. Nat. Ges., Teil I, 1893, p. 112
(Casablanca, Ebendaher) ; Olivier, Mem. Soc. Zool. France, 1894, pp. 1-36; Boulenger,
Trans. Zool. Soc. London, XIII, 1895, p. 136, pi. XVI; Boulenger, Novitates Zool.,
XII, 1905, pp. 73-77 (Dellai'n, Diruchan, Atlas of Morocco); Beddard, Proc. Zool.
Soc. London, May 16, 1905 (notes on circulation and brain of Eumeces algeriensis);
Zulueta, Bol. Real Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat., VIII, Dec, 1908, pp. 454-455 (Mogador);
Zulueta, idem, IX, Julio, 1909, p. 354; Pellegrin, Bull. Soc. Zool. France, XXXVII,
1912, pp. 256 and 263 (Fedhalla, Azemmour, Mogador, Fort Gurgens) ; Hediger,
Bliitt. fur Aquar-Terr-kund, XXXIX, No. 20, 1928, p. (Rabat); Werner, Sitz. Acad.
Wiss. Wien. Math-Natur Klasse, Abt. 1, Band 138, Heft 1 and 2, 1929, pp. 14 and
19 (Casablanca); Werner., idem, Band 140, Heft 3 and 4, 1931, pp. 292, 293
(Taforalt-Berkane Tiznit, Agadir.) ; and idem, p. 257.
1900. Eumeces algeriensis algeriensis Domergue. Bull. Soc. Geog. Arch. Oran, 1900, p. 270,
pi. IX.
1920. Eumeces schneiderii algeriensis Mertens. Senckenbergiana, II, 1920, pp. 176-179
(discussion; as subspecies); Mertens, idem, VI, Heft 5 and 6, Nov. 1, 1924, pp. 182-
184.
History. The first published authentic record of this species
seems to be that of Paul Gervais (1837), who reported a specimen
of Scincus cyprius Cuv. collected in Algeria by Doctor Guyon.
Dumeril and Bibron (1839) mention a specimen from Algeria like-
wise collected by Doctor Guyon (perhaps the same specimen)
under the name Plestiodon aldrovandii. Strauch (1862) reports
three specimens as Plestiodon cyprium from St. Cloud, Le Sig and
Arzew, and mentions a specimen collected by Guichenot at Bone
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 147
and specimens in the Paris Museum from the southeastern frontier
of Algeria collected by Pelissier.
Peters (1865), in a discussion of the genus Eumeces, mentions
the northwest African specimens as "var. Algeriensis," with scarcely
more "description" than to note that the specimen from Persia
agrees with the Egyptian form but was separated by shape and
certain head scale characters from the variety algeriensis.
Boettger 11878) noted the form in Morocco as Eumeces pavi-
mentatus, and later (1883) reverts to the name proposed by Peters
i Eumeces pavimentatus algeriensis).
Boulenger (1887) gave the form full specific rank, as it deserves,
and it so has been treated by subsequent authors with the exception
of Robert Mertens (1920), who suggests that the west Algerian and
Moroccan form is of only subspecific importance, and later (1924)
definitely places algeriensis as a subspecies of Eumeces schneiderii
and likewise throws into synonymy Domergue's (1900) Eumeces
algeriensis meridionalis. The species is treated here with specific
rank. There appears to be no intergradation of characters be-
tween this and the North African form of Eumeces schneiderii. I
believe it wise to recognize two forms, algeriensis algeriensis, and
a. meridionalis Domergue.
Boulenger (1895), who discusses the distribution of algeriensis
and schneiderii, shows that algeriensis is confined to Morocco and
Oran (absent in the Tangiers peninsula, Tangitanian District),
while schneiderii occurs in Constantine and Tunesia.
One may presume that algeriensis is a form long isolated by
desert from the eastern stock. The occurrence of schneiderii in
adjacent territory (possibly overlapping) may be a relatively recent
approach due to a lessening of desert conditions along the coast.
Diagnosis. A very large member of the Schneiderii group, lack-
ing evidence of longitudinal lines. A series of irregular transverse
light bands alternating with similar ocellated bands (reddish in
life) on a brown ground color. Four pairs of nuchals; eight or
nine upper labials, five or six preceding the subocular labial; pre-
and postsubocular series continuous; upper scales on lower eyelid
not or only slightly enlarged; an area of granular juxtaposed scales
following the insertion of hind leg, forming a pocket-like depression
when leg is folded back; median dorsal scales wider than adjoining
scale rows ; 28-32 rows about middle of body, the scales more or less
keeled; median preanals overlap smaller outer preanal scales; nostril
above suture of first labial and rostral ; mental with smaller labial
148
The University Science Bulletin
border than rostral; two postmentals; no postnasal; limbs touch or
are slightly separated when adpressed.
Description of species. Portion of rostral visible above very
large, separating the nasals by a relatively narrow distance, and
not extending farther back than highest point of nasals; supranasals
placed diagonally, forming a median suture; frontonasal relatively
small, a little wider than long, in contact laterally with the anterior
loreal, not or but slightly larger than a prefrontal; prefrontals
forming a broad median suture, and sutures with the frontal,
frontonasal, posterior loreal, anterior loreal, first superciliary, and
first supraocular, their length in the order named; frontal not or
Fig. 15. Eumeces algeriensis algeriemis (Peters). K.U. No. 11019;
Casablanca, Morocco. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head.
Actual head length, 30 mm.; width, 29 mm.
scarcely angular anteriorly, the sides somewhat concave posteriorly,
touching three supraoculars; frontoparietals quadrangular, forming
a median suture; interparietal short, truncate posteriorly; parietals
rather transversely placed, wider than long, not in contact behind
interparietal; four (or five) pairs of nuchals (in one specimen the
posterior part of the left parietal segmented and a small intercalated
scale between the first pair of nuchals) .
Nasal large, divided by two grooves, one running from nostril to
supranasal and another to the rostral, wedged between the rostral
and first labial, in contact with the second labial; anterior loreal
little higher than posterior loreal; latter as high as long; the
presuboculars and postsuboculars forming a continuous series; four
supraoculars; six superciliaries, the anterior and posterior large,
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 149
approaching the first supraocular in size; primary temporal large
(divided on left side in one) ; upper secondary quadrangular, not
as large as the lower secondary temporal, which forms a broad
suture with the anterior; tertiary temporal present, single (or
divided into two parts on left side) ; nine (or eight) upper labials,
the first much the smallest, its suture with the rostral less than half
the height of the scale, separated from the anterior loreal; seven or
eight lower labials; last large labial followed by a pair of large
postlabials, the lower of the two much the larger, and might be
mistaken for one of the labial series; these followed by four vertical
rows of scales diminishing in size as the ear is approached; four
well-defined ear lobules, more or less rounded behind; mental small,
the labial border much less than that of the rostral; two post-
mentals, the posterior much the larger, and (abnormally) partially
fused with the fust pair of chinshields; three pairs of chinshields,
all separated, third followed by a short and broad postgenial; this
latter followed by a second, more elongated scale.
Upper eyelid well-developed, the upper palpebral scales separated
from the superciliaries by four or five rows of granules; scales
bordering the lower palpebral scales not or only slightly enlarged,
separated from the subocular by six or seven rows of granules and
the subocular series ; ear surrounded by about twenty scales.
Scales on the body in longitudinal rows, the median series dis-
tinctly widened; about 70 scales from occiput to above anus; 38
scales about neck behind ear; 33 about constricted portion of neck;
45 about body at axillary region; 30 about the middle of body; 24
about base of tail; dorsal, and ventral scales to a lesser extent,
wrinkled or keeled; head scales somewhat rugose.
Limbs well-developed. Twenty-eight scales about the insertion
of forearm; scales in axillary region granular; wrist without a wrell-
defined tubercle, this area being covered with four scales of equal
size; scales of forearm merge gradually into the rounded flattened
tubercles of palm, which are subequal over much of the surface;
lamellar formula of fingers: 6; 10; 12; 13; 8. Fingers with an inter-
calated series of scales on outer side (except fifth, on inner side) ;
the terminal lamellae not tightly bound about the claws; about 34
scales around the insertion of the hind leg, an area of small granu-
lar scales forming a shallow pocket behind insertion; toes with an
intercalated series of scales on outer side. Lamellar formula of
toes: 7; 11; 13; 14; 9; scales of leg gradually merge into the rounded
15t
The University Science Bulletin
flattened tubercles of heel and sole, which gradually become smaller
and more imbricating toward the base of the median toes. Six
preanal scales, the median pair much enlarged, overlapping the
adjoining scale, which in turn overlaps the very small, scarcely
differentiated outermost scale; lateral postanal scale differentiated
noticeably, its surfaces raised and rounded; subcaudal scales
much widened (normally about 34 scales). Head much widened
posteriorly.
Color (in alcohol). Above, brown to tan; the head generally more
orange-brown on anterior part; beginning on shoulder the body is
traversed by irregular light bands about one scale wide, separated
by three scale rows, but growing wrider low on sides; the median of
these three rows bears a transverse band of somewhat ocellated
spots. Rostral, nasal and anterior labials light. A light cream spot
on seventh and eighth labials, another anterior to ear; two or three
vertical spots of cream on side of neck, the anterior partially in-
volving the ear; limbs and tail of a lighter tan than body; all ventral
surfaces dull cream.
Measurements of Eumeces alg
?riensis
T,lgeriensis
(Peters)
Museum
Numberf
M.C.Z.
4159
M.C.Z.
31449
Kas.
11019
Phil.
12123
U.S.N. M.
37290
Mich.
65763
Phil.
12122
M.C.Z.
31450
Total length
285*
358
381*
305*
Snout to vent
122
9.5
163
10
173
13
175
11
180
185
185
11.5
185
Snout to eye
14
Snout to ear .
29
41
29
48
36
54
35
57
38
54
37
Snout to foreleg
55
55
61
Tail
163
23
23
195
38
33
208
29
30
220
30
32
Width of head
23
30
35
33
30
31
32
Length of head
33
Width of body .
36
40
Foreleg
38
43
49
47
46
50
49
48
Hind leg
46
49
60
56
53
58
60
54
Longest toe
14
15
20
17
20
16
18.2
16
Postanal tail width
15
21
20
23
23
18
21
Axilla to groin
65
68
92
97
107
100
95
95
* Tip missing or regenerated.
t 4159, N. Africa; 31449 and 31450, Taforalt; 11019, Casablanca, Mor. ; 12123, 12122,
West Africa; 37290, Oran, Algeria; 65763, West Africa; 31450, Maraaf, near Casablanca,
Mor.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 151
Variation. The largest specimen examined measures 207 mm.
snout to vent (locality uncertain; A.N.S.P. No. 9386). The number
of subcaudals varies from 83 to 86 in the specimens with perfect tail,
85 in one with the extreme tip regenerated. The parietals are
inclosed in none.
In ten specimens, the scales from parietals to above anus vary
between 66 and 71, the number 66 occurring twice. 67 four times,
68 once, 69 once, 70 once, and 71 once. The scale rows on neck
vary from 29 to 33, the average being about 31; scale rows about
the middle of the body 28 to 30, 28 occurring twice, 29 once, and
30 seven times. Scales about base of tail vary from 20 to 26. The
labia's are usually 8-8, the number 9-9 occurring twice, and 8-9 once.
The nuchals are usually 5-5, 5-4 occurring three times and 4-4 once.
Invariably two postmentals and no postnasals occur.
Superciliaries five to seven, the usual number being 5-5; 7-7 occurs
twice. There are either four or three ear lobules, three being a
little more frequent. The frontonasal is never in contact with the
frontal. Subdigital lamellae under fourth toe eleven to fourteen,
11 occurring twice, 12 five times, 13 five times and 14 seven times.
The primary temporal tends to divide, this condition being present
in five specimens.
Distribution. This subspecies appears to be confined to the
countries of Morocco and western Algeria, north of the Sahara.
Locality records:
Morocco: Mogador (Brit. Mus. 1) (Zulueta, 1908; numerous specimens)
(Pellegrin, 1912) (Boettger, 1883); Dellain, Diruchan. Atlas of Morocco
(Boulenger, 1905) ; Melilla (Zulueta, 1909, 1 spec.) ; Fedhalla (Pellegrin,
1912); Azemmour (Pellegrin, 1912); Fort Gurgens (Pellegrin, 1912); Sale
Oved (Pellegrin, 1912); Ykem Talaint (Pellegrin, 1912); Anti-Atlas, 650
meters (Pellegrin, 1912); Morocco (Brit, Mus. 1); Rabat (Hediger, 1928)
(Pellegrin, 1912); Casablanca (K.U. 1) (Boettger, 1883) (Werner, 1929).
Algeria: Oran (Brit. Mus. 1) (Paris Mus. 1) (TJ.S.N.M. 1); St. Cloud
(Strauch, 1862); Le Sig (Strauch, 1862); Arzew (Strauch, 1862); Bone
(Guichenot, 1850); Fleurus (Oran Mus.) Taforalt (M.C.Z. 1); Chapelle
Santa-Cruz (Domergue, 1900) ; Djebel Yeffry (Domergue, 1900) ; Saint-
Lucien (Domergue, 1900) ; Kleber (Domergue, 1900) ; Saint Leu (Dom-
ergue, 1900) ; Ai'n-Temouchent (Domergue, 1900) ; Lamoriciere (Domergue,
1900).
Unidentified localities: Northwest Africa (Brit. Mus. 5) ; West Africa (A.N.S.P
2) (Mich. U. 1); North Africa (M.C.Z. 1).
152 The University Science Bulletin
Eumeces algeriensis meridionalis Domergue
(Fig. 12)
SYNONYMY
1900. Eumeces algeriensis var. meridionalis Domergue. Soc. Geog. Arch. Prov. Oran, XX,
1900, p. 272, pi. XVI, fig. 3 (type description; type locality, Ain Sefra) ; Werner,
Sitz. Kaiserl. Akad. Wiss. Math., Natur. Klasse Wien., CXXIII, pt. IV, Apr., 1914,
pp. 352, 354, 350; and ibid, CXXXVIII Band, Abt, I, Heft 1 and 2, 1929, p. 11
(Ain Sefra).
History. This form was first recognized by Domergue (1900)
in his work on the Herpetology of Oran, and very briefly char-
acterized. The characters chosen to distinguish the form are those
based on the "sousoculaires" (the pre- and postsuboculars), the first
superciliary, and the ear lobules. The type specimen is very young,
"de 11 et 15 mm." Domergue states that three adult examples were
later received from M. Gaston Buchet from Cap Sim (Mogador),
which he refers to the same variety. Whether his reference of these
specimens to 'meridionalis can be taken so that they can be regarded
as part of the type series I do not know. If so, I propose to desig-
nate the smaller, Ain Sefra, specimen as the lectotype, as there may
be some doubt as to whether the two forms should be regarded as
the same subspecies.
Diagnosis. Related to algeriensis algeriensis but differing in hav-
ing a lower number of scales (usually six or seven less) from occiput
to above vent; a reduction in the number of nuchals (usually only
a single pair instead of four or five). Two or four scale rows less
about the tail at base; a higher number of superciliaries (usually
8-8) ; 8-10 scales in the combined pre- and postsubocular series;
these narrow and elongate instead of nearly square.
Scales, in 27 or 28 rows about middle of body; upper labials, 8-8;
postmentals, two; no postnasal; subdigital lamellae under fourth
toe 18; an area of granular scales posterior to insertion of hind leg;
inner preanals overlap outer scales.
The markings are generally similar to those of algeriensis.
Variation. Among the three topotypes from Ain Sefra in the
Harvard Museum of Comparative Zoology, there is a rather negli-
gible amount of variation. The scales from parietals to above anus
are 62, 62, 60. Scales about the narrow part of neck are 30, 29, 30;
in axillary region, 36, 36, 36; around middle of body, 28, 27, 28;
upper labials, 8-8, 8-8, 8-8. (On the last specimen the eighth labial
on one side is broken) ; scales around ear, 19, 19, 20. The supra-
oculars are in the first 4-5, one scale being broken; in the second the
supraoculars are badly broken; in the third they are normally 4-4;
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces
153
Measurements of Eumeces algeriensis meridionalis Domergue
Museum.
Number .
Snout to vent . . .
Tail
Snout to eye. . . .
Snout to ear . . .
Snout to foreleg.
Axilla to groin. .
Width of head. . .
Length of head. .
Postanal width . .
Foreleg
Hind leg
Longest toe
M C.Z.
27455
124
176*
8
23
40
67
22
23
17
34
44
12
M.C.Z.
27454
119
132*
8
24
37
63
21
22
14
30
39
11.5
M.C.Z
27 153
87
119
7
19
29
45
16
17
9
25
33
11
* Regeneratul.
postmentals invariable; behind anus, only one or two divided sub-
caudals, followed by 93 (in smallest) widened subcaudals; pre-
frontals invariably in contact; three supraoculars (normally touch
frontal) ; pre- and postsubocular series 8-9, 9-10, 7-9. The temporals
and posterior labials are much the same, save that in the first and
largest, the upper secondary temporal is divided abnormally.
Color variation. No. 27455. Light transverse bars strongly evi-
dent; the ocellated lines dimly indicated; white lateral spots con-
tinuous with the transverse bars; top of head strongly clotted with
brown. Ground color olive, tail lighter in color than body. Neck
spots dim.
No. 27454. Same as the preceding, but the ocellated lines more
distinct; head heavily spotted, rostral brown. Nasal, supranasals
light without spots; labials light with some white blotches.
No. 27453. The lines of ocelli extend as far as nuchals; 17 or 18
light transverse lines; ten or twelve lateral spots continuous with
the transverse lines; tail distinctly banded with lighter.
It appears that the three specimens listed here are those mentioned
by Werner (1929), although there are slight discrepancies in the
measurements.
Distribution. This subspecies is known from the type locality,
Ain Sefra. Domergue has placed in the subspecies specimens from
Mogador, but this association may be questioned until verified by
other material from this localitv.
154 The University Science Bulletin
LONGIROSTRIS GROUP
A single species, Eumeces longirostris, is included, characterized
by dorsolateral and lateral light lines, which become more or less
lost in the adult ; the scale rows on the sides are in diagonal rather
than in parallel rows; a postnasal; a single, undivided postmental;
scales in 32-36 rows; four supraoculars; three pairs of chinshields;
limbs elongate, strongly overlapping when adpressed (in adults) ;
eight (or ten) scales border anterior edge of anus; outer two or three
small, the third or fourth somewhat larger, overlapping the median
enlarged anals and the adjoining outer anal scale. A group of small
scales behind insertion of hind leg.
The single isolated species, Eumeces longirostris (Cope), con-
sidered in this group, combines features that are characteristic of
certain other groups, as, for example, the complete separation of the
palpebrals from the superciliaries; the group of smaller scales fol-
lowing the insertion of the hind leg; and the much enlarged lower
secondary temporal, all suggest characters occurring in members of
the Schneiderii group. However, it differs from these in many of
their most typical characters.
It has the general color pattern of the Skiltonianus or Anthr acinus
groups, but differs in the character of the preanal scales, the
squamation of the digits, the general character (shape) of the
temporals, the general contours of the body, longer legs, the much
greater number of scale rows, and their direction of growth on the
sides. In this latter character, the diagonal rows of scales, it
agrees with obsoletus, but here the resemblance ceases. From the
Fasciatus group, which occupies the territory along the Atlantic
coast, it differs in most of the diagnostic characters.
Should we hypothesize that it is a form that has reached the
Bermudas from continental America, derived from some form now
living, we would have to consider these unique modifications as an
immediate result of restriction to a low oceanic island and the
intricate interplay of associated environmental factors which have
acted as the stimulus for the mutations or have selected them. I
am inclined to the opinion that it is a relic of the more ancient
dissemination of the group (genus) as evidenced by the presence
of the Schwartzei group in Mexico and Central America, with the
most closely related Taeniolatus group in the Central and Western
Asiatic regions. It may be regarded as a form contemporaneous
with the ancestors of the present Fasciatus, Anthracinus and Skil-
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 155
tonianus groups, that has maintained its primitive characters due
to its long sojourn in an environment that has in all probability
changed hut little since its arrival.
Eumeces longirostris (Cope)
(Plate 11; Figs. 1<;. 17)
SYNONYMY
1859. Scincus related to S. fasciatus, Jones. Naturalist in Bermuda.
1860. Scincus fasciatus Godet. Bermuda, 1860, p. 251.
1860. Scincus ocellatus Godet. Bermuda. I860, p. 251.
1861. Plestiodon longirostris Cope. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Pbila., Oct., 1861, pp. 312-314
(type description: type locality, Bermuda); Garman, Bull. Essex Inst., XVI, .Ian. 9,
1884, p. l") (under Eumeces); Stejneger and Barbour, Checklist X. Amer. Amph. Rept.,
HUT. p. 70.
1*7."'. Eumeces longirostris Cope. Bull. V. S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, 1875, p. 4."> (Bermuda
Islands); Goode, Amer. Jour. Sci., 1877, p. 290; Garman, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No.
25, 1885, part 4, Rept. Bermuda, pp, 287-289 (detailed history and description of
the species); Boulenger, Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, pp. 368-369; Cope, Ann.
Rep. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1898 (1900), pp. 631-632, fig. 124; Fowler, Proc. Acad.
Nat. Sci. Phila., LXVII, Apr,, 1915, p. 254 (Ducking Stool, Bermuda): Steuiegr and
Barbour, Checklist N. Amer. Amph. Rept., 2d Ed., 1923, p. 76; idem, 3d Ed., 1933,
P. 31.
History. This species appears to have been first noticed by Mr.
Jones, in 1859, in "The Naturalist in Bermuda." He reported it
as common, while former writers had either not mentioned it or
stated that lizards did not occur. D. T. L. Godet, in ''Bermuda," in
I860, mentioned two species, Scincus fasciatus and Scincus ocellatus.
It Avould appear that he mistook old males for the ocellatus, and
the young blue-tailed ones for the Scincus fasciatus.
In 1861 Cope described the species under the name Plestiodon
longirostris, giving a careful description, and comparing the form
with Plestiodon laticeps.
Garman (1885) gives a good description and reviews the history
of the species. He calls attention to the fact that Captain John
Smith, of colonial fame, reported "large" lizards on the islands in
earlier times, but at the time of his writing they were extinct, having
been killed by cats. Garman is uncertain whether the author might
be referring to this species or to a larger insular species such as
occurs now in the Galapagos Islands. The term "large" is or may be
very relative, and unfortunately no standard of size is given.
The six types were collected by J. H. Darrell, who sent them to
the U. S. National Museum. The type locality is "Bermuda."
Later, Yarrow (1882) reports another specimen in the United
States National Museum, collected by G. Brown Goode. In 1887,
Boulenger describes the form from a lot of four specimens obtained
in Bermuda by the Challenger Expedition. Since that time large
156 The University Science Bulletin
series have reached Eastern Museums, collected by Philip Pope,
L. S. Mobray, E. Q. Vanatta, T. H. Bean, R. L. Ditmars, T. Bar-
bour, Mr. Gross and E. L. Mark.
The six types are catalogued under U.S.N.M. No. 4737. I desig-
nate the largest specimen, having a body length of 71 millimeters
and a tail length of approximately 76 millimeters, as the lectotype.
The series is in good condition.
Diagnosis. Eumeces longirostris is a medium-sized species of the
genus, reaching a body length of 80 mm., characterized by a dorso-
lateral line beginning above the first superciliary and continuing to
base of tail; a lateral line beginning on the anterior labials and
continuing to tail, sometimes broken on side of neck; evidence of a
sublatoral line in young. Scales small, in 32-36 rows around body,
the dorsal and lateral scales smaller than ventrals, the laterals
smallest, and arranged in distinct diagonal rows on the sides of
body; a postnasal present; the postmenfal undivided; limbs long,
strongly overlapping (18 millimeters in adults) when adpressed;
four supraoculars, three touching the frontal; a large pair of nuchals,
sometimes followed by a second very narrow pair; seven or eight
upper labials, four or five preceding the subocular. The typical
lines are lost in old specimens.
Description of species. Rostral distinctly wider than high (2 mm.
to 21/2mm.), forming an angle behind; supranasals relatively very
large, forming a broad median suture, touching nasal and postnasal
laterally, the first loreal and frontonasal posteriorly; the suture
with the loreal less than half that with the frontonasal; frontonasal
much broader than long, forming sutures with the anterior loreals;
prefrontals large, very wide, forming a median suture equal to half
their width, laterally in contact with the two loreals, the suture
with the first less than half that with the second; the suture of the
first supraocular large, that of first superciliary small (K.U. 7280
abnormal in having the first superciliary broken and joining with
a segment from the first supraocular so that there are five supra-
oculars on the left side ) ; frontal forming an obtuse angle anteriorly,
broadly in contact with the three anterior supraoculars, abruptly
pointed behind, separating the frontoparietals and coming in contact
with the attenuated end of the interparietal (or with frontoparietals
in contact narrowly ) ; parietals not greatly widened, separated
widely by the interparietal; one pair of nuchals, normally (rarely
two; when present, the anterior much larger but not so wide trans-
versely as the posterior) ; frontoparietals small, touching two supra-
oculars.
Taylor: The Genus Kr. mixes 157
Nostril pierced in the nasal, which is divided by two sutures
from nostril, the posterior part small, being merely the rim of the
nostril, the anterior part smaller than postnasal; the nostril is
posterior to suture of first labial with rostral; postnasal distinct,
touching two labials; two loreals, both very low, the anterior loreal
not higher than greatest height of second; latter longer than high,
truncate posteriorly, separated from the subocular labial by two
presubocular scales, the anterior much larger than posterior; seven
or eight superciliaries; four supraoculars normally, three touching
the frontal ; five small postsuboculars, upper posterior enlarged, the
Fig. 16. Eumeces longirostris (Cope). K.TJ. No. 7280; Castle Island,
Bermuda Islands. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Ac-
tual head length, 14 mm.; width, 12 mm.
others scarcely differentiated from small scales of lower eyelid; ten
upper palpebral scales, normally separated from the superciliaries
by a row of small granules; lower eyelid with a series of enlarged,
vertically elongate scales, separated from the subocular by five rows
of small granular scales; two very small postoculars.
Eight upper labials, the fifth smallest, the eighth largest, or
seventh and eighth of nearly equal size and height; the primary
temporal quadrangular, wedged between and forming equal sutures
with the seventh and eighth labials, separated from the parietal by
the last postsubocular; two large secondary temporals, the upper
elongate, slender, nearly three times as long as wide, in contact
with the parietal its entire length; lower secondary temporal very
large, much larger than eighth labial, its lower posterior side slightly
rounded; this is followed by a narrow, elongated tertiary temporal;
eighth labial separated from ear by three or four postlabial scales
158 The University Science Bulletin
covering a distance equal to the entire length of eighth labial;
temporals separated from ear by one or two scales; ear opening
large, vertically oval, twice as high as wide.
Mental large, having a much wider labial border than the rostral;
postmental single, very large; three pairs of chinshields, the first
pair in contact, two following pairs separated; third pair followed
by an elongate postgenial and a smaller, similarly shaped scale,
longer than wide.
Dorsal scales larger than laterals, and usually smaller than
ventrals; scale rows on sides of body and tail diagonal; the median
ventral series of the tail somewhat widened (about 1.2 to 2.9 mm.),
109 scales in the subcaudal series. The number of scales in a row
from parietal to above anus, 63 to 67 ; scales about auricular opening
26 to 31 ; two or three minute lobules on auricular margin.
Thirty scales about insertion of leg; about 24 around insertion of
arm; outer wrist tubercle rounded, padlike, separated from typical
arm scales by three rows of granules. Ten or eleven large, rounded,
padlike scales on palm surrounded by smaller granular scales, and
a few interpolated among the group; the lamellae under proximal
two thirds of toes flattened pads, not imbricating; one or two series
of intercalated scales on basal half (or two thirds) of fingers on
inner side, between the dorsal and ventral lamellae; none on outer
side. On the toes, this same condition exists, the two intercalated
series reaching to or almost to the last distal joint.
Claws short, thick, the terminal lamellae not bound tightly about
claws; heel scales large, contiguous, juxtaposed, none of the larger
or smaller scales on the sole imbricating. In the axilla there is a
group of small, nonimbricating, pavementlike scales, and a similar
but somewhat less extensive group back of the insertion of the hind
leg; lamellar formula for fingers: 8; 11; 15; 17; 11; for toes: 9; 13;
18; 24; 14.
Ten scales border anterior edge of vent, the three outer on each
side very small ; the fourth enlarged somewhat, and overlapping the
very strongly enlarged median scales, and likewise overlapping
the adjoining smaller scale, differing thus from other known species;
three scales in the lateral postanal region of males differentiated;
these are somewhat rounded on the surface and shaped differently
from the surrounding scales. The pitting on the scales is extensive,
occurring along the sides of neck and body and for some distance
on the tail; these are also prominent in posthumeral and post-
femoral regions; a few dorsal scales likewise have dim evidence of
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 159
pits. There are usually six pits, frequently more; they are elon-
gated, extending along the posterior edge of the scale for a short
distance.
Body moderately stout, with a relatively short axilla to groin
measurement, the distance from the snout to forearm contained in
the axilla to groin distance 1.3 times; limbs strongly developed,
the adpressed hind limb reaching elbow of adpressed foreleg or just
failing to reach the axilla; the foreleg about two thirds the distance
from axilla to groin, reaching forward to beyond eye; the width of
body contained in head and body length little more than five times;
tail heavy, thick at base; head slender, somewhat longer than wide,
the snout somewhat elongated but not conspicuously so. Diameter
of eye contained 1.35 times in the distance from tip of snout.
Color and markings (from K.U. No. 8215, Bermuda). General
ground color of dorsal region grayish olive, practically uniform on
four median rows anteriorly, and six median rows posteriorly;
dorsolateral line light greenish to creamy white. It originates on
the edge of first supraocular, continues back to base of tail, covering
2 half scale rows; it is bordered above by a deep brown line equal
to one scale row in width anteriorly, narrowing posteriorly; rostral
region light, with two light areas extending back along prefrontals
and onto sides of frontal; labials with a few scattered, creamy, ir-
regularly placed whitish spots, more or less linear in arrangement,
the line passing through ear and continuing as a broken series of
spots to above forelimb, becoming continuous here and continuing
to groin; between the light lines the color is deep chocolate brown
for a width of about four to four and a half scales; ventral to lower
light line and bordering it is a narrow, dark chocolate-brown stripe ;
chin and lower labials light, belly bluish gray; the lateral brown
stripe continues some distance on tail.
Variation. This form, like most of the other species, shows con-
siderable variation in the evolution of the color pattern due to age.
The scale relationships appear rather constant. Some 40 specimens
examined show the postnasal present in all save one (A.M.N.H. No.
27180), and only a single specimen (A.M.N.H. No. 27172) has two
postmentals. The number of labials varies between seven and eight.
The latter number is due to the breaking of the third or fourth
labials into two parts. Thus either four or five labials precede the
subocular labial. In forty specimens, 25 have five preceding the
subocular (eight upper labials) and 14 have four preceding the
subocular (seven labials) and one specimen four on one side, five
160
The University Science Bulletin
CD
P.
o
U
ec
O
C»
o
» — a
cc
<^
O
<»
3
^
a
CO
s-
3
-
o
CO
H
-^ CO
.2©»
M CO
gin
-.so
Ss
02 •*
02-*
CO-tf
/. -t
S *
3.0
Sax
t- CM
00
ID
01
O 01
■1 Ol
05
i-i i-i O "5
oi co i-h co
00
t^ co
o>
to
"*
O
o
U3
CO
Ol
T-i
^H
i— 1
Ol
^H
Ol
CO
1—1
t-- Ol
rt oo
rt tO
rH CO
to oi
to CO
lO Ol
co
CO
Ol
lO
to
o
to
OS
co >ra
co i-i
o
Ol
o co
CM i-H
C5 -H T)H
r-i co i-i
m >n <-i
iH CM i-H
lC ^ ^H
•-I Ol i-l
i-i o
tM —I
0)
-a
o
o
H
03
--
3
3
M
o
O
o
s
a
a
a
o
CO
CO
CO
i-l
£ £
co
O
Cm
o
-a
a
so
c
o
Ml
O
tf
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 161
on the other. The number of superciliaries varies: the number 5
appears five times; 6, sixteen times; 7, fourteen times, while 8 only-
three times. In two cases the number differed on sides of same
animal: 8-7; 7-8. A single specimen showed variation in the
supraoculars. The subdigital lamellae under the longest toe varies
from 19 to 25 as follows. The number 19 appears once; 20, two
times; 21, eleven times; 22, sixteen times; 23, five times; 24, one
time, and 25, once.
The character of the temporals varies somewhat from that given
in the description, but the condition described may be regarded as
typical; the upper secondary temporal is frequently segmented,
forming two upper temporals, the posterior part the larger; the
tertiary temporal may likewise be divided. Occasionally the second
pair of transversely widened nuchals is absent on one or both sides.
The relationships of the frontonasal to the loreal, and the union of
the prefrontals, appear to be constant.
The coloration given is that of a young male, probably adult,
since the testes are large. In younger specimens the markings are
generally on the same plan. There are markings on the rostral and
on the canthus rostralis that are analogous to the anterior part of
the two lines formed by the bifurcation of the median line in other
species. The tail is bluish or purplish black.
In an older female (K.U. No. 8211), the dorsal coloration is
grayish-olive, and the dorsolateral light lines are still more or less
in evidence bordering the brown lateral stripe; but practically no
trace remains of the narrow brown stripe bordering the dorsolateral
light stripe above, save a few brownish flecks. The lateral brown
band is of a very light brown color, broken up by diagonal series
of light greenish dots forming diagonal rows; these are distinct, low
on the sides, and may reach as far as the dorsolateral light line;
the lower lateral light line is almost obsolete; the chin and preanal
plates creamy-white.
In a large male (K.U. 8216) the entire dorsal and lateral sur-
face is dark brown with a very large part of the scales showing
greenish flecks. On the sides the lateral brown band shows fewest
flecks. Lower on sides the greenish flecks are arranged in diagonal
rows directed backward; the head is greenish to yellowish-olive
above, heavily flecked with brown in the occipital region, less so
anteriorly; on the sides of the head a light yellowish color pre-
dominates, with a darker area behind and below the eye. The
labials are flecked with dull reddish-yellow; the chin and anterior
11—1123
162
The University Science Bulletin
part of the throat are immaculate yellow ; belly bluish or greenish-
blue.
In (M.C.Z. No. 6911) embryos in eggs about ready for hatching,
the white dorsolateral lines are seen beginning on the first or second
supraoculars; a pair of elongate light spots on the snout simulate the
termination of a pair of head lines. These spots extend from rostral
along the anterior part of the sides of the frontal ; the lateral lines
are represented by a series of spots on the neck. The embryos are
29 to 30 millimeters long.
Remarks. The presence of this species on the Bermuda Islands
is distinctly puzzling. There are no near relatives, and it appears
to be an archaic form that has existed since Bermuda was connected
with a former land mass; or that reached Bermuda from some land
that is no longer existent; or that came from a body of land still
existent but from which its ancestors have disappeared.
Unfortunately, other reptilian contemporaries have not survived
on Bermuda. These, did they still exist, might offer a clue as to
which of these possibilities was most likely. However, it appears
that the true history of the colonization of the land, now Bermuda,
is lost forever in oblivion.
Distribution. The species occurs only on the Bermuda Islands.
Fig. 17. Distribution of Eumeces longirostris (Cope), in Bermuda Islands.
Locality records:
Bermuda Islands: (M.C.Z. 54) (A.M.N.H. 37) (U.S.N.M. 6) (Field Mus. 25)
(A.N.S.P. 2) ; Castle Island (M.C.Z. 30) (K.U. 4) (Mich. 6) ; Ducking Stool
(A.N.S.P.2).
LYNXE GROUP
This group, comprising two closely related Mexican forms, is
characterized as follows: A short median light line runs forward
bifurcating on the medial or anterior part of the frontal ; and these
resulting lines reunite on the frontal. They are in contact anteriorly
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
163
with the dorsolateral light lines which follow the third and fourth
scale rows. A broad lateral brown stripe present; a lateral light line
to groin, bordered below by a darker line; indistinct clotted dark
lines on dorsal scales. Tail bluish in young. Ovoviviparous. Limbs
small, widely separated in adults when adpressed. Scale rows, 22
to 26. Supraoculars variable.
Key to the Forms
A. Four supraoculars Eumeces lynxe lynxe (Wiegmann), 163
AA. Three supraoculars Eumeces lynxe furcirostris (Cope), 173
Fig. 18. Distribution of members of the Lynxe group, in Mexico.
Eumeces lynxe lynxe (Wiegmann)
(Plate 41, Fig. B; Figs. 18, 19)
SYNONYMY
1828. Scincus quinquelineatus var. Wiegmann. Isis, 1828, p. 373.
1834. Euprepes lynxe Wiegmann. Herpet. Mexicana, 1934, pp. 36-37 (type description; type
locality, "Specimena nostra prope Chico invenit Depp"); Arch, fur Naturg., Jahr. 1,
Band 2, 1835, p. 288; Carman, Bull. Essex Inst., XVI, 1884, p. 15 (under Eumeces).
1839. Plestiodon quinquelineatum Dumeril and Bibron. Erp. Gen., V, 1839, pp. 707-708
(part.) {Euprepes lynxe made a synonym of quinquelineatum Linnaeus); Duges, La
Naturaleza, (1), I, 1870, p. 144;? Gravenhorst, Nova Act. Acad. Leop.-Carol., XXIII,
1851, pp. 350-354 (part.).
1845. Plestiodon Bellii Gray. Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., 1845, p. 92 (type locality unknown).
1864. Eumeces lynxe Peters. Monatsb. Acad. Wiss. Berlin, 1864, p. 484; Bocourt, Miss.
Sci. Mexique, Livr. VI, 1879, pp. 437-439, pi. XXII E, figs. 9, 9a, 9b, 9c, 9d (de-
scription of specimens from Guanajuato, Mex.); Sumichrast, La Naturaleza, (1), VI,
1882-1884, pp. 31-45 (reports the species common up to 3,000 meters on Orizaba;
perhaps this is furcirostris); Cope, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., XXII, 1885, p. 170
(key characters); Gunther, Biol. Cent. Amer., Itept. Batr., 18S5, p. 32; Boulenger,
364 The University Science Bulletin
Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 380 (part.) (specimen from Jalapa) ; Cope, Bull.
U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 32, 1887, p. 46; Garman, Bull. Essex Inst., XIX, 1887, p. 129;
TJuges, La Naturaleza, (2), I, 1889, p. 282 (Aztec name); Cope, Rept. U. S. Nat.
Mus., 1898, (1900), p. 630 (key); Duges, La Naturaleza, (2), II, 1900, p. 484
(Guanajuato); Gadow, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1905, pp. 218-219 (habits; also listed
as Eumeces lynce, typ. error, p. 233).
71865. Plistodon lynxe Cope. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1865, pp. 185-198 (this specimen,
"Tableland and Southern mountains of Mexico, Doctor Sartorius Coll.," is referred by
Cope [1887] to E. brevirostris ; a specimen of E. copei in the National Museum, No.
7037, with only "Mexico" as a locality label, may be the specimen referred to).
1887. Eum-cces bellii Boulenger. Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, pp. 378-379.
1931. Eumeces lynxae Hartweg. Copeia, No. 2, 1931, p. 61 (ovoviviparity).
History. The first specimen of Eumeces lynxe reached Europe
in a collection made by Ferdinand Deppe in Mexico. The specimen
was mentioned by Dr. A. F. Wiegmann (Isis, 1828, p. 373) under
the designation Scincus quinquelineatus var. Schneid. as follows:
"Aus der Familie der Scincoiden erhielten mir die von Schneider (Hist.
Amphib., II, p. 201) beschriebene Varietat des Scincus quinquelineatus mit dem
blauen Schwanze velche von den Einwohnern Lynxe genannt und wegen ihres
vermeintlichen giftes sehr gefiirchtet. Auch Hernandez* erwiihnt ihrer bereits
unter dem nam en Tetzauhcoatl."
In 1834 Wiegmann, while dealing with the entire known Mexican
herpetological fauna, described this specimen under the name of
E [uprepis] lynxe, failing to associate the form with Eumeces, the
newly created genus of his own making in this same work.
Peters (1864) appears to have been the first to place the form in
its correct genus. Cope (1865) used the generic name Plistodon;
Bocourt (1879) refers the species again to the genus Eumeces; and
most authors have subsequently referred the species to this genus.
The form of the specific name of the species has been changed by
Hartweg (1931) from lynxe to lynxae, which seems to be incorrect.
The name is presumably (vide Wiegmann [1828]) the Latin equiva-
lent of native Mexican for the large wild cats; and the scientific
name based on the classic Latin word lynx, if placed in the genitive,
would be lyncis. This change is not necessary.
Gray (1845) described Plestiodon Bellii from a specimen from an
unknown locality. Boulenger (1887) maintained it as a separate
species, apparently on the basis of its having a large first supraocular
touching the frontal, and having the sixth and seventh labials of
equal size. H. W. Parker, of the British Museum, has recently had
the great kindness to examine the type to see if aught could be
determined regarding its origin, and to compare it with Eumeces
lynxe. He writes:
* "Nova Plantarum Animalium et Mineralium Mexicanorum Historia. Tractatus tertius,"
by Francisco Hernandez. (Rome, 1651.) Under the Aztec name, tetzauhcoatl.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 165
"Nothing whatever is known of the locality of the specimen; it was for-
merly in Thomas Bell's collection and most of the specimens went to Oxford;
I have written to see if there is any list or catalogue in existence. I am afraid
that, having no knowledge of the genus whatever, I am not competent to ex-
press any views as to its status, but it appears to me to be very close to
E. lynxe in most characters except that the first supraocular is decidedly larger
and in contact with the frontal."
Mr. Parker has furnished a photograph of the type to me for
study.
An examination of the excellent photographs causes me to con-
cur with Mr. Parker's opinion. In the material available to me of
this species I find that the first supraocular is variable as regards
its relation to the frontal. Specimens having the two scales in con-
tact, and others having them separated, appear in the same brood.
Likewise, this same variation obtains in specimens from identical
localities. Some of these show variation in the length of the suture.
In certain ones it is considerable; in others the scales are in contact
at a single point, The size of the sixth labial varies somewhat so
that occasionally it approaches the seventh in size. Unless it is
possible to show that a considerable population exists in which these
characters are fairly stable, it seems best to consider bellii a syn-
onym of E. lynxe.
Boulenger has placed Eumeces furcirostris as a synonym of lynxe,
probably presuming it to be merely an abnormal specimen. The
type has a divided frontal, and only three supraoculars, and these
characters were used by Cope to separate it from lynxe. The char-
acter of the reduced number of supraocular plates, appearing as it
does in the southern part of the range, seems to warrant the reten-
tion of Cope's species as a subspecies of lynxe. I believe the division
of the frontal to be an abnormality, since I have found this con-
dition on several occasions in other species of the genus: viz. lati-
ceps, fasciatus, and skiltonianus, and it does not occur in a second
specimen of furcirostris examined.
Gadow (1905, pp. 128, 195) mentions Eumeces fuscirostris (sic).
It would appear that he really meant brevirostris, since he later
omits fuscirostris and records brevirostris from the same locality
and elevation.
The type locality of Wiegmann's species is "prope Chico." This
place name probably refers to a locality of this name either in
Vera Cruz or Pueblo; both are near the old Camino Real between
Mexico Citv and Vera Cruz.
166
The University Science Bulletin
Diagnosis. A medium-sized species with limbs touching in young,
widely separated in adults when adpressed. A median light line,
extending to the shoulders or somewhat beyond, bifurcates on the
frontal, the parts joining again on the rostral; the dorsolateral
light lines distinct, usually retained in adults (but may be lost in
old males), beginning on rostral, and extending to base of tail,
usually lessening in distinctness posteriorly; a lateral light line
begins on rostral and continues to groin; one postmental; no post-
nasal; anterior superciliary may or may not touch the prefrontal;
first supraocular either in contact or not, with the frontal; four
supraoculars.
Fig. 19. Eumeces lynxe lynxe (Wiegmann). A.M.N.H. No. 12835;
Hidalgo, Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 9.3 mm.; width, 8 mm.
Description oj species. Rostral moderate, the portion visible
above normal; supranasals large, widely separating the frontonasal
from the rostral; frontonasal much broader than long, touching
anterior loreal laterally and usually forming a suture with the
frontal (sometimes not) ; prefrontals rather small, usually sepa-
rated, touching both loreals laterally and very broadly in contact
with the first supraocular; frontal not noticeably elongated, but
distinctly longer than its distance from the end of the snout, some-
what narrowed at a point not far from the posterior end, after
which it widens slightly, touching three supraoculars laterally
(sometimes only two, in which case the most anterior is excluded) ;
frontoparietals more or less rectangular, forming a moderate median
suture; interparietal about a third longer than wide, not inclosed
by the parietals; two pairs of nuchals, the anterior of same trans-
verse length but distinctly wider than posterior.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 167
Nasal diagonally placed, rectangular, twice as long as high; the
nostril directed down and forward, posterior to the suture of the
first labial with the rostral; no postnasal; two loreals, the anterior
higher, touching two anterior labials; posterior loreal about as long
as high, touching the second and third labials, but widely separated
from the fourth; two presuboculars; six superciliaries (rarely five or
seven), first relatively small, scarcely of greater bulk than second,
usually excluded from contact with the prefrontal; four supra-
oculars, the anterior variable in size and in its relation to the frontal ;
three postsuboculars; seven upper labials, the last usually largest,
separated from auricular opening by a curved, elongate postlabial;
this separated from ear by two minute scutes; subocular (fifth
labial) somewhat longer than high, somewhat higher posteriorly;
first labial largest of the first four, not abruptly elevated posteriorly;
the fourth smallest ; four temporals, the primary about as large as
those of the second series, forming a moderate suture with the
lower, excluding the seventh labial from the upper secondary; the
tertiary is narrow, elongated, curved, entering the auricular border;
labial border of mental more extensive than that of rostral; a
single postmental; three typical, paired chinshields, followed by an
elongate postgenial shield, bordered on its inner anterior edge by a
scale wider than long; six lower labials; eye length equal to the
distance from nostril; palpebral scales in contact with the super-
ciliaries save for one or two small intercalated scales at anterior and
posterior corners; a small preocular and two small postoculars;
three or four enlarged opaque scales on the lower eyelid separated
from the subocular labial by two rows of granular scales.
Ear opening small, rounded, surrounded by about 16 scales;
usually a single, rounded, preauricular lobule, or one large and one
small one; scales of the two median dorsal series transversely
elongated anteriorly, all with curving posterior edges, not, or only
slightly, larger than adjoining rows; scales on sides of body and
narrow part of neck parallel ; scales on sides behind arm not strongly
diagonal; scale rows around neck immediately behind ear, 28;
around narrow part of neck, 25; behind arm, 29; about middle of
body. 24; about base of tail, 15 to 17; from occiput to above anus,
60 to 63 ; scales on sides and abdomen not or only slightly smaller
than the dorsal series; nine or ten scales about arm insertion;
fourteen about insertion of leg; eight preanal scales, the two median
much enlarged, those adjoining laterally decreasing in size, the outer
ones smaller but overlapping the inner; the scales under the tail
168 The University Science Bulletin
distinctly widened; tail only a little longer than head and body;
limbs small, widely separated when adpressed; lamellar formula of
fingers: 5; 8; 11; 10; 8; of toes: 5; 9; 11; 12; 8. A series of five
enlarged scutes border the heel ; three or four enlarged tubercles on
posterior part of the sole.
Color. Above generally brownish olive with (usually) a series
of- six very narrow lines of small blackish dots; somewhat posterior
to the shoulders a median light line bordered with brown begins and
continues forward, growing more distinct; on the anterior or medial
part of the frontal it bifurcates and the branches pass to the pre-
frontals, where they unite with the dorsolateral light lines and
continue to rostral; the dorsolateral light (whitish or cream) line
passes back along the side, on the edges of the third and fourth
scale rows; a broad brown lateral stripe from in front of eye to
tail, slightly wider on neck, where it involves the upper edge of
ear, but continues as a stripe of uniform width the length of the
body, covering the whole of the sixth scale row and half of the two
scale rows adjoining; this stripe bordered above by the dorsolateral
light line, and below by a lateral light line; latter begins on rostral
and continues to groin, where it stops or is indistinctly continued
on the front of femur; the lateral line is bordered below by a very
narrow indistinct darker line, below which the color merges into
the dull bluish-gray of the abdomen; chin and lower labials cream;
a cream or whitish area on breast; tail an indefinite bluish-gray;
the dark color of the back continues some distance on tail, behind
which indistinct flecks can be observed. Each scale on side of tail
has a darker area; anal scales and the median ventral subcaudals
of lighter color, usually of a shade of lavender; head slightly more
brownish than back, irregularly flecked with darker.
Variation. Seventy-eight specimens of this species have been
available for study, representing localities from a considerable part
of its known range. By far the largest number of these specimens
are in the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard, collected
in Guerrero and San Miguel, Hidalgo, by W. M. Mann; and in the
Alvarez Mountains, San Luis Potosi, by Edw. Palmer and W. W.
Brown.
The number of scale rows about the body and neck varies as
follows: Behind ear, 27 to 32; about more constricted portion of
neck, 23 to 26, with 25 occurring twice as frequently as any other
number (one specimen has 29 rows) ; about middle of body, 22 to
26, with 26 occurring once, 25, three times, 24, 71 times, 23, once,
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
169
H
<»
H
!S
Si
^^
eo
<u
<»
s
o
co
CI
0)
CN
W
SJcN
o
a
P
•o
-i—
■>»< o:
a
oc
N
t»
CO
t*
-d<
<H
^
CN
oc
Ifl
CN
SI CO
oc
CN
■*
oo
a
c
oo
CO
oo
CO
*
CN
CO
•H
>-;
._:oa
S~
CC
•*
m
CO
CO
<n
r<°°ic
co
0!
c
■>*
00
c
c
t^
CO
oc
CO
a
CO
»H
rt
■_!«
Srt
CN
CN
CN
(joo
L ' 00
•*
c
Ol
c
<*
00
00
a-
>0
CN
t^
^
t^
co
CC
^H
S^1
CC
iC
a-
a-
sico
dSt
CN
1^
a-
co
as
Oi
oc
t^
CN
10
CC
■H
co
^
^
.-JCO
g.o
t~
sipq
o
t-
i0
X
OC
t^
l>
CO
dSo
to
CO
■"*
"
CO
X
sici
a
CC
».o
20
oc
CC
CN
CC
CO
C«o
■c
■"*
co
*5
CN
t^
CN
si co
r,'CO
Tf
■x
-t
t-
cr
»0
»^
CC
CO
lO
t>
CO
^"
~"
£~
CN
CC
t^
t^
CN
•H
si-H
Uco
^H
cn
IC
z
t^
oc
LO
„
ic:
CO
m
t^
CN
S~
»C
CO
si-*
dog
oc
LO
CC
CC
t~
10
c
Tj
lO
1 Tt
•H
CN
"
^
■m >
a
Srt
CN
t~
t^
CN
sio
dSg
CO
CN
■-0
CC
X
0-)
Tt>
3 -t
CN
~2>
.
^M
>o
JV^
si »
d3§
iC
CM
00
ir.
•o
CN
00
CT
T)>
J CO
r-r-l >
.
•^-" _■
s
oo
t
CO
u:
T(<
sa't^
• cn
o3 §
(C
c
oc
rv;
>*
i-0
O
cC
X
CO
J CN
co
■_:>■* ^
)
£~
-*-
c
a
6
a
"a
u
c
i
a
>
t
"5
j
a
*
J-
>
c
c
a
c
c
a
C
9 "c
«
a
I
d
o
1-S
-*-
4-
4-
a
-C
-t-
b
D 1
01
- —
CD 2
3 s &•
c
~
c
c
5
C
—
■r
-4-
s
-
•c
§
£
a
/
c
a
£
a
c
a
C
a
*
<
«
c
p-
C
Ft
1
?
o
o
o
Oi
00
o
c»
o
o
C3S
O
Z-6
3 as
CC
s
m >
i—i -
O
O P-
-
0>
■
—
tn
-
:.
3
>^
61
—
g
c
u
CO
-
.=
U
r/1
'-.I
:
51
Cm
3
r
o
<M
-
>>
—
J
rH
.-
"ti
n
a
-;
r-
I
<M
■a
H tOTj
170 The University Science Bulletin
and 22, twice. The upper labials are seven, save in one specimen
with six on each side, and one with a formula of seven-eight. The
seventh (or last) of the series is invariably the largest, but the sixth
often approaches it in size. Two pairs of nuchals are especially
constant; only one exception, this having a single pair, was noted.
The single postmental is invariably present, and the postnasal in-
variably absent. The superciliaries are usually six, the numbers
five or seven rarely occurring. The relation of the frontonasal to
the frontal is quite variable. They touch in 46 specimens, and are
separated in 32. The exclusion of the first supraocular from the
frontal occurs in 13 specimens; in three of these, it was true on one
side only. This variation occurs more frequently in specimens from
Guerrero, Hidalgo, but it is not constant. The number of lamellae
under the fourth toe varies from eleven to fourteen, in the following
order of frequency: 14, 13, 11, 12, the last number being three times
as frequent as any of the others. A single specimen has 15-16
lamellae. The number of scales from occiput to above anus usually
60 to 63, occurring in the following order of frequency: 60, 63,
61, 62, the latter two numbers slightly more numerous than the for-
mer two. One specimen has 65, while seven have only 59. The
parietal is never inclosed. The first superciliary varies greatly in
its relationship with the prefrontal, being in contact in about 47
percent of the cases and separated in 53 percent. The frontonasal
is invariably in contact with the loreals. The number of pre-
suboculars was constantly two; the usual number of postsuboculars
is 3-3, with 3-4, and 4-4 occurring rarely. The character of the
temporals is remarkably constant. The primary is always large
and invariably touching the lower secondary. Usually there is a
single anterior postlabial followed by a pair of small scales.
The ground color varies in the adult from a bronze to chocolate,
or olive-brown. Usually dark areas, on the scales of the six dorsal
rows, form indistinct dotted longitudinal lines; the two median,
where they border the median light line anteriorly, may join and
form continuous lines. The dorsolateral light lines vary from
greenish-white to yellow-cream. In old specimens they may be
grayish or even tan, and usually less distinct posteriorly, but rarely
becoming completely lost posteriorly. The dorsolateral line occupies
the outer half of the third scale row and a small adjoining part of
the fourth row; the brown lateral stripe is always separated from
its fellow by six complete scale rows and the edges of the adjoining
rows.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 171
In two specimens, 19083 and 19087, M.C.Z., practically all trace
of the median line is wanting, as well as the bifurcating lines on the
head. No. 19087 is light brown, the scales not showing the dotted
black lines. The head is colored like the body; the lateral stripe
is dark chocolate brown and very distinct, but the light stripes
normally bordering it are scarcely discernible. No. 19083 is olive
in color, the dotted lines dimly visible on the back. Other large
specimens from the same locality have the light lines more or less
distinct.
The tails are usually grayish or bluish or bluish-gray. The
brown stripe is continued a greater or less distance on its sides.
The under side of the tail, in preserved specimens, is very often
lavender in color (possibly pinkish in life). In the young the light
stripes are more distinct anteriorly. Only rarely can the median
line be traced back past the middle of the body, and it appears
never to be very distinct past the shoulders.
The head is dark brown to blackish. The forking lines which
begin on the frontal and join the dorsolaterals on the prefrontals
may sometimes be very indistinct even in very young specimens
(26 mm). Usually, though, they are very distinct, the separation
beginning about midway on the frontal.
The upper part of the ear is not involved in the lateral light line.
In older specimens, the forking line is the first part of the median
line to disappear, but occasionally it is retained in fully adult
specimens (50 to 60 mm.).
The minimum size of the young when born is 26 to 27 millimeters ;
the largest specimens seen, a male and female, measure 70 milli-
meters. In the very young the limbs when adpressed touch or
overlap one or two millimeters. In old adults they are separated by
as much as 15 millimeters.
Remarks. Hartweg (1931) has reported on presumed ovovivi-
parity in the species. In the material examined I found developing
embryos in M.C.Z. numbers 19082, 11318, 11324, 11325, 11328,
11323, and 11331. Ovoviviparity would appear to be the normal
method of reproduction in this species.
An attempt to locate definitely the type locality Chico has not
been successful. There are villages of this name in Jalisco, near
Mascota, in the district of Tepexi, Puebla, near Irapuato, Guana-
juato, and villages named El Chico near Jalapa, Vera Cruz, near
Autlan, Jalisco, and near Coahuayana, Michoacan. One would
presume that the one in Puebla, not far from the Mexico City - Vera
172 The University Science Bulletin
Cruz highway, or that in Vera Cruz, might be the locality mentioned
by Wiegmann.
The native Mexican name in Guanajuato is Agujilla. I collected
about Santa Rosa where Duges obtained specimens, but neither
here or elsewhere in Mexico did Hobart Smith or I find specimens of
the species. The small skinks are regarded as deadly by the people
near Santa Rosa, while many other lizards were said to be harmless.
The relationship of this subspecies is nearest to lynxe furcirostris;
both are apparently aberrant members of, or related to, the Brevi-
lineatus group, differing in certain characters of markings and squa-
mation, and differing especially in their mode of reproduction.
Distribution. Eumeces lynxe, a high mountain or plateau form,
occupies a considerable portion of the southern plateau region. It
probably does not reach the western and southern limits of the
plateau on the Pacific side. However, there are certain questionable
records of the species in southern Jalisco, or Colima, and in Guerrero.
These two records, "Nevado de Colima," and "Omilteme, Sierra
Madre, west of Chilpancingo, Guerrero" of Gadow (1905), may be
questioned, on the presumption that the material was identified in-
correctly. It is possible that the "Nevado de Colima" specimens
are now represented in the British Musuem collection by a specimen
identified as brevirostris, labeled "Nevada Camp" Gadow. I can
find no trace of the Omilteme specimen.
The British Museum has two specimens identified as lynxe from
"Tauvitavo, Michoacan, 8,000 feet." Neither the "Directorio Gen-
eral de Correos y Telegrafos," nor any recent map I have consulted,
gives Tauvitavo as a place name of settlement or mountain. It is
possible that it is a misspelling (or misreading of a label) for
Tarecuato, Tarejero, Taretaro, Tarietaro, or Tarimoro, all place
names in Michoacan. The eastern part of Michoacan is within the
presumed range of the species. The species is definitely known
from the states of Guanajuato, Hidalgo, and San Luis Potosi. The
records for Vera Cruz probably refer (at least for the most part)
to Eumeces lynxe furcirostris (Cope).
Locality records:
Vera Cruz : Alpine Region of Orizaba to 3,000 meters (Sumichrast 1882) ;
Jalapa (several specimens. Boulenger [1887]. Possibly certain of these
should be referred to E. lynxe furcirostris).
San Luis Potosi: Alvarez Mountains (M.C.Z. 11) ; Alvarez (M.C.Z. 28).
Michoacan: "Tauvitavo," 8,000 feet (British Mus.) (Doubtful).
Guerrero: "Omilteme," Sierra Madre west of Chilpancingo, 8,000 feet (Gadow,
1905) (Doubtful).
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 173
Hidalgo: Zacualtipan (A.X.S.P. 1) ; San Miguel (M.C.Z. 6) ; 'Valosea' ? (M.C.Z.
1); Guerrero (M.C.Z. 21) (A.M.N .H. 4) (Mich. 4 with 6 embryos);
"Hidalgo" (A. Duges Mus. 1).
Puebla: Zacatlan (A.M.N.H. 1).
Guanajuato: Santa Rosa (A. Duges Mus. 2); "Guanajuato" (Bocourt, 1879).
Indeterminate records: Mexico (U.S.N.M. 1) (identified as E. Bellii) ; near
Chico (type locality; 1, Wiegmann).
Eumeces lynxe furcirostris (Cope)
(Figs. 18, 20)
SYNONYMY
ISSu. Eumeces furcirostris Cope. Proc. Amer. Phil. Soc, XXII, Jan. to Oct., 1885, pp. 169-
170 (printed Mar. 7, 1885) (typo description; type locality not stated); idem, p. 380
(Jalapa named as the type locality); Giinther, Biol. Cent. Amer., Rept. Batr., Oct.,
1885, p. 33; Ferrari-Perez, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., IX, 1886, p. 196 (state of Puebla;
Teziutlan); Cope, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus. No. 32, 1887, p. 169; and Rep. U. S. Nat.
Mus., 1898 (1900), p. 630 (Key).
1887. Eumeces lynxe Boulenger. Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 380 (part.).
History. The type specimen was collected at Jalapa, Vera Cruz,
by Doctor Flohr, and originally formed a part of the collection of
the Comision Geographica, part of which was later obtained by the
Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. The specimen, ab-
normal in the character of the divided frontal, was described by
Cope (1885), who at the same time published in the description a
key to the known Mexican species of the genus. The type is now
No. 11327 in the collection of the Academy of Natural Sciences of
Philadelphia.
Two years later Boulenger (1887) placed furcirostris in the syn-
onymy of Eumeces lynxe (Wiegmann) . In the description given
for lynxe he notes "four supraoculars, second and third in contact
with the frontal, first very small, sometimes united with the first
supraciliary;" evidencing the presence of this form in the Hoege
series of specimens in the British Museum. It seems that since in the
northern part of the range the number of supraoculars in lynxe is
fixed at four while in the southeastern part of the range the number
is three, it is well to recognize the latter population as representing
a subspecies rather than a species, since there is evidence that the
characters overlap, in a part of the range, as suggested by the
British Museum series.
Diagnosis. Similar to Eumeces lynxe lynxe in having a dorso-
lateral and lateral light line, with a short median line from the
shoulders bifurcating on the frontal and joining the dorsolateral
lines near the tip of the snout; general character of scales similar
to lynxe lynxe save that there are three supraoculars, two touching
174
The University Science Bulletin
the frontal, and the first superciliary is larger and invariably in
contact with the prefrontal.
Description of subspecies. (From type specimen, No. 11327,
A.N.S.P. collection; collected by Doctor Flohr, Jalapa, Vera Cruz,
Mexico.) Similar in general contour and markings to Eumeces
lynxe lynxe. The part of rostral visible from above distinctly less
than the frontonasal; supranasals moderately large, in contact
mesially, larger than nasals; frontonasal very broad, broadly in
contact with the anterior loreal; prefrontals large, fused (abnor-
mally) to form a single scale, and forming sutures with the fronto-
Fig. 20. Eumeces lynxe furcirostiis (Cope). E.H.T. and H.M.S. No.
2517, young; Toxtlacuaya, Vera Cruz, Mexico. A, laterial view of bead;
B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length, 5.3 mm.; width, 4.2 mm.
nasal, frontal, posterior loreal, first superciliary, anterior loreal, and
the first supraocular, the length of sutures in order named; frontal
segmented transversely (abnormally), forming an obtuse angle an-
teriorly, somewhat rounded posteriorly, touching two supraoculars;
frontoparietals diagonally placed, longer than broad, forming a
strong median suture ; interparietal broad, short, not inclosed by the
parietals ; parietals rather narrow, elongate ; first nuchals very large,
their longitudinal width more than one and one half times that of
the second pair (the right member of second pair divided, leaving a
median scale) .
Nasal low, elongate, divided by sutures, the anterior portion larger
than posterior; nostril directed strongly down and forward; two
loreals, the anterior only slightly higher than posterior; latter
largest, broadly in contact with two labials, and forming equal
sutures with the first superciliary and the prefrontal; two presub-
oculars, the posterior deeply wedged between the fourth and fifth
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 175
upper labials; three postsuboculars ; three supraoculars, the anterior
very large, triangular; five-six superciliaries, the anterior very large,
the posterior vertical scale relatively very small; primary temporal
very large, not or but slightly smaller than the upper secondary, and
somewhat smaller than the lower secondary, with which it forms a
broad suture; tertiary temporal narrow, elongate, separated from
the ear by a very minute scale; seven upper labials, four preceding
the subocular, of which the first is highest and largest, the fourth
very greatly reduced; seventh labial largest; postlabial, on the left,
one very large diagonally-placed scale, separated from the ear by
two minute scales; on right side, the scale is much smaller than on
the left and the two following are much larger; two small, very
inconspicuous preauricular lobules; six lower labials; upper median
palpebral scales not separated from the superciliaries by granules;
two (three) enlarged scales on lower eyelid, separated from the
subocular by two rows of granules. Mental with labial border
greater than that of rostral; a single azygous postmental; three
pairs of nearly equal-sized chinshields; postgenial relatively small,
bordered on its inner anterior border by a scale much broader than
long; fourteen scales about auricular opening, which is relatively
small.
Scales on body generally parallel, those on the dorsal surface
somewhat larger than the lateral or ventral series; those of the two
median rows slightly larger than adjoining series, and distinctly
widened transversely in nuchal region; scales in 30 rows behind
ear; around narrow part of neck, 26 rows; in axillary region, 29
rows; about middle of body, 24 rows; about base of tail, 17; sixty-
two scales in a row from occiput to above vent; tail regenerated; six
preanal scales, the two median strongly enlarged, the two outer
small, subequal, the outer overlapping inner; subcaudals very dis-
tinctly broadened.
Limbs short, slender, separated by length of eight scales when
adpressed; a prominent wrist tubercle; the palm with a group of
enlarged scales; lamellar formula of fingers: 5; 8; 11; 9; 6. Heel
bordered by four or five enlarged padlike scales, the sole with one
or two slightly enlarged tubercles, but scales subequal and slightly
imbricate; lamellar formula of toes: 5; 9; 12; 12; 8. The terminal
lamellae not tightly bound about base of claws ; eleven scales about
insertion of arm; a small area of granular scales in axilla; fourteen
scales about insertion of hind limb; no granular scales behind in-
sertion; an enlarged scale in the lateral postanal region, undif-
176 The University Science Bulletin
ferentiated save for a lighter colored median area. Pits present on
scales; in lateral nuchal region, one or two pits are dimly evident;
in axillary region and posterior humeral region the pits are stronger,
sometimes four or five pits being present on a single scale; one or
two pits dimly evident on the lateral body scales, but on posterior
femoral scales and on sides of the tail in the anal region the scales
bear from three to eight pits.
Color. Above generally olive to olive-bronze, the head dark
brown, with a short median line extending from the scapular region
to the middle of the frontal, where it divides, each part running
forward to rostral, inclosing a brown area; dorsolateral light lines
extend from the first superciliary back along side of head and body
to tail, where they become lost; each follows the middle of the third
scale row and covers about half the scales; both the median and
dorsolateral lines are edged anteriorly with deep brown, leaving
anteriorly intercalated lines of ground color; these dark, bordering
lines scarcely reach the middle of body on the dorsal region; a
clearly defined brown lateral stripe begins on the loreals and runs to
some distance on the tail, anteriorly involving eye and upper half
of ear, and bordered above by the dorsolateral, and below by the
lateral, light lines; lateral line begins on rostral, follows lower edge
of upper labials through lower half of ear to insertion of hind limb;
below this the color merges into the light greenish-gray color of the
sides; rostral and lower surface of head and neck region light
yellow-brown; under side of limbs and area about vent whitish;
fingers and toes blotched or barred with silver-gray; under side of
feet brownish; upper part of arm and leg dark brown, sharply de-
limited from the gray color of the posterior humeral and femoral
regions of the limbs.
Variation. The young specimen (T — S. No. 2517) measured
below has 22 scale rows, the frontonasal much broader than long,
touching the frontal; latter undivided; the prefrontals separated,
distinct; the dorsolateral light lines bluish to greenish-white, the
median line bifurcating and joining the dorsolaterals, extending
posteriorly to the middle of the body, gradually becoming fainter
until it is lost; very dim grayish lines begin on the neck and border
the edges of the first and second rows; clotted lines on the back
scarcely discernible; head blackish; lateral line from third labial,
involves lower half of ear, widens a little on the side of neck, and
continues as a very narrow line along the side, on the upper edge
of the sixth scale row, to sides of tail, interrupted at insertion of
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
177
Measurements of Eumeces lynxe jurcirostris (Cope)
Museum
Number
Sex
Snout to vent . .
Tail
Snout to eye. . .
Snout to ear. . .
Snout to foreleg
Axilla to groin .
Postanal width.
Foreleg
Hind leg
Longest toe. . . .
Head length . . .
Head width. . . .
Bodv width
hind limb; soles and palms dark; chin and breast cream; ventral
surface bluish-gray ; tail ultramarine ; adpressed limbs overlap about
one millimeter.
Remarks. The type specimen in the Philadelphia Academy of
Natural Sciences is still in good condition. The extreme tip of the
tail is regenerated, and the color is doubtless somewhat faded.
A very young specimen collected by Hobart Smith at Toxtlacuaya
was found in pine forest at an elevation of about 8,000 feet. The
specimen was routed from the bark of a fallen pine tree. The tail
is a brilliant blue. This specimen is figured. It will be noted that
the interparietal is proportionately larger in young than in adult
specimens.
It may appear that this form has been retained as a distinct sub-
species on relatively meager data. It is true that only a few speci-
mens have reached museums. With the accumulation of more
material of lynxe from Puebla and Vera Cruz, my conclusions as
regards the distinctness of this subspecies must either be corrobo-
rated, or, failing to do so, must see the name returned to the
oblivion of synonymy.
Distribution. This subspecies is found in southern Hidalgo,
Puebla and Vera Cruz. It is probable that there is a part of this
12—1123
178 The Uniyersh Science Bulletin
region where the characters of the two subspecies overlap. (See
Fig. 18 for distributional map.)
Locality records:
?Hidalgo: Zacualtipan (A.N.S.P. 1).
Vera Cruz: Jalapa (Xalapa) (Brit. Mus. several) (A.N.S.P. 1, type);
Toxtlacuaya, near Las Vigas, Vera Cruz (Taylor-Smith 1).
Puebla: Teziutlan (Ferrari-Perez 3).
SUMICHRASTI GROUP
To this group I assign the single species Eumeces sumichrasti
(Cope), known from southern Mexico and northern Central Amer-
ica. It is characterized by rather large size and is typically five
lined, save that the median light line bifurcates on the posterior
part of the frontal instead of on the nuchal. Lines lost in the
adult males. Two presuboculars; tails blue in young; eight upper
labials; two pairs of nuchals; postgenial bordered by a scale longer
than wide on its inner margin; scales in 28 to 30 rows, parallel on
the sides; many lateral scales with numerous pits on posterior bor-
ders; subcaudals widened. Limbs large, broadly overlapping when
adpressed ; terminal lamellae not tightly bound about base of claws.
This group seems to be more or less closely related to the
Fasciatus group, and agrees in most pertinent characters save in the
character of the head lines.
Eumeces sumichrasti (Cope)
(Plate 12; Figs. 21, 22, 23)
SYNONYMY
1866. PUstodon sumichrasti Cope. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1866, p. 321 (type descrip-
tion; type locality erroneously stated to be "Onzava"; Sumichrast Coll.).
1879. Eumeces sumichrasti Bocourt. Miss. Sci. Mex., Rept., Liv. 6, 1879, p. 422; Cope,
Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc, XXII, 18S5, p. 170 (Key); Gunther, Biol. Cent. Amer.,
Rept. Batr., 1885, p. 32; Boulenger, Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 371 (Jalapa,
Hoege Coll.); Cope, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 32, 1887, p. 46 (Orizaba, Vera Cruz;
and Potrero, Tierra Caliente of Vera Cruz [Sumichrast]).
1884. Eumeces (Plestiodon) sumichrasti Sumichrast. La Naturaleza, VI, 1882-1884, p. 40.
?1895. Eumeces rovirosae Duges. La Naturaleza, (2), II, 1895-'96 (1895), pp. 298-299, Lam.
XIII (type description; type locality, Mineral de Santa Fe, Chiapas; Navarro Coll.):
idem, 1896, p. 376; Bouh nger, Zool. Record, 1893, pp. 1-38 (makes rovirosae a
synonym of lynxe).
1932. Eumeces schmidli Dunn. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., LXXXIV, Mar. 22, 1932, pp.
30-31 (type description; type locality Lancetilla, Honduras, Rehn Coll.; also lifted
from Tela, Honduras).
History. Francis Sumichrast, a noted Swiss collector-naturalist,
resident in Mexico from about 1855 to his death in 1882, collected
the type, the first known specimen of this species. It was for-
warded to the Smithsonian Institution sometime prior to 1866. in
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces 179
which year Cope (1866) published a description. The type, which
is still extant and in surprisingly good condition, is an old male
specimen in which practically all trace of juvenile color and mark-
ings has been lost. The tail is regenerated. The type locality was
given by Cope as "Orizava," but the tag bears the inscription
"Potrero" (No. 4, F. Sumichrast). This village is Potrero (or El
Potrero) situated on the highway between Orizaba and Vera Cruz,
a few kilometers beyond Cordoba.
In 1882 Sumichrast published some notes on his collections, and
states that he had found the species "en los encinales de Potrero,
cerca de Cordoba a una altura de 590 metros." This must be re-
garded as the type locality. Giinther (1885) states that Sumichrast
found two specimens of this species in the oak woods at a height
of 1,800 feet.
The first specimen known to have reached Europe was a young
one, collected at Jalapa, by C. T. Hoege. The specimen became a
part of the collections in the British Museum and was available to
Boulenger when his third volume of the catalogue of the lizards was
written (1886). He describes the markings of this specimen, com-
paring it with lynxe: ". . . light vertebral line (in the young)
bifurcating on the frontal, as in E. lynxe, enclosing a dark rhom-
boidal spot on the forehead."
In 1895 Alfredo Duges obtained a young specimen collected by
Jose X. Rovirosa at "Mineral de Santa Fe in Chiapas." He de-
scribed it under the name of Eumeccs Rovirosae and published a
figure of the form in color. This specimen, which I examined, has
indeed been "muy mal tratado del vientre, cuello y ano," as
suggested by Duges. It was impossible to determine the total
number of scales round the body, but, judging by the rows on back
and sides, the number is 28 or 30. He notes the similarity of the
markings to E. lynxe, and likewise notes the distinguishing charac-
ters. The type, unnumbered, is now in the Alfredo Duges museum in
Guanajuato, Mexico.
In 1930 (July-September), while on an expedition to Honduras,
two specimens of this species were encountered by J. A. G. Rehn,
one at Tela, and one at Lancetilla, Honduras. This latter specimen,
now A.N.S.P. No. 19877, was made the type of a new species,
Enmeces schmidti, by Dunn.
The disposal of Eumeccs rovirosae and Enmeces schmidti in the
synonymy of sumiohrasti may seem, on superficial consideration,
surprising, since both are five-lined forms, with the median line
180 The University Science Bulletin
bifurcating on the posterior part of the frontal, a character unique
in the genus. (In most forms having the median line the bifurcation
is on the first nuchals or the back part of the interparietal ; in lynxe
and furcirostris the line bifurcates on the middle of the frontal. The
point of bifurcation is practically constant for a species, so far as
data on the genus goes.) On the other hand, sumichrasti is de-
scribed as a species lacking all trace of lines on the body. Since
many species (notably those of the Fasciatus group) tend to lose
most or all of the juvenile pattern of coloration in the adult males,
it is the anticipated condition in both rovirosae and schmidti.
It has been most fortunate that I have been able to examine the
types of the three forms, including the cotype of schmidti; and also,
I have at hand a superb photograph of the Hoege specimen of
sumichrasti, in the British Museum, which was kindly prepared for
me by Mr. W. H. Parker. I synonymize them for the following
reasons :
First, the geographical probabilities considered, we find the type
locality of rovirosae situated approximately 275 miles from that of
sumichrasti; that of schmidti, approximately 650 miles. Second, all
the localities are at low elevations: sumichrasti, 590 meters in forest^
rovirosae, unknown (probably no higher) ; schmidti, coastal plain
rain forest region; so that they may be generally considered as
lowland forms primarily (one record for Jalapa may be higher).
Third, the variation observed is well within normal variation to be
anticipated in the species. The table of measurements, and the
discussion under variation, will show more details of the similarities,
and the absence of pertinent characters in the material now avail-
able, that would warrant the retention of either, even as subspecies.
This does not, of course, preclude the possibility that larger series
will show size differences and possibly other characters which would
necessitate a different interpretation of the status of either one or
both of the forms.
Diagnosis. A large species of the genus characterized in the
young and middle aged by the presence of a median line extending
the length of the body and onto tail, bifurcating on the posterior
part of the frontal; a dorsolateral line covering the edges of the
third and fourth scale row the length of the body, and a lateral line
involving the lower half of ear, and extending onto tail. Limbs,
large, broadly overlapping in young and adults; scale rows, 28 to
30 about middle of the body; no postnasal; one postmental (nor-
mally); seven or eight upper labials; the postgenial (normally)
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
181
bordered medially by a scale longer than wide; rostral low; the
prefrontals forming a suture; seventh labial separated from upper
secondary temporal.
Description of type. Rostral low, the portion visible above only
about a half the size of the relatively small frontonasal; supra -
nasals large, forming a median suture somewhat shorter than that
formed with rostral, their greatest width about three fourths their
length; the frontonasal relatively small, in contact laterally with
the anterior loreal; prefrontals very large proportionally, apparently
equalling area of frontonasal, forming a broad suture mesially,
laterally in contact with two loreals, narrowly with the first, while
Fig. 21. Eumeces sumichrasti (Cope). Type, U.S.N.M. No. 6601;
Potrero, Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 16.2 mm.; width, 15 mm. The depth of the head is slightly-
greater than the drawing shows. Drawing by Dr. Doris Cochran.
the suture with the second is three times as long; the suture with
the first superciliary smaller than that with the first supraocular;
frontal distinctly shorter than the distance from frontal to end of
snout, reaching only the rostral; anterior angle of frontal is very
obtuse, wide anteriorly, diminishing in width gradually; posterior
end slightly rounded rather than angular; frontoparietals abnormal;
left divided into two parts (nearly into three) ; right separated from
frontal and from left frontoparietal by a series of three small scales
(one expects these normally absent) ; the interparietal relatively
slender, enclosed, narrowly, by the parietals; two pairs of nuchals,
the posterior edges strongly curving; nasal rather large, divided by
sutures, the anterior part strongly triangular, not or but slightly
larger than the posterior part; postnasal absent; anterior loreal
about equal in height to the larger posterior loreal; superciliaries
182 The University Science Bulletin
9-8, the anterior large, touching prefrontal; four supraoculars, three
touching the frontal; a relatively large preocular; two presubocu-
lars; two very small postoculars; four postsuboculars. Eight upper
labials, five preceding the subocular, of which the first is the largest,
but no higher than the three succeeding labials; eighth labial no
higher than seventh, but distinctly larger than any other in series;
primary temporal large; upper secondary temporal wider posteriorly
than anteriorly, lower secondary somewhat fan-shaped, touching
the primary; the tertiary temporal small, separated from eighth
labial and ear; two pairs of postlabial scales, each pair superim-
posed, of which the lower is larger in each case; three preauricular
lobules, closely flattened against the anterior border of the ear
opening; mental with a longer labial border than the rostral,
relatively deep; normally a single postmental (anterior upper parr-
ot this scale in the type is abnormally divided, the anterior part not
touching labials) ; three pairs of chinshields, the anterior pair in
contact. The postgenial following third pair rather short, longer
than wide, segmented longitudinally on one side, single on other;
7-6 lower labials.
Scales of the body generally uniform, the median series no larger
than adjoining scale rows, those on side not or only slightly smaller
than dorsal scales. Scale rows behind ear, 35; around constricted
part of neck, 30; about axillary region, 38; about middle of body,
28; six preanal scales, median pair broadened, the outer pairs small,
overlapping inner; median subcaudals much wider than adjoining
scales, but not, or but slightly more than, double their depth; an
area of small tubercular nonimbricating scales in axilla, a few of
which continue above and slightly anterior to forearm; 21 scales
about insertion of foreleg; a few enlarged tubercles on posterior
edge of palm, with smaller tubercles intermingled; basal lamellae
on toes padlike; lamellar formula for fingers: 6; 9; 13; 13; 8; and
6; 9; 13; 13; 9. Formula for toes: 7; 11; 14; 15; 12; and 7; 11; 14;
17; 13. Four large scales on heel; outer side of sole with large, flat
imbricating scales; inner side with smaller tubercles and three of
these somewhat enlarged. Pitting on the scales is practically ob-
solete.
Color (in alcohol). Generally olive-gray, the scales showing
darker areas, with a faint lateral stripe of brown; a median dorsal
light line is visible for a short distance behind nuchals, but dis-
appears on shoulders; a faint dorsolateral light line evident on
sides of neck only; no evidence of a lateral line; head brownish-
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
l>:;
yellow, slightly darker in frontal region, and browner in temporal
region; chin, tip of snout, breast, and under side of limbs lighter;
tail above apparently slightly more brownish.
Measurements of Eumeces sumichrasti (Cope)
Museum .
Number.
Sex
Snout to vent . .
Tail
Snout to eye. . . .
Snout to ear. . . .
Snout to foreleg.
Foreleg
Hind leg
Axilla to groin. .
Width of head. .
Length of head . .
Width of body . .
Postanal widt'-. . .
Longest toe
Type
sumichrasti
U.S.N.M.
6601
96
0
IS. 6
29.5
28
36
51
15
16.2
14
Type
schmidt i
A.NS.P.
19877
48
4.1
10
20
14
19
22
8.3
9.3
8.8
6.2
S
Paratype
schnidti
Field M.
18004
9
64
5.5
12.5
22.3
19
25
36
10
11.5
14
7.6
11.3
Type
rovirosae
A. Duges
yg-
26
45
10
14
Variation. The variations in color and markings noted are those
having to do with the normal color evolution between young and old.
The following description is drawn from the young Jalapa speci-
men, from photograph; from the types of "schmidti" and from the
type of "rovirosae." The details are identical in all. It will be
noted that the types of "schmidti" have been darkened by their
preserving fluid (presumably formalin), and the colors are doubt-
less changed and the markings somewhat obscured.
Color of young: Ground color black or brownish-black; a narrow
median cream or yellowish line extends the length of the body and
some distance on the tail; on the posterior part of the frontal it
bifurcates, reuniting on the rostral; a similarly colored dorsolateral
line begins on the anterior supraocular or prefrontal, extends the
length of the body on the edges of the third and fourth scale rows
to some distance on the tail; along the sides from the labials to the
tail is a narrow lateral yellowish line involving lower half of the
ear, and interrupted by the insertion of the hind leg; a dim post-
femoral light line; on sides the ground color is more intense, and in
184
The University Science Bulletin
older specimens becomes a broad, lateral dark-brown stripe from
loreal region to side of tail, covering about two and one half scale
rows; the lateral light line bordered below by a narrow dark line
that merges with the ground color of the abdomen. The tail is a
brilliant blue, fading to grayish-black in older specimens; the
abdomen is bluish-gray, the chin, throat, and breast yellowish-
white or cream.
In older specimens, 48 to 64 mm., the ground color begins to grow
lighter, taking on a gray-brown color, leaving the whitish lines
bordered with continuous dark lines; the ground color of the head
Fig. 22. Eumeces sumichrasti (Cope). Paratype, E. schmidti Dunn.
F.M.N.H. No. 130O4; Tela, Honduras. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal
view of head. Actual head length, 11.5 mm.; width, 10 mm.
becomes somewhat spotted with lighter and darker brown. In the
old males the color becomes more or less uniform, while in the
females (no specimens seen) the juvenile color pattern is likely to
be retained to a greater degree. The pitting on scales is distinct,
there being five to seven pits present.
In the three type specimens of sumichrasti, schmidti, and rovi-
rosae, the following characters are the same, save where variation
is noted. The variation in scale rows about the body is from 28 to
30; of the two schmidti specimens, one has 29, one 30, while
sumichrasti has only 28; the rostral is low, the part visible above,
small; supranasals invariably in contact; frontonasal broader than
long, forming contacts with the anterior loreal; the prefrontals
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 185
broadly in contact; supraoculars 4-4, three touching frontal (2-2 in
rovirosae, the third narrowly separated) ; upper labials 8-8 in
sumichrasti, 8-7 or 7-7 in schmidti, 7-7 in rovirosae; postnasal
absent; postmental single i abnormal in paratype of schmidti, being
double) ; nuchals two pairs, the posterior strongly curving (probably
two pairs in rovirosae; the specimen is injured) ; parietals in
sumichrasti (type; not in Jalapa specimen) forming a suture,
separated in schmidti specimens; frontoparietals as large as pre-
frontals or slightly larger; scales under tail strongly widened;
nasal divided by sutures; presuboculars 2-2; postsuboculars 4-4;
superciliaries 8-9 or 9-9; the temporals in the specimens of all agree
save that in the type of schmidti the seventh labial is in contact
with the upper secondary temporal, separating the primary and
lower secondary. The paratype, however, agrees with the condi-
tion in the other specimens of sumichrasti; the lamellae under the
fourth toe vary: 15-17 in sumichrasti; 17-17 in schmidti; 19-19
in rovirosae. It will be observed that none of the variations are
of such a nature that they might not occur in the same species in a
single locality.
Remarks. That a species so large and conspicuous should re-
main so rare in collections is a matter of surprise, occurring as it
does through so wide a territory, and having been discovered so
early in the faunistic exploration of Mexico. Little is known of
habits save that it occurs in forests at relatively or very low
elevation, but may also attain considerable elevation if the locality
"Jalapa" on the British Museum specimen is trustworthy.
The single adult female (schmidti) contains ripe eggs in the
oviducts. No evidence of developing embryos was discernible in
one egg examined. It is presumed that the form is oviparous.
Distribution. Apparently the species is confined to the lowland
region on the east of the southern part of the Mexican plateau, and
extending through the isthmus to Honduras. As it appears to be a
woodland form, it should be looked for in the peninsular area
occupied by Tabasco, Yucatan, Campeche, Guatemala and British
Honduras. A specimen in the British Museum labelled sumichrasti,
a photograph of which I have, appears to be tetragrammus or a
related form, judging by the color pattern and short legs.
Locality records:
Vera Cruz: "Encinales de Potrero, cerca de Cordoba" (type locality, U.S.N. M.
[No. 6601] 1, Sumichrast Coll.) ; Jalapa (spelled Xalapa on recent Mexican
maps) (Brit. M. 1. yg., Hoege Coll.).
186
The University Science Bulletin
Chiapas: Mineral de Santa Fe (type locality E. rovirosae, Alfredo Duges
Mus. 1, Rovirosa Coll.).
Honduras: Tela (Field Mus. 1, paratype schmidti; Rehn Coll.); Lancetilla
(type locality schmidti, A.N. .S. P. [No. 19877] 1. Rehn Coll.).
Fig. 23. Distribution of Eumeces sumichrasti (Cope), in Mexico
and Central America.
FASCIATUS GROUP
This group occupies the territory in the United States and south-
ern Canada east of the 98th meridian and in Asia in North and
Central China reaching near Tibet in the west and southern Siberia
in the north. They are present in the line of islands of the eastern
coast of Asia as far as Formosa and the Pescadores.
The similarities between the Asiatic and American species are of
such a nature that it seems beyond peradventure that they are
closely related and bespeak a direct land connection between their
present area of distribution to the exclusion of the territory to the
west of the 98th meridian.
The striking thing regarding the two groups is the small extent
of modification that obtains between certain Asiatic and eastern
American forms, in some cases so small that they were originally
placed in the same species.*
Twelve species, three American and nine Oriental, are included.
* This same close relationship is likewise apparent in Lciolopisma of this same lizard
family (Scineidae).
Taylor: The Genus Exjmeces 187
Key to the Species of the Fasciatus Group
PAGE
A Subcaudals very narrow (unless tail reproduced); young usually with a sublateral line;
the bifurcating lines on head do not or rarely join to the median line on Quchals; seven
or eight labials; scales 28 30 rows. [Southeast 1 - Eumeces inexpectatus Taylor, 224
\ \ Subcaudals strongly widened.
B. Xo strongly keeled lateral postanal scale.
('. A well-developed patch of enlarged scales on posterior border of femur;
upper secondary temporal more or less triangular, emarginate behind,
notched below; lower, nearly parallel-sided; two postmen tals; one postnasal.
(China) Eumects tunganus Stejneger, 234
( < '. Xo patch of enlarged scales on posterior side of fen. oral region.
I). Large species (120 mm.); scale rows usually 30-32; upper secondary
temporal not triangular, not emarginate; lower secondary not parallel-
sided, but usually more or less fan-shaped; intercalated scales between
upper and lower lamellae of fourth toe extend to near the distal pha-
lanx; a sublateral line in eastern forms, none in western; head red in
old males; usually only one postlabial, or two very small ones. (South-
east U. S.) Eumects laticeps (Schneider), 212
DD. Smaller, max. size 80 mm.; scale rows 28-30; head not red in old
males; intercalated scales on fourth toe extend but little beyond basal
phalanx; two, rather large, postlabials. (Eastern XJ. S.)
Eumeces fasciatus (Linnaeus), 188
BB. A strongly keeled lateral postanal scale.
C. A postnasal normally present; one or two postmentals.
D. Two postmentals; a well-defined patch of irregular enlarged scales on
posterior side of femur; upper secondary temporal with sides anteriorly
more or less parallel, rounded posteriorly; lower secondary more or
less fan-shaped; 76 mm. length; 22-24 scale rows; usually 2 nuchals.
(China) Eumeces xanthi Gunther, 239
DD. One postmental; upper secondary temporal triangular, emarginate
posteriorly: lower secondary with sides more or less parallel.
E. Scale rows 22; five-lined species, the median bifurcating on nu-
chal; frontonasals forming suture or not; seven labials; two pairs
of nuchals; max. size 66 mm. (Amamioshima.)
Eumeces barbouri Van Denburgh, 265
EE. Scale rows more than 24.
F. Scale rows 28-30, usually 28; loreal variable, sometimes di-
vided transversely, often separated from the labials; no
evidence of scale patch on femur; median line not bifurcat-
ing on head; prefrontals always separated. (Idzu Islands.)
Eumeces okadae (Stejneger), 272
FF. Scale rows 24-26, usually 26; no trace of a patch of en-
larged scales on femur; prefrontals forming suture or not;
posttemporal scales not strongly differentiated; usually one
pair nuchals; max. size 80 mm. (Larger Japanese Islands.)
Eumeces latiscutatus (Hallowell), 276
CC. Xo postnasal; one postmental.
D. Seven-lined; a sublateral line; lateral passing above ear; 24—26 scale
rows; posttemporals modified; median line bifurcating on head; nu-
chals, one pair; upper labials, seven; 63 mm. max. size. (Ishigakijima.)
Eumeces stimsonii Thompson, 260
DD. Five-lined; no sublateral line, the lateral passing through ear.
E. The patch of scales on posterior part of femur strongly defined;
three scales following upper temporal, well differentiated; scale
rows 26-28; frontonasals usually separated; seven or frequently
six upper labials; very frequently only two supraoculars touch
frontal; 93 mm. max. size. (China)
Eumeces elegans Boulenger, 245
188 The University Science Bulletin
Key to the Species of the Fasciatus Group — Concluded
PAGE
EE. Patch of irregular scales on posterior side of femur not or but
scarcely defined; seven upper labials; three supraoculars in con-
tact with frontal; usually 26 scale rows.
F. Median series of scales usually distinctly widened; the
white lines extend on tail one half to three fourths length;
the dorsolateral line follows middle of the third scale row.
(Riu Kiu Is.) Eumeces marginatus (Hallowell), 267
FF. Median series of scales less widened; light lines extend less
than one third the length of tail; dorsolateral line passes
along back, along the edges of the third and fourth scale
rows. (Northern Riu Kiu Is.)
Eumeces oshimensis Thompson, 253
Eumeces fasciatus (Linnaeus)
(Plate 13; Figs. 24, 25, 26, 27)
SYNONYMY *
1758. Lacerta fasciata Linnaeus. Syst. Nat., Ed. 10, I, 1758, p. 209 (type description based
on Catesby's drawing in Nat. Hist. Car., vol. II, pi. 67; type locality, Carolina); and
Ed. 12, I, 1766, p. 366; Dondorff, Zool. Beit., Ill, 1798, p. 120, No. 40; Shaw, Gen.
Zool., London, III, 1802, p. 241 (noted as a small species); Garman, Bull. Essex
Inst,, XVI, 1884, p. 14 (under Eumeces).
1766. Lacerta quinquelineata Linnaeus. Syst. Nat., Ed. 12, I, 1766, p. 366 (type descrip-
tion, based presumably on a description made by Doctor Garden from specimens ob-
served in Carolina); Meyer, Synop. Rept., 1795, p. 29; Dondorff, Zool. Beit., 1798,
p. 120, No. 24; Shaw, General Zoology, III, 1802, p. 241; Green, Journ. Acad. Nat.
Sci. Phila., IV, pt. 2, 1818, p. 284, pi. XVI, fig. 2 (5-lineata var.).
1801. Scincus quinquelineatus Schneider. Hist. Amph., II, 1801, p. 201 (part.); Daudin,
Hist. Nat. Rept,, IV, 1802-'03, p. 272, pi. LV, fig. 1; Merrem, Tent. Syst. Amph.,
1821, p. 72; Kuhl, Beitr. Zool. Vergl. Anat,, Frankfort, 1820, p. 128; Harlan, Journ.
Acad. Nat, Sci. Phil., VI, 1829, p. 10 (part.); and Med. Phys. Res., 1835, p. 138,
and 161 (part.); Holbiook, N. Amer. Herp., Ill, 1839, p. 39 (the plate VI is a repro-
duction of inexpectatus) ; Storer, Boston Journ. Nat. Hist., Ill, 1840, p. 219 (Barre,
Mass.); Latreille, Hist. Nat. Rept., II, p. 74, fig. p. 64, No. 3.
1801. Scincus auratus Schneider. Hist. Amph., Fasc. II, p. 182, Var. A. (part.); Merrem,
Tent. Syst. Amph., 1821, p. 71 (part.).
1839. Scincus lateralis Saeger. Silliman's Journ., 1839, pp. 323-324 (Detroit, Mich.).
1839. Plestiodon quinquelineatum Dumeril and Bibron. Erp. Gen., V. 1839, pp. 707-708
(part.); DeKay, Zool. New York, Pt. Ill, Reptiles and Amph., Albany, 1842, p. 30
(Pennsylvania to Florida); Linsley, Amer. Jour. Sci. Arts, (1), 46, 1843, p. 41; Gray,
Cat. Spec. Liz. Coll. Brit. Mus., 1845, p. 91 (part.); Gravenhorst, N. Acta. Ac. Leop.
Carol., XXIII, 1851, 1, p. 350, pi. XXXV (part.) (No. 1 is same specimen as de-
scribed by Schneider from the "Lampeschen sammlung ; " not type of Eumeces laticeps);
Jan, Cenni. Mus. Civ. Milan, Ind. Sist. Rett. Anf., Milan, 1857, p. 6 (Georgia); (?)
Maximilian, Verz. Rept. Reise Nord. Amer. beob. wurd., Dresden, June, 1865, pp.
63-64 (either fasciatus or laticeps) (between Natchez and Memphis); Wright and
Funkhouser, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., Mar., 1915, pp. 134-136 (part.) (Georgia;
a good account of three species [fasciatus, laticeps and inexpectatus considered as
one.]); Schmidt, Journ. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc, XXXII, Apr., 1916, No. 1, p. 36
(North Carolina?); Dunn, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 37, 1917, pp. 596, 597, 627
(North Carolina) (part,).
1842. Scincus fasciatus var. DeKay. Zool. New York, Rept. Amph., 1842, pp. 29-30.
1856. Plestiodon vittigerum Hallowell. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil., 1856, p. 310 (type de-
scription; type locality, Flint, Mich. Doctor Miles Coll.).
* The correct placing of the synonymy of this species is difficult owing to the confusion in
the literature of three species, fasciatus, laticeps, and inexpectatus. It is not impossible that
certain of these refer only to one or both of the two other species mentioned.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 189
1859. Plestiodon fasciatus Baird. Expl. Surv. R. R. Route Pacific Ocean, 1S">9, Zool. Rept.,
Pt. 4 (Fort Smith, Aik.); Allen, Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., XIII, 1870, pp. 260-
263 (New Bedford. Mass.); Allard, Sci., XXX, 1909, pp. 122-124; Fowler, Copeia,
X... lit;. Sept. 20, 1925. p. 59 (Delaware-), p. 03 (Maryland), p. 66 (Virginia);
Strecker, Contr. Baylor. Uni. Mus., No. 2, Jan. 15, 1926, p. 2; and idem, No. 3, Feb.
15, 1926. p. 1: I.insdale, Copeia, No. 164, 1927, p. 71- (Kansas); Stejneger and Bar-
bour, Check List No. Amer. Amph. Rept., 1917, p. 69; Bishop, Copeia, No. 54, 1918,
pp. 35-36; Dunn, Copeia, No. 53, 1918, pp. 16-27 (part.); ? Deckert, Copeia, No. 54,
3, p. 31 (probably not fasciatut); Patch, Canadian Field Nat., XXXIII, 1919, p.
60 (Canada); Dunn, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, XXXIII, Dec. 30, 1920, p. 136
(part.); Blanehard, Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. Uni. Michigan, No. 117, July 6, 1922, p. 7
(part.); Loding, Geol. Surv. Alabama. Alabama Mus. Nat. Hist.. Mus. Paper X". ">,
1922, p. 25 (Alabama: part.): Strecker. Bull. Xo. 4, Sei. Soc. San Antonio, Apr.,
1922, p. 31 (Texas): Pratt. Vert. Anim. U. S., 1923, p. 206 (part.): Strecker, Baylor
ITni. Bull., XXVII, No. 3. pt. 3, 1924, pp. 37, 38 (part.) (habits): Schmidt, Copeia,
No. 132, p. 68 (South Carolina): Force, Copeia, Xo. 141, Apr. 30, 1925, p. 25 (Okla.).
1868. Plistodon striatus Abbot. Geol. Xew Jersey, 1S6S, p. 801.
1871. (?) Plistodou litieatus Cope. 2d and 3d Ann. Rep. Peabody Acad. Sci., 1871, p. 82
(lapsus.).
1875. Eumeces fasciatus Cope. Bull. V. S. Xat. Mus., I, 1875, p. 45; (?) Coues and Yar-
row, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phils., 1878, pp. 21-28 (Fort Macon, N. C); Cragin,
Kan. Acad. Sci., VII, 1879-80, (1880), p. 115 (Kansas); Cope, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus.,
17, 1880, p. 18 (part.;; Yarrow, Bull. U. S. Nat Mus., 24, 1882, pp. 41-42 (part.)
(includes inexpectatus and laticeps. Numerous localities) ; Smith, Rep. Geol. Surv.
Ohio, V, pt. 1, Zool., 1882, pp. 650-651 (part.); Davis and Rice, Bull. Chicago Acad.
Sci., I, No. 3, 1883, p. 31 (Illinois); and 111. State Lab. Nat. Hist., Bull., 5, 1883,
p. 47; Cragin, Kan. Acad. Sci., IX, 1883-1884 (1885), p. 137; and Bull. Washburn
College Lab., I, No. 3, 1885 (Mar. and Apr.), p. 102 (Kansas); Hay, Ind. State Bd.
Agri., Amph. Rept., XXVIII, 1886, p. 214 (author's separate, p. 14); Jordan, Manual
Vert. Anim. U. S., 1916, p. 201; Hay, Jour. Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist., X, Mar. 30,
1887, p. 59 (Indiana); Abbot, Pop. Sci. Mon., Dec, XXXIV, 1886, pp. 170-171 (text
fig.; account of habits; called "blue-tailed skink," the scientific name not mentioned);
Nelson, Geol. Survey New Jersey, II, p. 2, Zool., 1890, p. 642; Blatchley, Jour. Cin-
cinnati Soc. Nat. Hist., XIV, 1891, p. 33; and Rep. of State Geologist, 1891, pp.
548-549; and Ann. Rep. Ind. Dept. Geol. Nat. Res., 1892, pp. 546-549 (part.);
Hurter, Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis, Dec. 12, VI, 1893, p. 259; ? Loennberg, Proc.
IT. S. Nat. Mus., XVII, Nov. 15, 1894, p. 321 (very doubtfully fasciatus) (Florida);
Garman, H., Bull. Essex Inst., XXVI, 1894, p. 34 (Kentucky); Rhodes, Proc. Acad.
Xat. Sci. Phila., 1895, pp. 386-387; Mearns, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., X, 1898,
p. 326; ?McLain, Contr. N. Amer. Herp., Feb. 1899, pp. 1-5 (part.); Smith, Proc.
Linnaean Soc. New York, No. 11, 1899, p. 18 (p. 9, author's separate) ; Beyer, Proc.
Louisiana Soc. Nat., 1897-1899 (1900), pp. 25-46 (part.); Atkinson, Ann. Carnegie
Mus., Bull. I, 1901-1902, p. 154 (Pennsylvania); Gibbs, Morris, Notestein, Clark,
7th Ann. Rep. Mich. Acad. Sci., 1905, p. 110 (Michigan); Stone, Amer. Nat., XL,
No. 471, Mar., 1906, p. 168 (Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware); Fowler, Ann. Rep.
New Jersey State Mus., 1906, pt. II pp. 195-196 (text fig., laticeps; pi. 50, inexpec-
tatus, copied from Holbrook) (New Jersey); Surface, Zool. Bull. Dept. Agri. (Penn.), V,
Xo. 8, 1908, pp. 249-251, pi. 31 (also p. 248, and fig. 26); Brimley, Proc. Biol. Soc.
Washington, XXII, June 25, 1909, p. 133 (Craven Co., North Carolina) ; idem., Mar.
23, 1910, p. 12 (Mississippi, Georgia, Florida [part.]); Somes, Proc. Iowa Acad.
Sci., 18, 1911, p. 150 (Iowa); Dunn, Copeia, No. 18, May 15, 1915, p. 6 (Virginia);
Stejneger and Barbour, Check List No. Amer. Amph. Rept., 2d Ed., 1923, p. 75
(part.); (?) Meyers, Copeia, No. 131, June 30, 1924, p. 61 (North Carolina); Blaneh-
ard, Papers Mich. Acad. Sci. Arts Letters, IV, 1924, pp. 535-536 (Missouri and Illi-
nois) (part.); idem, V, 1925, pp. 367-388 (Kentucky and Indiana); Strecker, Contr.
Baylor Mus., No. 5, May 15, 1926, p. 6 (part.) (Texas); idem., No. 7, July 15,
1926, p. 7 (Texas); Bishop, Copeia, No. 152, Mar. 25, 1926, p. 118 (Kentucky);
Ortenburger, Copeia, No. 155, June 24, 1926, p. 138 (Okla.); Netting, The Pitts-
burg Naturalist, I, Xo. I, Jan., 1926, p. 7 (Pennsylvania); Ortenburger, Uni. Okla.
Bull., Proc. Okla. Acad. Sci., pt. 1, VI, 1926, p. 95 (Oklahoma); Brimley, Jour.
Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc, XLII, 1926, p. 83 (part.); (?) Pickens, Copeia, No. 165,
Dec, 1927, p. Ill (part.); Strecker, Contr. Baylor Uni. Mus., No. 10, Mar. 15,
190 The University Science Bulleti
N
1927, p. 14 (Enemies); idem., No. 16, pp. 1-21 (part.); Strecker and Williams,
Contr. Baylor U. Mus., No. 17, Oct. 20, 1928, p. 15; Burt, Trans. Acad. Sci. St.
Louis, XXVI, No. 1, Aug., 1928, pp. 51-56 (Map of distribution, fig. 11.) (Kansas);
Blanchard, Copeia, No. 167, 1928, p. 47; Ruthven, Thompson, Gaige, Michigan
Hand Book Series, Herp. Mich., 1928, pp. 66-70, pi. 13, fig. 3 and map; Roddy,
Rept. Lancaster County and State of Penn., 1928, pp. 48-50 (Pennsylvania) ; Pope
mid Dickinson, Bull. Pub. Mus. City Milwaukee, VIII, No. 1, 1928, p. 46, pi. 10,
fig. 2 (Wisconsin); Gloyd, Trans. Kan. Acad. Sci., XXXI, 1928, p. 120 (Kansas);
Burt, Jour. Kan. Ent. Soc, I, No. 3, 1928, pp. 50-68; Ortenburger, Copeia, No.
170, 1929, pp. 11, 27 (Oklahoma); Strecker, Contr. Baylor Uni. Mus., No. 19, Sept.
1, 1929, p. 13 (Texas); Cahn, Copeia, No. 170, Apr. 30, 1929, p. 6 (Wisconsin);
Corrington, Copeia, No. 172, Nov. 15, 1929, pp. 68-69 (South Carolina); (?) Burt and
Burt, Amer. Mus. Nov., No. 381, Nov. 2, 1929, p. 9; Klotts, Copeia, No. 173, Jan.
16, 1930, pp. 107-108 (New Jersey); Ortenburger, Copeia, No. 173, Jan. 16, 1930,
pp. 94-95 (Oklahoma); Babcock, Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., No. 57, Oct., 1930, pp.
11-12 (and fig., p. 10); Netting, Ann. Carneg'e Mus., XIX, No. 3, Jan. 21, 1930,
pp. 171, 172 (Pennsyhania) ; (?) Weller, Proc. Junior Soc. Nat. Sci., I, 1930, pp. 9-11;
Meyers, Copeia, No. 173, Jan. 16, 1930, p. 101 (N,w Jersey); Noble and Teal,
Copeia, No. 2, 1930, June 30, pp. 54-56 (breeding habits); (?) Harper, Copeia, No.
4, 1930, p. 154 (Georgia); Conant, Bull. Antiv. Inst. Amer., IV, No. 3, 1930, p. 63
(part.); Force, Copeia, No. 2, 1930, p. 29 (Oklahoma); Bond, Copeia, No. 2, 1930,
p. 54 (West Va.); McCoy, Bull. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., No. 59, 1931, pp. 25-33
(Key); Weller, Guide to Exh. Amph. and Rept. Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist., 1931,
p. 4; Haltom, Alabama Mus. Nat. Hist., Uni. Alabama Museum Paper, No. 11, 1931,
p. 118; Gloyd, Pap. Mich. Acad. Sci. Arts Letter, XV, 1931, pp. 393, 401; Taylor,
Uni. Kansas Sci. Bull, XX, No. 13, Oct. 1, 1932, pp. 251-258, pi. 261 (comparison
with inexpectatus) ; idem, pp. 263-268 (comparison with laticeps); Kingman, Kansas
Sci. Bull., XX, Oct. 1, 1932, pp. 273-287, pi. XXIV, fig. 3 (skull characters); Burt,
Copeia, No. 2, 1932, p. 104 (eliminated from Colorado list); Stejneger and Barbour,
Check List N. Amer. Amph. Rept., 1933, p. 81; (?) Burt, Amer. Midland Nat., XIV,
1933, pp. 170-173 (Missouri); (?) Van Hyning, Copeia, No. 1, Apr. 3, 1933, p. 5
(Florida); Noble and Mason, Amer. Mus. Nov., No. 619, May 11, 1933, pp. 1-19
(breeding habits); (?) Necker, Bull. Chicago Acad. Sci., V, No. 1, Jan. 26, 1934, p. 2
(Tennessee); Dury and Williams, Baker-Hunt Found. Mus. Bull. 1, Nov., 1933, p. 14
(Kentucky record).
1878. Eumeces striatals Cope. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc. 1S78, p. 65 (lapsus).
1879. Eumeces quinquelineatus Bocourt. Miss. Sci. au Mexique, Liv. 6, 1879, pp. 426-428,
pi. XXII E, fig. 10-10a, 10b, 10c (part.) (fasciatus; possibly also laticeps and in-
expectatus); Hurter, Cat. Rept. Batr. Coll. Missouri (privately printed), 1883, pp. 1-8;
Boulenger, Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 269 (part.); Boettger, Cat. Rept.
Samra. Mus. Senckenb. Nat. Gesell., Teil. I, 1893, pp. 110-111 (part.); Cope, Ann.
R p. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1898 (1900), pp. 632-640 (part.); Strecker, Trans. Texas
Acad. Sci., IV, pt. 2, 1901 (1902), p. 3 (Texas); Paulmier, in New York State Mus.
Bull., 51, Apr., 1902, p. 390 (New York); Brown, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1903,
p. 558; Stone, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1903, pp. 538-542 (Arkansas, Okla. and
Texas) (part.); Ditmars, Ann. Rep. N. Y. ZSol. Soc, VIII, 1903, p. 160; Morse,
Proc. Ohio State Acad. Sci., IV, pt. 3, Special Paper No. 9, 1904, p. 125; Henshaw,
Occ. Papers Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., VII, 1904, p. 6 (Mass., Conn.); Gibbs, Morris,
Notestein and Clark, 7th Ann. Rep. Mich. Acad. Sci., 1905, p. 110 (Michigan);
Bailey, North Amer. Faun., 25, 1905, p. 45 (Texas); Brimley, Jour. Elisha Mitchell
Sri. Soc, No. 4, Dec, 1907, pp. 144-160 (Key) (Carolina); Strecker, Proc. Biol. Soc.
Washington, XXI, Feb. 29, 1908, p. 49 (Texas); ibid. Mar. 21, 1908, pp. 73 (Texas)
and 89 (Hot 'Springs, Ark.); ibid, July 27, 1908, p. 169 (Texas); Hurter, Trans. Acad.
Sci. St. Louis, XX, 1911, pp. 140-142 (part.) (Missouri); Ruthven, Mich. Geol. Biol.
Surv. Pub., 10, 1911, pp. 263-264 (Michigan); Graenicher, Bull. Wis. Nat. Hist.
Soc, IX, 1912, pp. 80, 81 (Wisconsin); Ditmars, The Reptile Book, 1915, p. 196
(pl. LVII; part.), (also part., pp. 201-203); Wright and Funkhouser, Proc. Acad. Nat.
Sci. Phila., Mar., 1915, pp. 134-136 (part.) (Georgia); Thompson, Occ. Papers Mus.
Zool. Uni. Michigan, No. 18, Dec. 15, 1915, p. 4 (Northern Peninsula Mich.); Ellis,
19th Rep. Michigan Acad. Sci., 1917, pp. 45, 48, 52, 55 (Michigan); (Anon.), Okla.
Geol. Surv., Circ. 6, 1917, pp. 34-35; Over, South Dakota Geol. Nat. Hist. Survey,
Bull. 121 (Series XXIII, No. 10, Bull. Uni. S. D.), 1923, p. 20 (South Dakota);
Ditmars, Reptiles of the World, 1928, pp. 183-185 and 197 (part.).
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 191
History. Probably no group of species has been more confused
or misunderstood than that composed of Eumeces jasciatus, laticeps
and inexpert at us, and perhaps there is no taxonomic problem
more involved than that which concerns associating the correct
name with the various forms. That there are three distinct and
well-defined species cannot be doubted by anyone who will take
time enough to examine them in series.
Pre-Linnaean literature on the forms is not extensive, and ap-
parently no effort was made to differentiate the species. The
earliest records I find are those of Petiver,* who figures a form
under the name Lacerta marinus minor caudd caeruled.
Petiver's figures are such that Holbrook (1842) states concerning
the last (Petiver, 1702): "which reference must go for little as no
one can positively determine at this time what animal Petiver had
in view."
Harlan (1835) gives the following reference, "S. (cincus) Ameri-
cans Petiver gaxophylacii Naturae et Artis 1711 tab. 69. fig 13,"
and on this basis uses the name Scincus americanus for a specimen
eleven inches in length from the southern states in the collection
of the Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia.
Marc. Catesby,f in his Natural History of Carolina, Florida,
and the Bahama Islands, London 1751-1754 (2 vols, in folio, pis.
1-120), gives a figure of a lizard which he called Lacerta caudd
caeruled, from Carolina; a figure which apparently can be dis-
tinguished as the smallest of the three species that occur in Carolina.
Linnaeus, in the 10th edition of the Systema Naturae (Vol. 1,
1758, p. 209), based the species Lacerta fasciata on Catesby's
Lacerta caudd caeruled, and gives as a second reference, Petiver,
Gaz. Nat. et Artis, pi. 1, fig. 1. Linnaeus' description is very brief,
the descriptive data being taken from Catesby's picture and de-
scription of the lizard.
In the 12th edition of the Systema Naturae, Linnaeus (1766)
lists two species of lined skinks from Carolina, Lacerta quinqueli-
neatus appearing on page 366, and Lacerta fasciata on page 369.
The former was included on the basis of a description sent to
Linnaeus (apparently) by Doctor Garden, of Charleston. Here
again, the data recorded are so general in nature that no clue can be
found to determine which of the forms the Garden description may
* Musei Petiveriani centuriae, X, rariora continentes, London, 1695-1705, Vol. 1, pi. l,
fig. 1; and Gazophylacii naturae et artis decades, London, 1702. Folio, pis. 1-100 (pi 69*
fig. 13) (1711, fide Harlan, 1835).
t Also issued in Nurenburg, a Latin and German edition entitled "Piscium et Serpentum
imagines quas Marcus Catesby tradidit." 1750-1777, 2 vols, in foliis, pis. 1-109.
192
The University Science Bulletin
Fig. 24. Lacerta caudd caerulea. From Catesby, "The Natural History
of Carolina, Florida and the Bahama Islands," vol. II, pi. 67. Somewhat
reduced.
have referred to, and the name quinquelineatus apparently cannot
be applied certainly to any of the three forms of blue-tailed skinks.
Gmelin, in the 13th edition of the Systema Naturae, retains the
forms as given in the 12th edition.
Certain references to these Carolina skinks appear in works of
authors who did not recognize or follow the binomial nomenclature
of Linnaeus. In Laeepede's Histoire Naturelle des Quadrupedes
Ovipares et des Serpens (1788-1790), the name Lc Lezard Strie
was used for one form (vol. II, p. 116) and Le Lezard a queue
bleue (vol. II, pp. 79-80) for the other.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 193
Here again one cannot certainly state which name applies to
these species. Daudin, in Latreille, Histoire Naturelle des Reptiles,
refers to L< scinqvA a cinq raies.
Daubenton (Louis- Jean-Marie) in his work (Les Quadruples
Ovipares et les Serpens [the second volume of l'Encyclop. method
Diet. Erpet]) recognizes two forms: he Lezard a queue, bleue, and
Le Lezard strie, based probably on the works of Lacepsde.
Schneider (Amphibioriuni naturalis et litterariae, fasciculus segun-
dus) (1801) recognizes the Linnaean species quinquelineatus under
his genus Scincus. The description of a specimen in the collection
of the Museum in Gottingen is brief, and its identity is in doubt.
However. Gravenhorst redescribes the specimen (Gravenhorst,
1851. p. 350. pi. XXXV). He gives detailed measurements, and
a detailed color description, noting that certain color characters
described by Schneider were no longer visible. Gravenhorst lists
three Mexican specimens under the same description (perhaps
Emmas lynxi Wiegmann).
Schneider, in this same work (pp. 188-1901, describes as new a
-pecies of skink, Scincus laticeps, from a specimen in the Gottingen
Museum. The description, while brief, appears to agree with the
characters of the form called laticeps in this work. No type locality
is given. The great widening of the head back of the eye, combined
with coloration, seems to point to this form (and apparently can
point only to this species), and has been so construed by certain
-til sequent authors who have recognized the large skinks of the
southeastern United States as distinct. Daudin (1802-'03) recog-
nized it; Dumeril and Bibron (1839 I ; Gray (1845). However, it
does not appear certain that the type was examined by any of these
authors. Holbrook ( 184*2, vol. 11. p. 121) places this form under
Plestiodon erythrocephalus (Guilliams) and states: "I cannot re-
ceive the specific name "laticeps" for this reptile, because I do not
suppose it with them to be identical with Scincus laticeps of
Schneider. His description is too short and vague to distinguish his
animal from those closely allied. And he never saw but one speci-
men in the museum of Gottingen in which the 'body was a uniform
grayish-brown colour above, and the tail had two black spots near
the extremity.' "
Regarding the color of the animal, I translate Schneider as "The
original color of the specimen in the museum of Gottingen was dark
gray {'erat fusco griseus'), unspotted save that on the end of the
tail two blackish ^pot^ were present {'quod in extrema cauda dua<
13—1123
194 The University Science Bulletin
negricantes maculae aderunt')." He mentions, also, a picture sent
by Doctor Tilesius from Leipzig, as of a specimen belonging to the
species, but this is obviously an error of identification, since the
specimen is spotted over the body, and the tail is annulated with
dark. It would appear that the spots on the tail of the type might
be discoloration due to injury or fixation, as no known skink, so far
as I am aware, is so marked.
Whether or not this type specimen is extant has not at this time
been ascertained.
Shaw, in his General Zoology (Vol. Ill, 1802), recognizes Lin-
naeus' Lacerta jasciatus for the same lizard ("seldom exceeding
eight inches in length") occurring in Virginia and Carolina; he re-
stricts the name Lacerta quinquelineatus to the form in Carolina.
The descriptive material does not differentiate this from the preced-
ing form or from laticeps, a species apparently not recognized by
Shaw. Daudin, in his Histoire Naturelle des Reptiles, IV, p. 272,
pi. LV, fig. 1, describes and figures a form under the name Scincus
quinquelineatus. The particular species cannot be distinguished by
the figure, while the descriptive material makes certain that it must
include laticeps since he mentions specimens with a length of "dix
pouces trois lignes." Apparently unaware that Linnaeus had named
the lizard pictured by Catesby (see above) Lacerta fasciata, he
attributes the name fasciata to the later edition of Systema Naturae
(Ed. XIII) by Gmelin, and states that he regards this a variety of
quinquelineatus, partly on the evidence furnished him by Bosc, and
partly from his own observations.
Daudin also describes in this work a presumed new species under
the name Scincus tristatus, using a name applied to it by Bosc in
a manuscript ("Description Manuscrite Communiquee"). The
length given for the type (9 pouc, 1 lign.) makes it certain that
this can only refer to laticeps. The details given in the description
likewise agree with the characters of this species. This is the Lizard
rembruni of Daudin in Latreille, Hist. Nat. des Rept., Vol. 1, p. 248,
fig. 2 (fide Daudin, 1803). Should future researches {i.e., the
discovery of the type) show the Schneiderian name laticeps unten-
able, this name is apparently the first name certainly available for
the large skink. In this work Daudin lists Scincus laticeps Sch-
neider and quotes Schneider's description. Noting that it appears
to be very close to the scinque rembruni (= Scincus tristatus), he
suggests the possibility that this may be a presumed African skink,
such as one figured by Seba (Thes. 1734-1765, Vol. II, pi. XII,
fig- 6).
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 195
The first American author to use a binomial for one of the three
skinks was Jacob Green (1818), who describes and figures a species
under the name Lacerta <i>nnquelineata (Jour. Acad. Nat. Sci.
Phil., I), and in the same year and in the same publication (pp.
461-462, pi. XVIII, fig. 2) Gilliams (1818) describes as new a
form which he calls Scincus crythrocephalus. The type locality is
Maryland (James Keech coll.). The description makes it evident
that the species is laticeps Schneider (tristatus Daudin). The figure
is extremely poor. Thus a third name is definitely ascribed to the
large southern form of five- or seven-lined lizard. The type ap-
parently is no longer extant.
Harlan (Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila, IV, 1824, pp. 286-288,
pi. 2) describes as new a species under the name Scincus bicolor,
from a specimen preserved in the ''Philadelphia Museum. " The
size of the specimen as well as its characters make it certain that it
is laticeps (head and body 4 inches). The figure is very poor and
might equally well represent any of the three species save for size.
In the same paper Scincus erythrocephalus Gilliams var. is listed.
He mentions two dried and faded specimens in the "Philadelphia
Museum." These are small specimens, and the description is inde-
terminate.
Harlan (1829) recognizes three species. These are Scincus quin-
quelineatus, presumably including the young of all three species,
Scincus erythrocephalus and Scincus bicolor. He now gives a lo-
cality for the latter — "Inhabits southern states." Harlan (1835)
lists a species, Scincus americanus, quoting as authority for the
name "S. americanus, Petiver Gaxophylacii Naturae et Artis 1711
tab. 69, fig. 13." He also places "S. erythrocephalus Gilliams" as
a synonym. Scincus quinquelineatus appears, including Lacerta
fasciatus as a synonym. He still retains his species Scincus bicolor
with the comment, "according to Say this is a bleached specimen
of Scincus 5-lineata."
Holbrook (1838, vol. II) redescribes and figures a large specimen
of laticeps as Scincus erythrocephalus. The specimen figured is
still extant in the Museum of the Academy of Natural Sciences of
Philadelphia. The description is an excellent one. The. range of
the species is given as being from latitude 39 degrees north to
Florida along the Atlantic States. He includes Harlan's Scincus
americanus as a synonym, but does not note Daudin's tristatus as
a possible synonym. In Vol. Ill, p. 39, 1839, a species Scincus
quinquelineatus is describe! 1 and figured by Holbrook. It is ob-
196 The University Science Bulletin
viously a composite group that is considered, since he includes in
the synonymy Scincus tristatus Daudin, laticeps Schneider, and
Scincus bicolor Harlan, as well as the Scincus quinquelineatus of
various authors. However, the specimen figured is the form in-
expectatus, as is evident by the character of the scales under the
tail. This character is mentioned in the text, but he states that
this is for one third of the length and posteriorly they are wide,
"like subcaudal scales of the boa." The geographic distribution
likewise shows that a composite form is considered. This is from
latitude 35 degrees north to the Gulf of Mexico. He states that
Say observed it on the Missouri river at Engineers Cantonment and
that he has received specimens from Louisiana and Mississippi.
Scincus fasciatus is described in Vol. Ill, p. 45. and figured on plate
7. The specimen figured is a young seven-lined laticeps. In the
second edition of his work, issued in 1842, Holbrook again treats of
the three forms. Scincus fasciatus is a composite including speci-
mens from Pennsylvania south. The figure is of a young specimen
of laticeps. Scincus quinquelineatus is apparently still a composite,
the figure, however, being inexpectatus ; and Plestiodon erythroce-
phalus is an adult male laticeps.
In a later paragraph he states: "The geographic distribution of
animals would, if it were properly known, go far in determining
the identity of the species; thus the Scincus quinquelineatus is a
southern animal and has never yet been found, as far as I know,
north of Virginia, though abundant in the Carolinas, Georgia and
the more southern and western states ascending high up in the
Valley of the Mississippi [Ohio and Missouri] ; while the Scincus
fasciatus inhabits the Atlantic states from New York to Florida,
but has not been found west of the Allegheny Mountains."
Authors subsequent to Holbrook apparently did very little critical
work on these forms.
Hallowell (1856) describes as new a skink from Michigan as
Plestiodon vittigerum, a name that certainly applies to the small,
widespread Eumeces fasciatus. The type locality is Flint, Mich.
Saeger (1839) had already described a form from Detroit, Mich.,
as Scincus lateralis Say rar. If one were to refuse to accept
Catesby's figure as belonging to this form, Hallowell's name is the
first name that unquestionably can be applied to this small, widely
distributed species of the five-lined skinks.
In Cope's great work on American herpetology (19001 the three
species are united under the name Eumeces quinquelineatus. Cope
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 197
states: "Professor Baird* lias shown that Scincus erythrocephalus
quinquelineatus and fasciatus are forms of the same species, the
first name having been given to old males. . . I have adopted
his opinion. . ." (/ope apparently overlooked the fact that
fasciatus is the oldest name.
However, Cope names a seven-lined form, polygrammus, as a va-
riety of Eumeces quinquelineatus from Colonels Island off the coast
of Georgia. Unfortunately-, this specimen (No. 4156 U.S.N.M.) is
no longer extant, and since both laticeps and inexpectatus may have
seven lines, this name is indeterminate (note comments under inex-
pectatus). Two other names have been applied, but these appear
to be due to error (Abbot (1868), Plistodon striatus and Cope
(1871) Plistodon lineatus) .
From the foregoing account the difficulties of definitely ascertain-
ing the proper name for the three American skinks of this group
must seem obvious.
My opinion is that Catesby's figure and description, on which
fasciatus is primarily based, is an attempt to portray the young
of the small five-lined form, here called fasciatus, a species which
occurs from Florida to Canada, and west to Texas, Oklahoma, Kan-
sas, Nebraska and Dakota. This because of the description given
by Catesby, as follows: "This Lizard is usually small, seldom ex-
ceeding six inches in length, the head short, the tail is blue, the
rest of the body brown; except that from the nose runs five yellow
lines at equal distances, along the back to the tail. They are seen
often on the ground, and frequent hollow trees. Some people sus-
pect them to be venomous, tho' I never heard of an instance to
confirm it. They are found in Virginia and Carolina." Should one
tail to accept this, the name next in order for this form that can be
applied with certainty is HallowelPs E. vittigerum.
I believe the name laticeps, proposed by Schneider, was based on
an adult of the large skink of the southern states, since among
known species there are none that the description fits more closely
than this species. There is great likelihood that the type is the
large species from the southern part of the United States, since in
the same work he describes other specimens from this region and in
the same museum. However, should the type be discovered, and
the contrary proved, the next name in order is Daudin's Eumeces
tristatus (that of Gilliams, Emmas erythrocephalus, chosen by
Holbrook, being much later).
* If Baird's opinion has been published, the reference has escaped me.
198 The University Science Bulletin
For the third species I do not believe that any of the earlier
names can be applied. Whether quinquelineatus was based on this
form or one of the other two cannot be ascertained, since it was
based on a brief account (whether or not accompanied by a speci-
men, as Holbrook [1842] states, cannot at this time be determined)
written by D. D. Garden, of Charleston, Carolina. The descrip-
tion will fit any one of the three forms at certain stages, since the
sublateral lines are the first lost and all may become five-lined
lizards and the color of the lines vary from light blue, white, yel-
low to brown. Holbrook attempted to fix this name for a five-
lined form, but without any more positive information as to the
type than has been given here. Moreover, there is evidence that
his quinquelineatus is a composite form. Whether the name poly-
grammus* proposed by Cope for a seven-lined form refers to this
form or a young laticeps cannot be ascertained, since it appears that
the type was lost while the collection of the U.S.N.M. was in Cope's
hands at Philadelphia or subsequently, since it apparently never
reached the U. S. National Museum after the time it was loaned.
Unless this type specimen can be found and proved to be of the
form with small scutes under the tail, I believe the name Eumeces
inexpectatus , which I proposed in 1932 for this form, should stand.
Diagnosis. A member of the Fasciatus group, with the median
light line bifurcating on the nuchal, the branches reuniting on the
tip of the snout; a dorsolateral light line, and a lateral line, reach-
ing the tail, the lateral passing through the ear; tail blue in young.
Males lose the lined markings and become uniformly colored above,
the lateral brown stripe remaining more or less evident throughout
life. Seven (more rarely eight) upper labials, the last largest,
separated from the auricular opening by a pair of subequal superim-
posed postlabial scales; the lower secondary temporal usually more
or less fan-shaped; scales about body normally 28 or 30 (very
rarely 26); postmental divided; a single postnasal. Maximum
size, 80 mm.; prefrontals in contact or not; nuchals usually one or
two pairs; lamellae under fourth toe usually 16 or 17; intercalated
scales on outer side of fourth toe extending no farther than basal
phalanx (rarely part way on the adjoining phalanx). Subcaudals
very distinctly widened.
* Cope (1900, p. 637) states: "The Plestiodon vittiyerum of Hallowell from Michigan
belongs to the middle stage of this species, var. polygmmmus. In a large number of small
skinks, etc., etc'
The context seems to show that this statement is in error. I believe it should read:
"The Plestiodon vittigerum of Hallowell from Michigan belongs to the middle stage of this
species."
"Var. polygmmmus: In a large number of small skinks," etc., etc.
Note further comments on polygmmmus under Eumeces inexpectatus.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 199
Description of the species. A medium-sized species. The rostral
high, the part visible above usually less than half the size of the
frontonasal; supranasals forming a median suture or not, distinctly
smaller than the prefrontals; frontonasal usually broader than long,
in contact laterally with the anterior loreal, and in contact or not
with the frontal; prefrontals variable in size, if large, forming a
median suture, when small, widely separated, occasionally fused
with the frontonasal; frontal much broader anteriorly than poste-
riorly, the anterior tip angular or truncate depending upon the
relation of the prefrontals; frontoparietals forming a median suture
invariably; interparietal usually elongate, never enclosed by the
large parietals; usually two pairs of nuchals, the anterior pair
usually larger (but shorter transversely) than the second pair;
nasal relatively large, sometimes approaching the size of the in-
ternasals, the scale divided by a suture, the anterior portion largest,
usually subtriangular; a postnasal almost invariably present; ante-
rior loreal relatively large, distinctly higher than wide, reaching
much higher than the posterior loreal ; latter longer than high, much
higher anteriorly than posteriorly; two presuboculars (very rarely
three, in which case the posterior loreal is shortened) ; there are
from seven to nine superciliaries usually, eight being the most fre-
quent number, the anterior one usually larger than the posterior of
the series; four supraoculars, three in contact with the frontal.
Primary temporal large, subrectangular, invariably in contact
with the lower secondary; latter different in shape, but not especially
smaller than the upper secondary, which is relatively short and
widened posteriorly; tertiary temporal well-defined, separated from
the ear by an elongate scale; four postsuboculars (rarely five), a
small preocular, and two small postoculars; upper medial palpebral
scales in contact with the superciliaries; lower eyelid with elongate
scales separated from the suboculars by two or three rows of granu-
lar scales. Upper labials normally seven, four preceding the sub-
ocular (more rarely eight, with five preceding the subocular) ; the
first labial a little higher but not larger than the three succeeding;
subocular much longer than high; seventh labial much larger than
the sixth, the last labial, whether seventh or eighth, always largest;
two more or less regularly shaped superimposed postlabials, which
enter the ear or are narrowly separated from it by one or two very
small granular scales. Mental very large, the labial border greatly
exceeding that of the rostral; two postmentals (very rarely except
in Oklahoma specimens, where it occurs frequently, there is a
200
The University Science Bulletin
fusion of the two to form a single postmental) ; three pairs of large
chinshields, the anterior pair in contact, each posterior chinshield
followed by a large postgenial which is bordered along its ante-
rior, internal border by a relatively large scale longer than wide;
usually six lower labials including the last, which is the largest; ear
usually surrounded by 18 to 20 scales; three or two small lobules
on the anterior border.
Scales on the sides of body parallel, save behind arm insertion;
the median dorsal scales not or but slightly larger than adjoining
rows; lateral scales as large as or sometimes a little larger than
Fig. 25. Eumeces fasciatus (Linnaeus). K.U. No. 8332, Lawrence Co..
Arkansas. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head
length, 11.5 mm.; width, 11.5 mm.
dorsals. Scale rows around head behind ear, 33 to 36; about con-
stricted portion of neck, 29 to 33; about axillary region, 34 to 38;
about middle of body, usually 28 or 30 (in Kansas specimens the
number 26 occurs in several specimens). Six preanal scales, the
median pair much enlarged, the outer scales overlapping the inner;
the lateral postanal scale only slightly differentiated in males.
About 15 scales around insertion of arm ; outer wrist tubercle well
differentiated; numerous enlarged tubercles on the posterior half
of the palm; lamellar formula for fingers: 5; 9; 11; 11; 8. Twenty
scales about insertion of leg ; heel bordered by four enlarged padlike
tubercles, the median separated; only one or two enlarged tubercles
on the sole. Lamellar formula for toes: 6; 9; 13; 17; 10. Sub-
caudal scales distinctly widened.
Color (in life). Young, black, with five greenish or bluish-white
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
201
lines, the median bifurcating on the nuchal, the branches uniting
on the rostral; dorsolateral line beginning on the first superciliary,
passing back along the side, following usually the edges of the third
and fourth scale rows, although the greater width is on the fourth
row; these, with the median, continue about half the length of the
tail; the lateral light line begins on rostral, but is usually dim
anterior to the fourth labial. Here it widens and continues back to
the middle of the front edge of ear (in Arkansas specimens it takes
a slightly diagonal trend and may reach nearly to the top of the
cari ; it then issues from the lower half of ear behind and continues
to some distance on the side of the tail; a more or less distinct light
line may be evident on the posthumeral and postfemoral regions,
the latter more generally present; below the lateral line there is a
-tripe of black whose lower edge merges into the grayish or bluish-
may of the abdomen; chin, light cream, becoming grayish pos-
teriorly; tail azure.
Adult males have the dorsal color olive-brown, the light lines
gray, or light tan, usually indistinctly bordered with darker color;
a well-defined brown stripe between the dorsolateral and lateral
lines which continues onto the tail; belly somewhat greenish, the
head somewhat orange or reddish, at least during the breeding
season; bifurcating lines on the head dim. Tail dark gray-olive.
Old males lose practically all trace of the light lines, becoming
; Imost uniform olive or brown-olive above; the lateral brown stripe
is retained and sometimes the lateral light line. The chin, throat
and breast cream; the abdomen gray.
Adult females retain to a considerable degree the color markings
Measurement
s of E
umeces fasdatus (Linnaeus)
Museum
:, i r,
T.Z.S.
yg.
2162
Kl.
yg-
7658
K.U.
yg.
732
K.U.
cf
4990
i - \".M.
9
767 I
K.U.
8769
K.U.
9
S774
K.U.
&
8765
Number*
K.U.
Sex
cf
Snout to vent
Snout to foreleg
Axilla to groin
Tail
25
11.2
12
37
16
Is
43
16
21
73
10
8
13
l ;
54
21
25
56
20
29
60
24
32
Ids
11
10.8
is
64
23
37
110
10 . 8
10
17
"3
70
26.3
37
75
26
40
Length of head
Width of head
Foreleg
Hind leg
6 5
5
8
• HI •>
s 2
6
11
1 1 :-:
12
10
17
24
12
10
16
24 ■">
13.8
13
19.4
on
14.2
13.1
19.2
29
*Nos. 2102, 732, 7658, 7674, 8769, 8774 and 8765, Lawrence, Kansas: 545. Toledo, Ohio;
4990, Ashville, South Carolina.
202 The University Science Bulletin
of the juveniles save that the dorsal ground color is brownish or
brownish-black, the lateral dark stripe differentiated, and the tail
loses all traces of the blue color; the lines on the head may become
dim and the color of the light lines less intense.
Variation. This species, occupying such a large territory, from
Canada to the gulf, westward to Dakota and Texas, might be ex-
pected to exhibit very considerable variation. The very surprising
fact is that it exhibits less than most species even when one con-
siders a species of very limited distribution.
There is apparently very little difference in size; the largest
specimens from Michigan are three or four millimeters longer than
those from any other locality, and slightly more robust.
Probably the nearest approach to subspeciation was discerned in
certain Oklahoma specimens loaned by Dr. A. I. Ortenburger. In
this lot are numerous specimens in which the postmental is un-
divided, a character occurring very rarely elsewhere in the species.
Thus, in a series of thirty Oklahoma specimens from the western
part of the range of the species, fifteen have a single postmental.
A group of fourteen from this lot is from Seminole county, and of
these nine have a single postmental. Throughout other parts of the
range this character occurs rarely (about one in a hundred) in the
several hundred specimens examined. The preserved material shows
no well-defined color markings that would distinguish them from
their brothers, save in a living specimen — an adult male (taken in
a tree!) — which displayed a very unusual shade of color, the dorsal
surface being uniform gray-brown with lavender or purplish iri-
descence. It appears that these aberrant specimens are on the
extreme western edge of the territory occupied by the species, and
represent, no doubt, an incipient species. In from 40 percent to
50 percent of the specimens examined, an extra nuchal is present on
one or both sides, occurring with about equal frequency in speci-
mens throughout the greater part of the range, but in Kansas speci-
mens the percentage having two nuchals is from 70 to 80.
The usual number of lower labials is seven, the last always larg-
est. Eight upper labials (five preceding the subocular) occur on
both sides rarely (approximately four in a hundred) , these chiefly
through the eastern and southern part of the range. Specimens
showing them on one side were of more frequent occurrence.
The character of the temporals and postlabial scales showed a
surprising constancy, the two superimposed postlabials being in-
variably present.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 203
The range of scales from occiput to above anus varies from 53 to
62. Counts available on more than 500 specimens show the preva-
lence of these counts in order: 30; 39; 60; 135; 129; 90; 24; 1; 1; 1.
Thus thirty specimens have a count of 53, 39 of 54, etc. There is
some regional variation. Kansas specimens have a much larger per-
centage with 56, Oklahoma with 58. The range in a single lot
from a single locality (Lawrence, Kan.) is 53, 6; 54, 10; 55, 7;
56. 19; 57, 7.
The postnasal is absent in a very few specimens. I have recorded
its absence in five specimens, two from Ohio, two from Louisiana
and one from Kansas. Two other specimens have the scale absent
on one side.
The lamellae under the fourth toe vary typically from 15 to 17, the
number 16 being most frequent, the numbers from 14 to 19 occurring
the following number of times respectively, in specimens counted:
1. 40, 107, 55, 4, 2.
Superciliaries vary from six to nine: 6, 2 times; 7, 84; 8, 144;
9, 40.
The scale rows about the middle of the body vary from 25 to 32 ;
25 occurring once (Kansas) ; 26, 13 times (10 Kansas, three Ohio) ;
28, 60 times; 29, 17 times; 30. 49 times and 31 once (Indiana), in
141 counts.
Remarks. The well-known habit of this species in brooding its
eggs has been mentioned numerous times in the literature, the most
extensive account being the recent work of Noble and Mason (1933).
On numerous occasions I have captured specimens with eggs,
usually under some flat rock, or under the bark of stumps or fallen
logs. They usually appeared loath to leave the clutch.
Dates on which eggs were taken are June 25, 1926 (Devall Bluff,
Ark.), two lots (9 eggs in clutch, very slightly incubated); July 2,
1926. clutch of 9 eggs, partly incubated; July 13, 1926. clutch of 10
eggs, the young well formed, the color markings evident. Newly
hatched young were first found in Anderson county. Kansas, on
July 26. These had apparently just emerged from eggs, as sug-
gested by the condition of the umbilical region.
Eggs taken in June were from one or two millimeters smaller in
both transverse and longitudinal diameter than those taken in July.
On numerous occasion- specimens have been kept in a vivarium
during April. May and June, but I have not observed this form
breeding.
204 The University Science Bulletin
Distribution. This species has a greater range than any other
known in the genus. Authentic records from South Dakota, the
northern peninsula of Michigan, and Ontario, mark the known
northern distribution. Unauthenticated reports of the presence of
a blue-tailed lizard in Manitoba have reached me, but this must of
course be verified. Ccpe reports a specimen from eastern Nova
Scotia which now appears to have been lost, In the Atlantic states
the presence of this species lias not been verified north of Massa-
chusetts. To the south it extends at least to northern Florida. Along
the Gulf of Mexico the species extends to Louisiana and eastern
Texas. Burt (1929) believes that a specimen of obsolctus reported
by Cope from Matamoros is probably fasciatus. An examination
of this specimen shows it to be unquestionably Eumeccs obsoletus.
The western limit of distribution appears to be a line approxi-
mately following meridian 97 degrees west. Certain records of the
presence of this species from more western localities must be dis-
counted. Yarrow (1882) reports three specimens and Cope (1900)
three specimens of skinks from Gila River, Arizona (both records
refer to U.S.N.M. 9231) the former as Eumeccs fasciatus and the
latter as guttulatus. Burt (1929), apparently unaware of Yarrow's
identification of the specimens, considers the sole remaining speci-
men in the U. S. National Museum bearing the number 9231 as a
young specimen of fasciatus. An examination of this specimen
proves it to be Eumeccs callicephalus or a species extremely closely
allied to the latter.
Yarrow (1873) reports a specimen, U.S.N.M. No. 9230, collected
by W. S. Wood from Bridger's Pass. Wyo. Cope (1900) reports
specimens U.S.N.M. Nos. 3125 (Lieut. Bryant Aug., 1856) and 9230
(W. S. Wood, collector from Bridger's Pass), of Eumeccs quin-
qm lira at us. Sp: cimens bearing these numbers are no longer present
in the collection. However, a specimen of Eumeces multivirgatus,
U.S.N.M. 9230, from Bridger's Pass (?), Wyo., is present.
In the Li. S. National Museum are two specimens listed under No.
3122, as Eumeces fasciatus from ''Between Guadelupe Mts. and
Pecos R., Texas." Cope lists this number under Eumeces quiu-
quelineatus, but for a locality, substitutes a (?). These specimens
are fasciatus, but the locality is certainly incorrect. Two other
specimens (U.S.N.M. No. 12193) bear the locality "Santa Fe, N.M.?
Newberry."' These are typical fasciatus. The locality is doubtless
incorrect.
In the American Museum of Natural History is a specimen (No.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
L'Of,
15i»(i ) v fasciatus, somewhat atypical, which hears the locality
•"Western Mexico" (Frank Tondant coll.. 1904). It would appear
that the Ideality is incorrect, hut of this there may he some doubt;
for the present 1 shall regard it as a fasciatus probably originating
in some locality in the normal range.
Fig. 26. Eumeces fasciatus (Linnaeus). A.M.N.H. No. 1596; "Western
Mexico." A. lateral view cf head; B. dorsal view of head.
Fi<;. 27. Distribution of Eumeces fasciatus (Linnaeus), in
Eastern United Stat. s.
206 The University Science Bulletin
LOCALITY RECORDS
Massachusetts :
Worcester Co.: Barre (Storer, 1840).
Bristol Co.: New Bedford (Allen, 1870).
Connecticut: (Ditmars, 1908).
Litchfield Co.: Salisbury (Linsley, 1843).
Fairfield Co.: Trumbull (Linsley, 1843).
New Haven Co.: New Haven (Henshaw, 1904).
New York: (A.M.N.H. 1).
Rockland Co.: Ramapo (A.M.N.H. 1).
Orange Co.: Sterling Lake (A.M.N.H. 1); Highland Falls (Mearns,
1898) ; Bearfoot Mt., Greenwood Lake (Smith, 1899).
Unidentified: Bluffs of the Pallisades (Smith, 1899).
Delaware: Choptank Mills (A.N.S.P. 2).
New Jersey:
Passaic Co.: Bluffs of the Passaic at Patterson (Smith, 1899); Green-
wood Lake (Myers, 1930).
Atlantic Co.: Two miles above Weymouth (Cornell 1); Hammonton
(A.M.N.H. 1) ; Mays Landing (Stone, 1906).
Bergen Co.: (K.TJ. 1) ; Pallisades Park (Meyers, 1930).
?Sussex Co.: Lake Hopatcong (Fowler, 1906).
Maryland: (A.N.S.P. 1).
Prince Georges Co.: (U.S.N.M. 1).
Charles Co.: Marshall Hall (U.S.N.M. 1).
Anne Arundel Co.: Annapolis (A.M.N.H. 2).
West Virginia:
Logan Co.: (T.Z.S. 1).
Grant Co.: Near Dorcas (Carnegie 1).
Marion Co.: Fairmount (Cornell 1).
Pennsylvania:
Clarion Co.: (Surface, 1908).
Huntington Co.: Diamond Valley (A.N.S.P. 4).
Dauphin Co.: (Surface, 1908).
Cumberland Co.: Carlisle (U.S.N.M. 6).
Center Co.: Laurel Valley (Carnegie 1); near Game refuge (Cornell 1).
Clinton Co.: Haneyville (Carnegie 1).
Allegheny Co.: Clairton (Carnegie 1); near Wilkinsburg (Atkinson,
1902).
Westmoreland Co.: ? (Netting, 1930; embryo 34 mm. long. Possibly
laticeps) .
York Co.: York Furnace (Stone, 1906) (may be laticeps).
Montour Co.: (Surface, 1908).
Philadelphia Co.: Fairmount Park, Philadelphia (Stone, 1906).
Kentucky :
Wayne Co.: Mill Springs (M.C.Z. 1) (Mich. 1) (B.H.F.M. 1)
(C.S.N.H. 2).
Breathitt Co.: Quicksand (Cornell 1) ; Lost Creek (B.H.F.M. 1).
Harlan Co.: Pine Mountain (B.H.F.M. 1).
Carter Co.: (C.S.N.H. 1) ; Cascade Caves (C.S.N.H. 1).
Taylor: The Genus Ei meces 207
Virginia: (U.S.N.M. 2) ; Ferry Landing (U.S.N.M. 2).
Albemarle Co.: Crozet (M.C.Z. 1).
Halifax Co.: Midway (M.C.Z. 1).
Fairfax Co.: Mt. Vernon (M.C.Z. 3) (U.S.N.M. 12); The Dyke
(U.S.N.M. 2).
Pittsylvania Co.: Danville (M.C.Z. 2).
Princess Anne Co.: Lynhaven (A.M.N.H. 2).
Norfolk Co.: Lake Drummond, Dismal Swamp (U.S.N.M. 8) (Mich. 2) ;
Jericho Canal, Dismal Swamp (U.S.N.M. 2).
Caroline Co.: Chilesburg (U.S.N.M. 1).
Allegheny Co.: Clifton Forge (U.S.N.M. 2).
District of Columbia: Washington (U.S.N.M. 2).
North Carolina: (A.M.N.H. D.
Wake Co.: Raleigh (Field D.
Guilford Co.: Guilford (Mich. 3).
Lenoir Co.: Kinston (U.S.N.M. 3).
Craven Co.: Newbern (U.S.N.M. 1) ; Neuse River, New Bern (Mich. 1).
Cataba Co.: (M.C.Z. 2).
Granville Co.: (M.C.Z. 1).
Vance Co.: Kittrell (M.C.Z. 1).
Cartaret Co.: Beaufort (M.C.Z. 1).
Robeson Co.: Rowland (M.C.Z. 2).
Unidentified localities: Port Hudson (M.C.Z. 2) ; Lake Tahoma
(M.C.Z. 2).
South Carolina:
Anderson Co.: Anderson (A.N.S.P. 1).
Abbeville Co.: Abbeville (A.N.S.P. 1).
Charleston Co.: Charleston (M.C.Z. 1) (A.N.S.P. 7).
Dillon Co.: Little Pee Dee River (A.M.N.H. 1).
York Co.: Rock Hill (Mich. 1).
Georgia: (M.C.Z. 2).
Heard Co.: Houston (Mich. 3).
Walker Co.: Chickamagua (Phil. 1).
Liberty Co.: Fulton (M.C.Z. 2).
Charlton Co.: Thompson's lodge, Folkston (Cornell 7).
Alabama :
Perry Co.: Uniontown (A.N.S.P. 2).
Calhoun Co.: Anniston (M.C.Z. 1).
Madison Co.: Eutaw (U.S.N.M. 1).
Florida: (A.N.S.P. 2).
Marion Co.: (Mich. 3) (Carnegie 4) (U.S.N.M. 1).
IVanderburg Co.: Perry Township (Mich. 2) (specimen so labeled, pos-
sibly Vanderburg Co., Indiana).
Mississippi: (U.S.N.M. 3) (A.M.N.H. 1).
Perry Co.: New Augusta (U. of Rochester 2).
Lafayette Co.: University (Mich. 4).
Harrison Co.: Biloxi (A.M.N.H. 1).
208 The University Science Bulletin
Louisiana: (Field 2, with eggs).
Caddo Co.: (Parish) Gayle (Field 4) (Baylor 2G).
West Carrol Co.: (Field 1) (Mich. 1).
Orleans Co.: New Orleans (A.N.S.P. 1) (U.S.N.M.9).
Jeff Davis Co.: 1 mi. n. Fenton (Mich. 1) ; Jennings (Cornell 2).
I>< Soto Co.: Frierson (Baylor 21); near Mansfields (Baylor 5).
St. Landry Co.: Grand Coteau (U.S.N.M. 7).
Plaquemines Co.: (M.C.Z. 2); Belair (M.C.Z. 1) (U.S.N.M. 1).
Bossier Co.: Benton (Baylor 5).
Tennessee: (Mich. 2).
Dyer Co.: Maxey (U.S.N.M. 2); Lane (Mich. 1).
Franklin Co.: (U.S.N.M. 7).
Hamilton Co.: Lookout mountain (U.S.N.M. 1).
Reah Co.: Spring City (M.C.Z. 1).
Shelby Co.: Raleigh (A.N.S.P. 1).
Roane Co.: (U.S.N.M. 1).
Carroll Co.: Huntingdon (U.S.N.M. 1).
Williamson Co.: Franklin (U.S.N.M. 1).
Obion Co.: Reelfoot Lake (Mich. 7).
.Madison Co.: Jackson (Mich. 1).
Henry Co.: Henry (Mich. 5) ; near Como (Mich. 1).
Cumberland Co.: Devils Tip Hollow, near Crossville (Mich. 1).
White Co.: Sparta near Bon Air (Mich. 1).
Benton Co.: Camden (Mich. 1).
Indiana: (M.C.Z. 5).
It". Us Co.: (Mich. 1) ; Bluffton (Mich. 1).
Harrison Co.: Near Palmyra (Mich. 1).
Monroe Co.: 5 mi. east Bloomington (Mich. 1).
Vanderburg Co.: Evansville (Mich. 1).
Jay Co.: Salamonia (Field 1).
Pike Co.: Stendal (Field 1).
Knox Co.: Wheatland (U.S.N.M. 5).
Posey Co.: (M.C.Z. 5).
Vigo Co.: (M.C.Z. 1).
Marion Co.: (M.C.Z. 1).
Putnam Co.: (M.C.Z. 1).
Crawford Co.: (M.C.Z. 2).
Arkansas :
Miller Co.: (Baylor 7).
Lafayette Co.: (K.U. 34).
Laurence Co.: Imboden (K.U. 179) (Field 2).
Prairie Co.: Duval] Bluff (K. U. 11).
Washington Co.: (K.U. 8).
Union Co.: (U.S.N.M. 1).
Logan Co.: Blue mountain. Choctaw Route (A.N.S.P. 2); Magazine Mt.
(A.N.S.P. 4).
Carrol Co.: Lake Lucerne (Mich. 1).
Benton Co.: 2V2 mi. NE Sulphur Springs (Mich. 6) ; V-i mi. S Sulphur
Springs (Mich. 1).
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 209
Garland Co.: Hot Springs (Baylor 5).
Saline Co.: (E.H.T. 3).
Ohio:
Adams Co.: Buena Vista (O.S.M. 1).
Franklin Co.: Truro Twp. (O.S.M. 1); Columbus (O.S.M. 1).
Athens Co.: Athens (Ohio U., Athens, Ohio, 1).
Scioto Co.: Brush Creek (Toledo 2); Sunshine (Toledo 1); Roosevelt
Game preserve (Toledo 1); Shawnee Forest (O.S.M. 1).
Paulding Co.: Antwerp (O.S.M. 1) (Cincinnati M.N.H. 1).
Hamilton Co.: (O.S.M. 2).
Hardin Co.: 3 mi. east Mt. Victory (Toledo 36) ; Dudley Twp.
(Toledo 3).
Hocking Co.: Good Hope Twp. (Toledo 1) (O.S.M. 1); Clear Creek
(O.S.M. 2).
Wood Co.: Ross Twp. (Toledo 1).
Butler Co.: Huestons Woods near Oxford (Toledo 1).
Knox Co.: Mt. Vernon (Oberlin College 1).
Putnam Co.: 3 mi. NW Ottawa (Toledo 1).
Lucas Co.: Toledo (Toledo 1) ; Richfield Twp. (Toledo 14) ; Treadway
(Toledo 1) ; Bancroft and County line Road (Toledo 6).
Crawford Co.: 4 mi. NW Sulfur Springs (Toledo 1) ; 3 mi. N Bucyrus
(Toledo 1).
I'nion Co.: Washington Twp. (Toledo 1).
Highland Co.: Foot Hill (Toledo 1).
Pike Co.: Mifflin Twp. (Toledo 1).
Hancock Co.: Cass Twp. (Toledo 3).
Ashtabula Co.: Pymatuning Swamp (Toledo 1).
Richland Co.: Plymouth Twp. (Toledo 1).
Illinois :
Alexander Co.: Olive Branch (Field 14).
Union Co.: Celto Pass (Field 6).
Pulaski Co.: Grand Chain (Field 1).
Cook Co.: Edgewater (Field 1); Shermerville (Field 1).
Johnson Co.: 20 mi. N. Metropolis (Mich. 1).
Wabash Co.: Mount Carmel (U.S.N.M. 6).
Menard Co.: Athens (M.C.Z. 1).
Jackson Co.: Murphysboro (M.C.Z. 1). Unidentified: Aux Plains, III.
(U.S.N.M. 1) (possibly not Illinois).
Michigan: (M.C.Z. 1) (A.X.S.P. 5).
Lenawee Co.: (Mich. 1).
Huron Co.: Sand Point (Mich. 16); Rush Lake (Mich. 1).
St. Clair Co.: China Twp. (Mich. 1).
Oakland Co.: Royal Oak Twp. (Mich. 1).
Monroe Co.: (Mich. 7).
Manistee Co.: East Lake (Mich. 1).
Crawford Co.: (Mich. 1).
Ingham Co.: East Lansing (Mich. 1).
Berrien Co.: Warren Dunes (Mich. 2).
Charlevoix Co.: (Ruthven et al.. 1928).
14—1123
210 The University Science Bulletin
Grand Traverse Co.: Traverse City (Mich. 2).
Muskegon Co.: (Field 2).
Marquette Co.: (Mich. 1).
Missaukee Co.: (Mich. 1).
Lake Co.: (Mich. 1).
Kalkaska Co.: (Mich. 2).
Washtenaw Co.: Ann Arbor (M.C.Z. 1). (Also Kalamazoo, Kent,
Ottawa, St. Joseph, Van Buren, Mont Calm and Barry counties listed
by Gibbs, Notestein and Clark, 1905.)
Oklahoma: ( A.M.N .H. 1).
Pittsburg Co.: South McAlester (A.N.S.P. 1).
Cleveland Co.: (O.U. 5).
Creek Co.: Sapulpa (A.M.X.H. 1).
Caddo Co.: (O.U. 1).
Rogers Co.: (O.U. 1) ; Claremore (M.C.Z. 1).
LeFlore Co.: (O.U. 3) ; Sugarloaf Mt. (A.N.S.P. 3) ; Wistar (A.N.S.P 1)
Hughes Co.: (O.U. 2).
Ottawa Co.: Wyandotte (A.N.S.P. 1).
Seminole Co.: (O.U. 14).
Choctaw Co.: (O.U. 1).
Washington Co.: (K.U. 1).
Sequoyah Co.: (O.U. 2).
Latimer Co.: (O.U. 19).
Adair Co.: (O.U. 3).
McCurtain Co.: (O.U. 6); Broken Bow (Field 6).
Logan Co.: (O.U. 5).
Oklahoma Co.: (O.U. 1).
Tulsa Co.: (O.U. 2) (Mich. 6).
Okmulgee Co.: (O.U. 20) (K.U 3) (Mich. 7).
Payne Co.: (O.U. 3).
Comanche Co.: (O.U. 4).
Atoka Co.: Limestone Gap (A.N.S.P. 4).
Kansas:
Anderson Co.: (K.U. 43).
Franklin Co.: (K.U. 5) (Mich. 17).
Wilson Co.: (K.U. 2).
Labette Co.: (K.U. 7).
Woodson Co.: (Burt, 1928).
Sumner Co.: (K.U. 2).
Douglas Co.: (K.U. 107) (Field 1) (Cornell 1).
Elk Co.: (Burt, 1928).
Cherokee Co.: (K.U. 7) (A.M.N.H. 1).
Bourbon Co.: <Mich. 6).
Sedgwick Co.: (K.U. 1).
Greenwood Co.: (K.U. 2).
Doniphan Co.: (K.U. 4).
Wyandotte Co.: (K.U. 5).
Montgomery Co.: (K.U. 9).
Allen Co.: (K.U. 16).
Taylor: The Geni - Ei meces 211
I., a i ■-tit ( '<>.: ( K.U. 3).
§ awnt i < 'o.: I K.U. 1 ).
Johnson ( 'o.: (Carnegie 1).
Miami Co.: (Carnegie I) (Mich..".
Riley Co.: (Cragin, 1880).
Geary Co.: (Hun. 1928)
Atchison Co.: (Burt, 1928).
Jefferson Co.: (Burt. 1928).
Missouri:
on Co.: (K.U. 2) (Carnegie 1).
Jackson Co.: (K.U. 4).
Stom Co.: (A.M.N.H. 1); Galena (A.N.S.P. 1); Marble Cave
\ M.N.H. 2).
St. Louis Co.: St. Louis (U.S.N.M. 1).
Christ;,,,, Co.: Chadwick (A.N.S.P. 1).
Dunklin Co.: (Carnegie 1) (A.M.N.H. 1).
Pemiscot Co.: 10 mi. SE Portageville (Mich. 2) ; 3 mi. SE Portageville
(Mich. 1).
Carter Co.: Big Spring Park (Mich. 7). Unidentified: Shepard. Mo.
(Mich. 1).
Tex as :
Henderson Co.: New York (Baylor 1).
Harrison Co.: Caddo Lake (Baylor 1).
McLi nnan ( 'o.: (K.U. 1) ; "McGregor to Conjelle line" (Baylor 1).
Dallas Co.: (K.U. 1) : Dallas (A.N.S.P. 3. Boll Coll.) ; (M.C.Z. 5).
Gregg Co.: (K.U. 1).
Ellis Co.: (K.U. 1).
Baylor Co.: Seymour (A.N.S.P. 1).
Matagorda Co.: Matagorda (A.N.S.P. 1).
Liberty Co.: Liberty (Mich. 2); Dayton (Cornell 1); Cleveland
Baylor 1).
Shelby Co.: Joaquin (U.S.N.M. 1).
Tyler Co.: Doncette (Cornell 1).
Marion Co.: Lake Caddo (A.M.N.H. 1).
Bowie Co.: Sulphur River (Baylor 10).
Wisconsin :
Juneau Co.: New Lisbon (Field 1).
Clark Co.: (Field 1).
Walworth Co.: (Higley, 1889).
Milwaukee Co.: (Pope-Dickinson, 1928).
Washington Co.: (Pope-Dickinson, 1928).
Polk Co.: (Pope-Dickinson. 1928).
Portage Co.: (Pope-Dickinson, 1928).
Waukesha Co.: Golden Lake (Calm, 1929).
Nebraska: '.'Fort Pierre (Cope, 1900) (specimen lost).
Iowa: (Seme-. 1911 I.
Woodbury Co.: Sioux City (A.N.S.P. 1) (labeled Dakota, possibly from
across the river) .
South Dakota: Clay Co.: 4 mi. easl of Vermillion (Over. 1923).
212 The University Science Bulletin
CANADA
Nova Scotia: St. Catherines (River?) (U.S.N.M. 1, No. 4827).
Ontario:
Essex Co.: Point Pelee (N.M.C. 9) ; Arner (N.M.C. 3).
Peterborough Co.: Peterborough (N.M.C. 2).
Frontenac Co.: Mountain Grove (N.M.C. 1).
Simcoe Co.: Go Home Bay (R. Ontario M. 1) ; Honey Harbor
R. Ontario M. 1).
Eumeces laticeps (Schneider)
(Plates 14, 15; Figs. 28, 29, 30)
Note: It has been impossible to determine with certainty that the names
allocated here all belong under this species. Moreover, it is quite as probable
that certain listed under Eumeces fasciatus belong here.
SYNONYMY
1801. Scincus laticeps Schneider. Hist. Amph., II, 1801, pp. 189-190 (type description;
no type locality; type originally in Museum of Gottingen, Germany); Daudin, Hist.
Nat. Rept., IV, 1803, p. 301 (^description, after Schneider); Merrem, Tent. Syst.
Amph., 1821, p. 72.
1801. Lacerta tristata Latreille. Hist. Nat. Rept., I, p. 248 (not seen).
1802-'03. Scincus tristatus Daudin. Hist. Nat. Rept., IV, p. 296 (part.) (description based
partly on a manuscript description and partly on specimens presumably from Carolina).
1803. Scincus quinquelineatus Daudin. Hist. Nat. Rept., IV, 1803, p. 272 (part.); Harlan,
Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., VI, pt. 1, 1829, pp. 10-11 (part.); and Med. Phys.
Res., 1835, pp. 138 and 161 (part.); Holbrook, N. Amer. Herp., Ill, 1839, pp. 39, 40;
and 2d Ed., II, 1842, pp. 121-125.
1818. Scincus erythrocephalus Gilliams. Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., I, 1818, p. 461, pi.
XVIII (type description; type locality, "Southern States"); Harlan, Journ. Acad. Nat.
Sci. Phila., VI, pt. 1, 1829, p. 11 (southern states); and Phys. Med. Res., 1835, pp.
138, 139; Holbrook, N. Amer. Herp., 1st Ed., II, 1838, pp. 101-103, pi. XXII (plate
drawn from A.N.S.P. No. 9298); Cuvier, Reg. Anim., 1829, p. 62; Griffith, Cuvier's
Anim. King., IX, 1831, p. 157.
1824. Scincus bicolor Harlan. Jour. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., IV, pt. 2, 1824, p. 286, pi.
XVIII, fig. 1 (type description; type locality, "Southern States"); and Journ. Acad.
Nat. Sci. Phila., VI, pt. 1, 1829, pp. 11-12, and 37; and Med. Phys. Res.. 1835,
p. 139; Cuvier, Reg. Anim., 2d Ed., II, 1829, p. 62; Griffith, Cuvier's Anim. King.,
IX, 1831, p. 157.
1830. Euprepes tristatus Wagler. Syst. Amph., 1830, p. 62.
1831. Tiliqua erythrocephala Gray. In Griffith's Cuvier's Anim. Kingd., IX, Syn., 1831,
pp. 69-70; Mag. Nat. Hist. Jardine, I, p. 292.
1831. Tiliqua quinquelineata Gray. In Griffith's Cuvier's Anim. King., IX, Syn., 1831,
pp. r>9, 70 (part.).
1831. Tiliqua bicolor Gray. In Griffith's Cuvier's Anim. King., IX, 1831, p. 70.
1835. Scincus americanus Harlan. Med. Phys. Res., 1835, pp. 138, 139 (name apparently
based on Petiver's [Gazoph. Nat. et artis, 1711] tab. 69, fig. 13 Tnot seen]).
1839. Plestiodon laticeps Dumeril and Bibron. Erp. Gen., V, 1839, pp. 705-706; Gray,
Cat. Spec. Liz. Coll. Brit. Mus., 1845. pp. 90-91 ; ?Jan, Cenni. Mus. Civ. Milan
Ind. Sist. Rett. Anf., Milan, 1857, p. 6 (Georgia); Baird, Expl. and Surv. R. R. Route
Pac. Ocean, 1859, pp. 25-27 (specimen mentioned now U.S.N.M. 9239); ?Theobald,
Cat. Rept. Mus. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, (No. CXLVI), Ext. number Journ. Asiat. Soc.
Bengal, 1866, p. 26.
1839. Plestiodon qu.ivquelincatum. Dumeril and Bibron. Erp. Gen., V, 1839, pp. 707-709
(part.); Wright and Funkhouser, Proc. Acad. Nat, Sci. Phila., 1915, pp. 133-136
(Okefinokee Swamp. [part.] This lot contains laticeps. inexpectatus and a form
having 24 scale rows. This specimen has been beheaded and cannot be properly
identified).
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 213
1839. Scincus fasciatus Holbrook. X. Amer. Herp., 1st Ed., 1839, III, p. 4."). pi. 7; and
idem, 2d Ed., 1842, II, pp. 127-129, pi. 18 (the figure is laticeps).
1838. Tiliqua erythrocephala Gray. Cat. Slend.-Tongued Saur., M:ig. Nat. Hist., II,
1838-'39, p. 292.
1842. Plcstiodon erythrocephalus Holbrook. X. Amer. Herp., 2d Ed., 1842, pp. 117-120, pi.
XVI; DeKay, Zool. N. Y., Kept, Amph., 1842, p. 30.
1864. -Eumeces laticeps Peters. Monatsb. Konigl. Akad. Wiss. Rerl., 1864, p. 49 ; Bocourt,
Miss. Sci. Mex., Liv. 6, 1879, pi. XXII, D, figs. 6, 6a, 6b; Taylor, Univ. Kan. Sci.
Bull., XX, No. 13, May 15, 1932 (issued Oct. 1, 1932), pp. 251-261 (comparison with
E. inexpectatus) ; ibid, Xo. 14, May 15, 1932 (issued Oct. 1, 1932), pp. 263-271, pis.
XIX and XX; Dury and Williams, Baker-Hunt Found. Mus., Bull. I, Nov., 1933,
p. 14 (Kentucky records).
1879. Eumeces quinquelineatus Bocourt. Miss. Sci. Mex., Liv. 6, 1879, pp. 426-428 (part.):
- th, Rep. Geol. Surv. Ohio, V, pt. 1, 1SS2, pp. 650, 651 (part.); Boulenger, Cat.
Liz. Brit, Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 269 (part.); Rhodes, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1895,
pp. 386, 387 (part.); McLain, Contr. N. Amer. Herp., 1899, pp. 1-5 (part.); Stone,
Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1903, p. 538 (part.) (Spec, from Petit Jean Mt. Ark.
A.N.S.P. 15452); Stone, The Amer. Nat., XL, Mar., 1906, p. 168 (York Furnace,
York Co., Pa.); Strecker, Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XXI, July 27, 1908, p. 169 (part,);
Hurter, Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis, XX, 1911, pp. 140-142 (part.) (Missouri); Dit-
mars, The Reptile Book, 1915, pp. 196, 197 (part.), and pp. 201-203 (part.).
1882. Eumeces fasciatus Yarrow. Bull. U. S. National Museum, No. 24, 1882, pp. 41, 42
(part,); Blatchley, Rep. State Geol., 1891 (1892), pp. 548, 549 (part.); Stejneger
and Barbour, Check List X. Amer. Amph. and Rept., 2d Ed., 1923, p. 75 (part,);
Blanchard, Papers. Mich. Acad. Sci. Arts Lett., IV, 1924, pp. 535, 536 (part.)
(Nos. 58737 and 58738); Strecker, Contr. Baylor U. Mus., No. 5, May 15, 1926,
pp. 5, 6 (part.) (Louisiana) ; and idem, No. 7, 1926, p. 7 (part.) ; Ortenberger, Uni.
Okla. Bull., Proc. Okla. Acad. Sci., VI, pt. 1, 1926, p. 95 (part,); Brimley, Journ.
Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc, XLII, 1926, p. 83 (Key; part.); Ortenberger, Copeia, No.
170, 1929, p. 11 (part.), and p. 27 (part,); Conant, Bull. Antiv. Inst. Amer., IV,
No. 3, Dec, 1930, p. 63 (part.).
1917. Plestiodon fasciatus Stejneger and Barbour. Check List N. Amer. Amph. Rept., 1917,
p. 69; Blanchard, Occ Papers Mus. Zool. U. of Mich., No. 117, 1922, p. 7 (part.;
2 specimens from Henry, Tenn.) ; Strecker, Baylor U. Bull., XXVII, No. 3, pt. 3, 1924,
pp. 37, 38 (part.) (Arkansas).
History. In a short paper published in 1932 I revived the name
Eumeces laticeps for the large, lined skink occurring in the south-
eastern part of the United States, a name first assigned by Schneider
(1801) to a broad-headed skink in the Museum of Gottingen. This
brief description points out certain salient features of the adult
male, but omits pertinent details of squamation. It likewise men-
tions the fact that formerly the specimen had black spots near the
end of the tail, a character normally present in no skink known to-
day. One presumes that, if present, these marks may have been
due to injury or some accident of preservation (such as a fungus
growth when a preserving fluid has become very weak). Unfor-
tunately the origin of the specimen was either not known or not re-
corded by Schneider. The second specimen mentioned by Schneider,
known to him only by a drawing, is obviously not of this species.
Inquiry regarding the type has to date met with no reply. I re-
gard it likely that it is still extant.
Under Eumeces fasciatus I have traced the history of this form,
and believe it unnecessary to repeat it here (consult pa.ircs 188-198 i.
214 The University Science Bulletin
Diagnosis. A large species of the Fasciatus group, characterized
by the presence of five or seven white lines in the young, the median
bifurcating on the nuchal, and the brandies running forward to the
frontonasal; tail blue in young; limbs long, overlapping; prefron-
tals broadly in contact; one postnasal; two postmentals; subcaudal
scales greatly widened; scale rows 30-32; usually eight supralabials,
five preceding the subocular, which is relatively high ; primary tem-
poral relatively small, touching the lower secondary, which is
frequently enclosed by the tertiary temporal and the last labial;
latter relatively low and much elongated; the intercalated plates
on the outer side of fourth toe extend to or nearly to ultimate
phalanx.
Description of the species. Portion of rostral visible above often
approaching the size of the frontonasal; supranasal moderate, longer
than wide, forming a median suture; frontonasal relatively small,
almost invariably separated from the frontal; prefrontals large,
almost invariably in contact, much larger than the frontoparietals;
frontal usually constant in shape, broadly angular anteriorly, pos-
teriorly the sides sloping gradually, in contact with three supraocu-
lars; frontoparietals relatively small, forming a suture usually equal
to a half or more of their length; interparietal relatively short and
wide, usually truncate posteriorly ; one, rarely two, pairs of nuchals,
not as strongly differentiated as and relatively smaller than in
most species.
Nasal moderately large, divided by a suture, the anterior part
largest; a small postnasal; anterior loreal higher than wide, higher
than posterior; latter large, much longer than high; two presub-
oculars, the anterior usually much the larger; four supraoculars;
superciliaries eight to ten; five (or four) postsuboculars; primary
temporal subquadrangular, in contact with the lower secondary
temporal, which is triangular if enclosed by the seventh labial
and the elongate tertiary, or the lower part may be elongated
by fusion with a scale segmented from the tertiary temporal and
as a result reaches the edge of the ear; upper secondary temporal
usually more than twice the area of the primary, much widened
posteriorly. Usually eight labials (rarely seven) , five preceding
the subocular, which is as high or higher than length of its labial
edge; first labial a little higher than but rarely as large as the third
or fourth; eighth labial much elongated along labial border, sepa-
rated from the ear by (normally) one small postlabial, very rarely
by two superimposed, in which case the upper is usually a segment
Taylor: The Genus Evmeces
215
of the tertiary temporal; anterior ear lobules inconspicuous, usually
thickened and flattened, lying close to the surface; upper palpebral
scales, with the exception of one or two (or in one case none),
separated by a row of grannies from the superciliaries ; lower lid
with four or five enlarged plates separated from the subocular by
usually four, rarely three or five, rows of granules; mental moderate,
with a labial border much larger than that of rostral; two post-
mentals, the anterior small; three pairs of chinshields, first only in
contact; last followed by an elongated postgular, which is bordered
on its anterior inner edge by a scale longer than wide; six lower
labials, the last largest.
Fig. 28. Eumeces laticeps (Schneider). Field Mus. No. 853, Enter-
prise. Florida. A. lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, about 25 mm.; width, about 26 mm.
Scales on body, save in postaxillary region, parallel; no (or very
slight) differences in size of the scales about the middle of body.
There are 24 to 26 scales around the ear. Scales in a row about
neck behind ear 35 to 42, the higher counts most frequent ; about
constricted portion of neck 33 to 36, thirty-four being most fre-
quent; about body in axillary region 38 to 45 rows; about middle
of body 30 to 32 occurring with about equal frequency (very rarely
a little higher or lower). Widened subcaudals vary from 100 to
106. Six scales border the anterior edge of vent, the median pair
distinctly enlarged, the outer scales overlapping inner; lateral post-
anal scute usually somewhat enlarged and differentiated in males;
about twenty scales about arm insertion; outer wrisl plate or tubercle
strongly enlarged; sole with a group of various-sized, enlarged, pad-
like tubercles; lamellar formula of fingers: 6; 10; 12; 14; 8.
Twenty-four scales about insertion of leg; heel usually bordered by
216 The University Science Bulletin
four padlike scales not in contact medially; usually three pad-
like tubercles on sole posteriorly; the outer scales of sole strongly
imbricated, flat, the inner scales small, granular or tubercular;
intercalated scales on outer side of fourth toe extending the length
of the two basal phalanges, and all or part of third. Lamellar
formula for toes: 8; 11; 14; 19; 14.
Head in young and females normal; in old and adult males it
becomes greatly widened behind the ear; in old males the width of
the head exceeds considerably the length.
Color. Young, deep black above, with a tail deep blue, slightly
ultramarine below. A median greenish or (bluish posteriorly) light
line bifurcating anteriorly on the nuchals, the branches reuniting
on the frontonasal or supranasals; the line extends about one third
the length of the tail. The dorsolateral line begins on the first
superciliary, passes back along the sides of the body and continues
from one third to one half the length of the tail, occupying the
middle part of the fourth scale row the greater part of its length;
a lateral line begins on the presuboculars, curves under the eye, and
rises to top of ear; it emerges about middle of posterior edge of the
ear, continues back on the basal half of the tail, wider on sides of
neck, following the middle of the seventh scale row the greater part
of its length; sublateral light line begins on back edge of lower
jaw, runs to shoulder where it is interrupted, then follows back along
the tenth row or edges of the ninth and tenth to the hind leg, where
it is interrupted; it is discernible a short distance on the tail. This
line is less intense than the others. Occasionally, whitish spots on
the forearm and a postfemoral light line, sometimes reaching the
foot ; dorsal lamellae of the toes with lighter areas ; first four labials
light, the lower part of the posterior labials dark; chin, cream; belly,
bluish-gray. The dorsal lines are usually greenish-white anteriorly,
but posteriorly they may be light blue or blue-white; underside of
limbs grayish-white; more rarely they appear cream or light tan.
Young adults have the ground color lighter, some of the darker
pigment remaining, usually forming dark lines along the median
and dorsolateral light lines. The dark area between the dorsolateral
and lateral light lines remains dark but usually changes to a dark
brown, more or less uniform, but occasionally flecked with olive.
From this time on the color of the males tends to diverge from the
juvenile character, the stripes losing their distinctness and the dorsal
color becoming more or less uniform brown or olive, or even olive
flecked with darker color. The lateral brown stripe is usually more
Taylor: The Genus 1m meces
217
u
-a
_
d
o
C72
CO
CO
<»
O
J
a>
■—
03
c3
.2~
ZcM
r/i90
.-Tog
R©C>
Zcm
r/i00
^00
|3
<<CM
IZcm
~X
Zcm M
,:X >>
^CO
/. -
cm
Hi
<N
lo lO
*JI 1-1
o
— — —
CM T
o
M
o —
CM CM
C — i-
eo •«»" ■-
o
CM
00
CM
OS
Cl
N O h t(i lO 00
i-H (M rr — i i-i ™
co
CO
CO
OS CO
O OS
CO
CO CM -H
i-i CM CO
O CM CM CO t*- O
_ „ _ rt CI —
CM -c
CO
CM OS W
i- ■-! CM
C5 O —1
■z CI
i-i CM
o
© -r ©
CO — X
i— CM
co
CO
CM
CO
CM
CO
1-1 t-
CO t-
CM
CO
©
CO
o
CO
CM CM
m ©
c-i
o
-/-
3
O
s
03
O
a
X
o
=1
o
o
—
—
~ - £
a
■a
o
c
o
(J
CM
CO
00
in
s
0
o
3
33
o
O
e
o
to
-1
/
1.-5
6
s
6
U
c
o.m
Ov
<
=
CU
a
a>
I-
■a
-
as
CO
.a
B
O H- (
en
o
s
00
>
l>
..
—
■j
=
0
a
h-
-
~
>.
t-
-1
<
-
::
M
1
■■z
X
a
■a
—
.
-
=
—
s
—
—
-.
•c
en
CM
11 X
—
H
•-
-,
—
-
-
—
-
/
"
_
-
2
3
-
r
■r.
2
218
The University Science Bulletin
or less distinctly retained, and the lateral light line continues to be
more or less discernible. The head becomes red.
The females tend to retain more of the details of juvenile colora-
tion, and the light stripes are discernible in the largest specimens
examined. They, however, become tan or a different shade of olive;
the ground color becomes lighter and usually is olive, flecked with
black. The lateral stripe is very distinct.
Variation. In my study of this species I have examined 278 speci-
mens, 20 states and more than 117 localities being represented. In
a species having so large a distribution, it was surprising that no
well-established variation in squamation was discerned. True, in
certain localities it is possible to demonstrate certain average differ-
ences. Thus, a larger percentage of specimens in the southeastern
Fig. 29. Eumeces laticeps (Schneider). K.U. No. 7809; Imboden, Law-
rence Co., Arkansas. Female. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of
head. Actual head length, 17 mm.; width, 18 mm.
part of the range have the lower secondary temporal enclosed
posteriorly by the tertiary temporal and the seventh labial; how-
ever, numerous examples show a different arrangement ; in the speci-
mens from the more western parts the above arrangement occurs
much less frequently. In a previous paper (Taylor, 1932) I re-
garded that this difference, together with the absence of the sub-
lateral line, might warrant the separation of the eastern from the
western form. After an examination of the series mentioned I have
concluded that this is, at least at the present, not warranted.
The following data on occurrence of this character were taken in
103 specimens from numerous localities: Florida, 8 with lower
secondary temporal enclosed, one not enclosed; Georgia 7, 4; Ala-
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 219
bama 2, 0; South Carolina 7. 2; Virginia 3, 2; Ohio 0, 4; Maryland
0, 1; West Virginia 1, 0; Mi->i>sippi 0, 1; Indiana 1, 5; Illinois 0, 2;
Oklahoma 2, 19; Arkansas 0, 14; Louisiana 0, 2; Tennessee 0, 8;
Kentucky 0, 1; Texas 0, 2; Missouri 0, 4.
The sublateral line is lacking in all younger specimens in the
territory west of the Appalachian Mountains, but whether this is
invariably true cannot be ascertained in all specimens, due to the
fact that this character is obliterated in adult males.
The number of scales from the parietals to above vent varies
from 54 to 60, the numbers 57 and 58 occurring with practically
equal frequency, each nearly three times as frequently as 59 or 56.
Specimens having 54 and 55 are from northern Arkansas. The
higher numbers are also present in the same lot from the same
locality. The widened subcaudal scales from anus to tip of tail
vary between 93 and 100, usually 96 or 97. The extra pair of
nuchals is present in about four cases; however, a single extra
nuchal on one side or the other is about twice as frequent in oc-
currence. The frontal is separated from the frontonasal in about
95 per cent of the specimens; a single postmental occurs in about
two percent of the specimens.
The number of superciliaries in 180 counts (90 specimens) vary
from seven to eleven, occurring in the following order of frequency:
7. 2 ; 8, 58 ; 9, 80 ; 10. 36 ; and 11, 4 times. Eight is of more frequent
occurrence in western specimens. Subdigital lamellae under the
fourth toe vary between 16 and 20; in 104 specimens 16 occurring
39 times; 17. 94; 18, 62; 19, 12; and 20. once. There is no regional
difference apparent. The postsuboculars vary from four to six. In
159 specimens four occurs on one or both sides 79 times; 5, 159
times; 6, 3 times.
The number of scale rows about the middle of the body varies
from 28 to 34. which represents a range more or less typical of
certain other species of the genus. The numbers from 28 to 34
occurred with the following frequency in 136 specimens where counts
were made: 1. 1, 56, 13, 53, 5. 7. Thus, 30 rows, occurring 56
times, are but slightly more numerous than 32 rows, occurring 53
times. The 5 specimens with 33. and 7 with 34, are not confined
to any particular region, but are from widely scattered localities.
lit marks. The separation of this species from the two related
species, fasciatus and inexpectatus, is not difficult if one takes the
time to compare the specimens with the descriptions here given. In
220 The University Science Bulletin
the recent edition of the Check List N. Amer. Amph. Reptiles, by
Stejneger and Barbour, 3d Ed., 1933, p. 80, the following footnote
occurs: "Two additional species of Eumeces, viz. E. inexpectatus
and E. laticeps, have been recently recognized by E. H. Taylor
(Univ. Kansas Science Bull., Vol. 22, No. 13, 1932, p. 251, and Univ.
Kansas Science Bull., Vol. 22, No. 13, 1932, p. 263). The evidence
thus far adduced does not support the validity of these forms."
Since the above statement has been published I have discussed
the question with both Doctor Stejneger and Doctor Barbour,
supplying still further evidence for the recognition of the forms.
For so long a time Cope's conclusions (1900) in regard to this group
have held sway that it is difficult to realize that a different interpre-
tation is tenable, inasmuch as Cope's keen discernment rarely over-
looked forms worthy of taxonomic distinction. Even with the desire
to recognize the three forms, and trying to verify their status, the
herpetologist is still doubtful that it is warranted when, on examin-
ing a jar of specimens, all of which come from the same locality
(not impossibly collected on the same date and by a single col-
lector), he finds three specimens which have the characters of the
three proposed forms. The conclusion based on experience is that
he is dealing with a variable form and the characters are unworthy
of even subspecific recognition. Another jar examined may show
specimens which exhibit characters of only two species. I say it
seems more reasonable to suppose that one is dealing with a variable
form, rather than with three separate species, since it is rare in
one's experience to find three species occupying the same general
range, having enough characters in common to cause a herpetologist
to mistake them as one, and having at the same time distinguishing
features, perhaps less obvious, that would warrant their being re-
garded as totally distinct species.
However, I believe, unquestionably, that this is exactly the state
of affairs with regard to the forms fasciatus, laticeps and inex-
pectatus. I likewise believe that anyone who has access to sufficient
material and who will examine the material with sufficient care
to note all characters, cannot fail to be convinced of the separate
identity of these forms.
Distribution. The species occupies in general the entire south-
eastern part of the United States, extending north to the southern
parts of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana and Missouri, and as far west
as eastern Oklahoma and Texas.
Taylor: The Genus Elmeces
221
Fig. 30. Distribution of Eumeces laticeps (Schneider), in
Eastern United States.
LOCALITY RECORDS
Pennsylvania: Lancaster Co.: York Furnace (A.N.S.P. 1).
Maryland: Camp Roosevelt (U.S.N.M. 1).
West Virginia: Jefferson Co.: xk mi. above Harper's Ferry (U.S.N.M. 1).
Virginia: (A.N.S.P. 1).
Loudoun Co.: (A.N.S.P. 1).
Princess Anne Co.: Virginia Beach (U.S.N.M. 1).
Prince William Co.: Manassas (U.S.N.M. 1).
Agusta Co.: O'Connell's Place (U.S.N.M. 1).
Gloucester Co.: (U.S.N.M. 1).
Rockbridge Co.: Natural Bridge (U.S.N.M. 1).
North Carolina:
Cartaret Co.: Beaufort (M.C.Z. 1).
Columbus Co.: Lake Waccamaw (U.S.N.M. 1).
Wake Co.: Raleigh (Baylor 1).
South Carolina:
Edgefield Co.: 1 mi. NW Trenton (U.S.N.M. 1).
Beaufort Co.: Hiltonhead (A.N.S.P. 1) ; Port Royal (M.C.Z. 1).
Anderson Co.: Anderson (A.N.S.P. 1) (U.S.N.M. 1).
Dillon Co.: Little Pee Dee River (A.M.N.H. 2).
Charleston Co.: Charleston (M.C.Z. 1; Holbrook's specimens) (Field 1)
(U.S.N.M. 1); Mount Pleasant, Christ Church Parish (U.S.N.M. 4).
Berkeley Co.: St. Stephen (Toledo Zool. Soc. 1); Oakley (U.S.N.M. 1).
Richland Co.: Columbus (U.S.N.M. 1).
222 The University Science Bulletin
Georgia: (A.N.S.P. 1) (Cornell 1).
Cobb Co.: Roswell (M.C.Z. 3).
Dade Co.: Sand Mt. Trenton ( A.M.N .H. 1).
Grady Co.: Beachton (Field 2).
Thomas Co.: Thomasville (A.N.S.P. 3).
Turner Co.: Ashburn (A.M.N.H. 2).
Lowndes Co.: Valdosta (A.M.N.H. 2); Melrose (Mich. 1); "a little
north of Valdosta" (M.C.Z. 1).
Charlton Co.: Cypress Bayou, Okefmokee Swamp (A.M.N.H. 1); Oke-
finokee (Cornell 18); East of Folkston (Cornell 1); St. Petersbourg
(Cornell 1).
Heard Co.: Houston (Mich. 2).
Camden Co.: St. Mary's (M.C.Z. 2) (U.S.N.M. 1).
Chatham Co.: Savannah (M.C.Z. 2).
Fulton Co.: (M.C.Z. 4).
Liberty Co.: Riceboro (U.S.N.M. 3).
Berrien Co.: Nashville (U.S.N.M. 2).
Alabama: (A.N.S.P. 1) (U.S.N.M. 1); "Northern Alabama" (U.S.N.M. 1).
Perry Co.: Uniontown (A.N.S.P. 1).
Butler Co.: Pigeon River (A.N.S.P. 2).
Calhoun Co.: Anniston (M.C.Z. 2).
Montgomery Co.: Montgomery (U.S.N.M. 1); Barachias (U.S.N.M. 1).
Baldwin Co.: Perdido Bay (U.S.N.M. 1).
Mississippi: (U.S.N.M. 3).
Adams Co.: (A.N.S.P. 1).
Tennessee:
Shelby Co.: Raleigh (A.N.S.P. 2).
fObionCo.: Reelfoot Lake, Samburg (A.N.S.P. 3).
Henry Co.: Henry (Mich. 2).
Houston Co.: Danville (U.S.N.M. 1).
Knox Co.: Knoxville (U.S.N.M. 1).
Montgomery Co.: Clarksville (U.S.N.M. 1).
Florida: (A.N.S.P. 1) (U.S.N.M. 1).
Volusia Co.: Volusia (A.N.S.P. 1); Enterprise? (Field 1); DeLand
(U.S.N.M. 1) (Field 1) (Cornell 3).
Marion Co.: (Field 1) (Cornell 3) ; Eureka (A.M.N.H. 1).
Duval Co.: Near Jacksonville (A.M.N.H. 4); Arlington (M.C.Z. 1)
(U.S. N. M.2).
Alachua Co.: Near Gainesville (A.M.N.H. 1); Alachua (Mich. 1);
Gainesville (Mich. 2) ; Micanopy Road (Mich. 1).
Lake Co.: (Mich. 1).
Leon Co.: Tallahassee (Mich. 1).
Franklin Co.: Apalachicola (U.S.N.M. 1).
Nassau Co.: (U.S.N.M. 1).
Columbia Co.: Blounts Ferry (U.S.N.M. 1).
Monroe Co.: Indian Key (U.S.N.M. 1).
Lee Co.: (U.S.N.M. 1).
Unidentified localities as regards counties: Indian River, Fla. (U.S.N.M.
1); Camp Baracca (M.C.Z. 1); St. John's River, Beecher Pt.
(U.S.N.M. 1).
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 223
Louisiana: (A.N.S.P. I).
Orh ans Parish (or county) : Gentilly (Ottawa Uni. 1).
St. Mary's Co.: Morgan City (U.S.N.M. 2).
Caddo Co.: Gayle (Field 1) (Baylor 2) ; Frierson (Baylor 1).
- Landry Co.: Grand Coteau (U.S.N.M. 1).
St. Tammany Co.: Covington (U.S.N.M. 1).
//., ria Co.: Avery Island (C.A.S. 1).
Texas:
Bexar Co.: (Baylor 1).
Dallas Co.: Dallas (A.N.S.P. 1) (M.C.Z. 2) (Cornell 1).
Washington Co.: Clifton Bosque? (Cornell 1).
Matagorda Co.: Matagorda (Cornell 3).
Victoria Co.: Black Bayou (Cornell 6).
McL( nnan Co.: Asa (Baylor 7); Waco (Baylor 1).
Bosque Co.: (Baylor 3).
Liberty Co.: Cleveland (Baylor 2).
Unidentified for county: Brazos River (U.S.N.M. 1. Shumard Coll.).
Oklahoma:
McCurtain Co.: (O.U. 4).
Delaware Co.: (O.U. 6).
Choctaw Co.: (O.U. 2).
Pushmataha Co.: (O.U. 1).
Leflore Co.: (O.U. 3) (Cornell 4).
Latimer Co.: (O.U. 5).
Unidentified: Old Fort Cobb (U.S.N.M. 1).
Arkansas :
Logan Co.: Petit Jean Mt. (or Yell Co.) (A.N.S.P. 1).
Lawrence Co.: Imboden (K.U. 5) (Field 2).
Sevier Co.: Lakesburg (A.M.N.H.2).
Jefferson Co.: New Gascony (A.N.S.P. 2).
Sebastian Co.: Fort Smith (U.S.N.M. 1, Shumard; Orig. No. 3176).
Garland Co.: Hot Springs (U.S.N.M. 1) (Baylor 1).
Ashley Co.: Wilmot (U.S.N.M. 1).
Miller Co.: (Baylor 2).
Ohio:
Hocking < 'o.: Good Hope Twp. (Toledo Zool. Soc. 1) ; Clear Creek
(Ohio State Mus. 1).
Darke Co.: Greenville (Cornell 1).
Athens Co.: Athens (Ohio U. 1).
Hamilton Co.: Cincinnati (Baylor 1).
Indiana:
Pike Co.: Stendel (Field 1).
htfersonCo.: Madison (M.C.Z. 2); Hanover (A.N.S.P. 1) (Mich. 1).
Wells Co.: Bluffton (Mich. 1).
Vandi rb< rg Co.: Evansville, 7 mi. SW (Mich. 1).
Illinois: Southern 111. (U.S.N.M. 1).
Randolph Co.: Chester (Mich. 1).
Monroe Co.: Red Bud (Mich. 1).
Jackson Co.: Murphysboro (Mich. 1).
224 The University Science Bulletin
Alexander Co.: Olive Branch (Field 2).
St. Clair Co.: Belleville (U.S.N.M. 1).
Wabash Co.: Mt. Carmel (U.S.N.M. 1).
Missouri :
Pemiscot Co.: (Mich. 1).
Butler Co.: (U.S.N.M. 2).
Stone Co.: (A.M.N.H. 1) (Cornell 1).
St. Louis Co.: St. Louis (U.S.N.M. 4).
Cooper Co.: Boonville (M.C.Z. 1).
Montgomery Co.: ?Bigspring Park (Mich. 1).
Kentucky: (M.C.Z. 2).
Fulton Co.: Hickman (U.S.N.M. 2).
Kenton Co.: (B.H.F.M. 1); Independence (B.H.F.M. 1).
Grant Co.: Crittenden (C.S.N.H. 3).
Eumeces inexpectatus Taylor
(Plate 16; Figs. 31, 32)
SYNONYMY*
1839. Plestiodon quinquelineatus Holbrook. North Amer. Herp., Ill, 1839, pp. 39-41
(part.), pi. VI (the plate is a picture of a specimen of this species); and 2d Ed., II,
1842, pp. 121-124 (part.), pi. XVII.
1879. Eumeces quinquelineatus Bocourt. Miss. Sci. Mex., Liv. VI, 1879, pp. 426-428; Liv.
VII, 1881, pi. 22E, figs. 10, 10a, 10b and 10c (part.).
1932. Eumeces inexpectatus Taylor. Uni. Kans. Sci. Bull., XX, No. 13, Oct. 1, 1932 (Bull.
Uni. Kansas, Vol. XXXIII, No. 10, 1932), pp. 251-261, pi. XVII, figs. 1-5 (type
description; type locality Citrus Co., Fla.).
History. This species, apparently common over the southeastern
part of the United States, has long been identified under the name
Eumeces quinquelineatus and Eumeces fasciatus. Whether or not
this form was actually described by Linnaeus cannot absolutely
be proved or disproved. Since fasciatus should be used for the
widespread species, I am of the opinion that neither name can be
applied to this form. The brief description of quinquelineatus
given by Linnaeus is so inadequate that it applies equally well to
all three of the species occurring in the type locality — fasciatus,
laticeps and inexpectatus. As the types of the Linnaean species
are, so far as can be ascertained, lost, it is obvious that there can
never be an absolutely certain fixation of the name quinquelineatus.
The only attempt to fix the name quinquelineatus to any one of
the three species is that of Holbrook (1838 and 1842), who applies
the name to this species at least in part, and gives a figure of a
specimen of this species. It is obvious that this is an arbitrary
choice. Moreover, from the data given in the discussion and the
distribution, it is apparent that it is in a measure a composite
* It is certain that many of the references listed under laticeps and fasciatus refer, at least
in part, to this species.
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces 225
form. Some of Holbrook's specimens in the Academy of Natural
Sciences, Philadelphia, with this name, are Eumeces laticeps.
When I discerned that three distinct species occurred, the ques-
tion arose as to whether the Linnaean name quinquelineatus or
some later name might apply to this third form. After considerable
research in the literature (see discussion under fasciatus) , it seemed
that none of these could be applied with any degree of certainty,
and a new name, incxpectatus, was erected.
At that time I had available only 36 specimens. To date I have
been able to study 226 specimens, all of which agree, with that
chosen as the type, in all essential details. These additional speci-
mens have added but little to our knowledge of distribution, save
that the southern Virginia records take it a little farther north than
was known, and those from Louisiana a little farther to the south-
west. Numerous specimens have since been examined from Alabama
and Georgia, as well as from those states where its presence was
definitely known previously. (Consult the history of Eumeces
fasciatus in this work for a more detailed account of the earlier
names than is given here.)
Diagnosis. A member of the Fasciatus group, with characters
somewhat intermediate between Eumeces laticeps and E. fasciatus.
Young with median light line from head to tail, bifurcating on the
nuchal, disappearing in adult males; a distinct dorsolateral line
usually, but not invariably, remaining evident in adult males; a
broad lateral brown stripe, bordered by a light lateral line, usually
not continuous on the labials; young with (usually) a sublateral
light line. Upper labials seven or eight, last largest, separated from
the ear by an elongate lower postlabial, with two smaller post-
labials above it; usually one pair of nuchals; one postnasal; two
postmentals; median preanal scales relatively small; 30-32 scale
rows about the middle of the body; subcaudal scales not distinctly
enlarged. Young with a blue tail.
Description of type (Kansas University Museum, No. *•_»::•_'.
Citrus Co., Fla.). The portion of the rostral visible above a little
less than half the bulk of the frontoparietal; supranasal large,
forming a relatively short median suture, touching postnasal and
anterior loreal laterally; frontonasal much broader than long, touch-
ing the anterior loreal laterally; the sutures with the supranasals
somewhat shorter than those with prefrontals; latter large, broadly
in contact medially, forming subequal sutures with the first supra-
ocular and first superciliary; frontal about one fourth longer than
15—1123
226
The University Science Bulletin
its distance from the end of the snout, distinctly wider anteriorly
than posteriorly, the sides gradually sloping, in contact with three
supraoculars; frontoparietals moderate in size, forming a suture
half their length; parietals very broad, not enclosing the inter-
parietal; a pair of large nuchals; nasal divided, the posterior part
forming a narrow rim about nostril; a relatively large postnasal;
two loreals, the anterior very little higher than the posterior, which
is elongated; two presuboculars; four-five postsuboculars; primary
temporal quadrangular, nearly square; upper secondary temporal
elongate, widened but little posteriorly; lower secondary temporal
Fig. 31. Eumeces incxpectatus Taylor. K.U. No. 8232 (type) ; Citrus
Co., Florida. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 13.2 mm.; width, 12 mm.
nearly triangular, the longest side next to the labial; an elongate
tertiary temporal following behind the secondaries; nine super-
ciliaries, the first and last largest.
A small preocular; two small postoculars; large opaque plates
on lower eyelid separated from subocular by four rows of tubercles;
only the four median upper palpebral scales form sutures with the
superciliaries; eight upper labials, first with posterior part much
elevated above the succeeding four which precede the subocular;
seventh distinctly smaller than eighth, which is the largest of the
series; this followed by an elongate curved postlabial which enters
ear, with two small scales in contact with it above (on left side the
posterior is small) ; three small free lobules on anterior border of
ear; six lower labials; mental with much greater labial extent than
rostral; two postmentals; chinshields typical, the last followed by
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 227
two scales, the outer Large, elongate, the inner small, variable, a
little longer than wide; 37 scales about neck behind ear; 31 row-
about narrow part of neck; 40 rows about body in axillary region;
32 scale rows about middle of body; 21 rows about base of tail;
lateral scales parallel save in axillary region, a little larger than
dorsals; six or eight preanals, the median only moderately enlarged,
outer scales overlapping inner; subcaudal scales not or but slightly
differentiated in shape or width from the other caudal scales; scales
about insertion of arm, 15; a well-defined, large, wrist tubercle;
12 to 15 enlarged padlike tubercles on palm; lamellar formula for
fingers: 6; 10; 13; 13; S. About 20 scales around insertion of hind
limb: heel bordered by four or five contiguous plates, with only
one or two somewhat enlarged tubercles anterior to the four heel
plates. Lamellar formula for toes: 7; 11; 13; 18; 11. Intercalated
scales on fourth toe not reaching beyond the basal phalanx.
Head slightly bulging behind eye; ear opening moderate; limbs
well developed, the hind leg reaching elbow of adpressed forelimb.
The pits on the scales are very small, punctate, occurring on sides
of neck and body, on posthumeral and postfemoral regions and sides
of tail. In the neck region scales may have as many as 15 pits
(much more numerous and smaller than in fasciatus) . In older
specimens these become obsolete, as they are in the type. However
in certain of the paratypes they are quite distinct.
Color (in alcohol). Above generally bronze, the scales showing
certain metallic reflections; many scales showing a somewhat darker
area: the top of head somewhat yellowish-brown; a median lighter
line, whitish or yellowish, dimly visible, bifurcating on the nuchal,
the line still visible to the prefrontals; a dorsolateral light line ex-
tending from supraoculars far onto the side of the tail; the line
following outer edge of fourth and inner third of the fifth row of
scales, bordered above by a fine row of small black dots. A broad,
brown stripe on side of head, somewhat deeper brown than on top
of head, growing gradually darker on neck, and becoming almost
black along side of body and tail ; a lateral light line beginning on
the presuboculars, forming at firsl a series of four more or l<
disconnected white spots, the la-t reaching top of car; it emerges
from lower half of ear and continues above hind limb on the side
of the tail, very strongly defined its entire Length; lateral light line
bordered below by a dark -tripe; no sublateral light line visible at
this age; chin and lower labials flesh colored; venter grayish, grow-
ing bluish-gray posteriorly: a light line on the posterior side of
228
The University Science Bulletin
femur; toes and feet lighter than venter, the scales darker edged
on toes.
Color of female (paratype) : Above very dark brown, with the
median light line bifurcating on nuchals, continuing to rostral,
bordered by deep black lines; bronzy anteriorly, blue-black poste-
riorly ; dorsolateral line narrow, running through middle of fifth
scale row, greenish-white with metallic reflections, bluish poste-
riorly; lateral stripe intensely black on sides, brownish on head;
lateral line prominent, wider anteriorly; otherwise similar to male.
Measurements of Eumeces inexpectatus Taylor
Museum.
Number .
Snout to vent
Snout to foreleg. . .
Snout to ear
Tail
Width of head
Length of head
Axilla to groin
Postanal tail width
Foreleg
Hind leg
K.U.
8232
66
26
15
reg.
12
13.2
36
9
20
28
K.U.
8233
62
22
14
reg.
10
11 .4
30
7.5
19
25
Mich.
61632
79
29
17
128*
15
15.2
38
9
24
33
Mich.
61634
73
28
17.3
181*
13.6
15
37
10
21.5
31
Mich.
61754
77
26
17.1
115*
13
14.7
41
9
22
31.5
♦Partly regenerated. 8232, type; 8233, paratvpe ; 61632, Michigan U. Mus., Hillsboro,
Fla. ; 61634, near Gulfport, Pinelas Co., Fla. ; 61754, Cabbage Key, Fla.
Variation. Detailed scale counts were made on 90 specimens,
while data on certain scales were recorded in a larger number. The
following variation is evident: Scales in a line from parietals to
above anus, 55-59, the number 55 occurring 6 times; 56, 12 times;
57, 39 times; 58, 23 times; and 59, 10 times. The variation has no
geographical significance. The scale rows about the middle of the
body vary from 29 to 36; they are normally 30, 31, or 32. In 108
counts, 30 occurs 24 times; 31, 24 times; and 32, 47 times. Two
specimens have 29, one 33; ten have 34, and one has 36. These
specimens with very high numbers are from various localities. The
specimen having 36 scale rows is from Little Sarasota Bay- Florida
(U.S.N.M. 9953). The labials are either seven or eight; in 106
counts, the number 7-7 occurs 46 times; 8-8 occurs 35 times; and
the number 7-8 occurs 25 times. The postmental is invariable.
In 125 specimens, 103 have the prefrontals in contact; 22 have
them separated, but usually the separation is very small. In one
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 229
case they are separated by a small intercalated scale. The nuchals
were observed in 92 specimens. The arrangement 1-1 (one pair)
occurs in 61 specimens; 1-2 in 22 specimens; 2-2 (two pairs) in 7
specimens; and 3-2, in two. The number of lamellae under the
fourth toe was counted 188 times (94 specimens). The number 14
occurs once; 15, five times; 16, 37 times; 17, 88 times; 18, 37 times;
19, 10 times; and 20, twice.
Superciliaries vary from 7 to 10, seven occurring 10 times; 8, 66
times; 9, 83 times; and 10, seven times, in 84 specimens. The
number of postsuboculars varies from three to five. The numbers
3-3 occur three times; 4-3, three times; 4-4, 69 times; 4-5, seven
times; 5-5, ten times.
The limbs, when adpressed, invariably overlap; in old males
the average is about 12 millimeters. The scales separating the
last labial from the ear and the lower secondary temporal show
some variation; occasionally there is only a single scale above the
elongate postlabial; more frequently two.
Color variations seem to be those dependent on age or sex. Here,
as in related species of the fasciatus group, the adult males undergo
a complete or nearly complete color evolution from the brilliant
lined young with azure tails to dull-colored, brownish-olive speci-
mens with orange or reddish head in old age. The brown lateral
stripe appears to remain very distinct in the old. The females
retain in much greater degree the juvenile pattern.
Coloration of young (from University Michigan Museum, No.
61629; from near Gulfport, Pinelas Co., Fla.). General ground color
deep black; a very narrow median greenish-white line running to
nuchals. where it is slightly separated from the two diverging lines
of the head; posteriorly, on back, median line light blue or bluish-
white, becoming a deeper blue on tail, and finally lost in the blue
ground color of the latter part of the tail; dorsolateral line, not
touching diverging lines of head, arises separately on the first
superciliary, continues with irregular edges over outer side of the
supraoculars, then continues along side of body to tail, following
the fifth scale row, generally greenish-white, but becoming blue
posteriorly; first four labials the creamy color of the chin and lower
labials; lateral white line arises on the second loreal, passing through
the presuboculars and under eye, crossing the last two labials to the
top of ear, where it stops; the line then begins behind ear about
middle and continues back to tail; lower part of the posterior
labials dark; between the median and dorsolateral lines are two
230 The University Science Bulletin
dim, narrow, bronze-colored lines on the edges of the second and
third scale rows, visible as far as the tail, where they become blue;
belly bluish-gray, which color reaches on side to the black stripe
which is below the lateral line, at which the gray is slightly lighter
so as to suggest a dim sublateral white line; tail deep blue, darker
posteriorly, the underside of tail a more grayish-blue. Chin and
breast cream color; a whitish line on posterior surface of hind leg.
A second young specimen, an immature male (48 mm.) (Uni-
versity of Michigan, No. 61631, from Hillsboro Co., Fla.), already
begins to show the brownish coloration on the side of the head and
the labial line shows the tendency to form white spots on the brown
color of the posterior labials; the throat shows a slight salmon-
brown suffusion. In general, the markings are the same as in the
preceding specimen. The bifurcating lines usually do not actually
contact the median line on the nuchals, but tend to turn out slightly
at this point.
Remarks. While, as pointed out, this form bears much similarity
to fasciatus, it should in no sense be construed as a subspecies of
either fasciatus or laticeps, since the fact that it occurs through so
wide a territory occupied by these two species and maintains its
identity, precludes such an association. The maximum size of this
species is 89 millimeters snout to vent; I have found four males
reaching 85, and a single one reaching to 89 millimeters in the 236
specimens examined. It is slightly larger than fasciatus, but much
smaller than laticeps. The tails are rarely complete. A specimen,
27 mm. snout to vent, has a tail 44 mm. ; one 50 mm., a tail 100 mm. ;
one 53 mm., a tail 95 mm.; one 79, a tail 125 mm. The subcaudal
scutes in two complete tails were 110 and 112.
Unfortunately, I have no data on the habits of this form, nor
can I state whether it is terrestrial or arboreal. The claws are
somewhat more of the general character of laticeps, and distinctly
larger than in fasciatus. The character of the subcaudals serves to
separate the species most easily. In tails that have been completely
regenerated this is impossible, since in the regenerated part the
scales are strongly widened.
Like all of the known species of Eumeces, variation in head scales
as well as scale rows and details of the markings must be antici-
pated, at least to the extent to which they occur in any other species
of Eumeces, closely related or not. Many of the variations in the
material examined have been pointed out; other variations occur.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 231
Cope (1900, p. 637) states: "The Plestiodon vittigerum of Hallo-
well from Michigan belongs to the middle stage of this species, var.
polygrammus." As this seems unreasonable I suspect a typographi-
cal error, and that the latter part should read: "of this species.
Var. polygrammus," etc.
There follows comments on a specimen from Colonels Island
which differs from quinquelineatus, "in having the five bluish-white
lines on a black ground very narrow; the legs uniform black without
any stripe. There is a third lateral stripe on each side, between the
fore and hind legs, less distinct than the other, and a short, light
-tripe on each side of the median one on the back of the neck. This
is along the adjacent edges of the first and second row of scales from
the median line, the inner edge of this first row involved in the
median stripe. The posterior extremity of the oval light outline on
the head above, instead of being connected with the end of the
dorsal stripe as its bifurcation, has the two branches curved out-
ward, as a quarter circle, and connecting with the two supple-
mentary short cervical stripes and not at all with the median."
Practically every character listed is characteristic of both inex-
pectatus and laticeps, except the statement that there is no stripe
on the leg, since a white stripe on the posterior part of femur occurs
in both species. In regard to the median line, I find that the "bifur-
cating" lines of the head usually do not contact the median line.
However, in some specimens they do {vide Taylor 1932, pi. XVII,
fig. 2.) and in none I have examined do they agree with the descrip-
tion as I understand it. Certain specimens of laticeps sometimes
fail to have the median dorsal line touch the head lines. The lines
between the dorsolateral line and the median line develop in both
species, perhaps earlier in inexpectatus.
Since the type of this species is apparently lost it seems impossible
to do more than hazard a guess as to the identity of polygrammus,
although to me it seems more likely that it is the form called
inexpectatus than laticeps. However, were I to use the name
polygrammus instead of inexpectatus, it is obvious that I would be
exchanging a certainty for an uncertainty, and in that case one
might just as well use the name quinquelineatus, another uncertainty
and an older one!
Moreover, there is of course a possibility that this is the form
described as capito by Bocourt.* I have not allocated this name to
* Eumeces capito Bocourt, Mi--. Sci. Mexique, I.iv. VI, 1879, pp. 429-431, pi. XXII D,
figs. 8, 8a, 8b, 8c.
232
The University Science Bulletin
synonymy, but think it probable that it is based upon an aberrant
specimen of fasciatus.
Distribution. The northern limits of distribution of this form
are as yet uncertain. It follows the Atlantic and Gulf Coast line
from Norfolk, Va., to the Mississippi river mouth. Whether it
reaches any considerable distance from the coast in the seaboard
states is known only as obtains in Mississippi, where a series of
specimens have been collected at University in Lafayette Co.,
approximately 250 miles from the coast, In South Carolina it is
known to reach York Co., about 150 miles from the coast. Indiana
records in the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard College,
must be regarded as too doubtful to be considered. A very con-
siderable part, if not the entire range of this species, is shared with
laticeps, and, with the possible exception of southern Florida, also
with fasciatus.
Fig. 32. Distribution of Eumeces inexpectatus Taylor, in
Southeastern United States.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 233
LOCALITY RECORDS
Virginia: Norfolk Co.: Norfolk (U.S.N.M. 1); Wallaceton, Dismal Swamp
(U.S.N.M. 1).
North Carolina:
Craven Co.: Newborn (Mich. U. 1) (U.S.N.M. 1).
Lenoir Co.: Kinston (U.S.N.M. 1).
Dare Co.: Hatteras, Hatteras Is. (U.S.N.M. 2).
Cartaret Co.: Beaufort schute (M.C.Z. 2, part of Nos. 3405-3407).
South Carolina:
Charleston Co.: Charleston (M.C.Z. 1) (Field 1) (U.S.N.M. 1)
(A.N.S.P. 4).
York Co.: Near Rockhill (Mich. U. 1).
Florida :
Alachua Co.: (Mich. U. 1) ; Gainesville (Mich. U. 2).
Brevard Co.: Eau Gallic (M.C.Z. 2) ; Georgiana (U.S.N.M. 16) ;
Canaveral (A.M.N.H. 5); Micco (A.M.N H. 1).
Citrus Co.: (K.U. 2, types) ; Pineola (A.M.N.H. 1).
Dade Co.: (U.S.N.M. 1); Everglade (A.M.N.H. 1); Homestead (M.C.Z.
1); Long Pine Key (M.C.Z. 1); Miami (M.C.Z. 3); Lemon City
(U.S.N.M. 1).
HUlsboro Co.: (K.U. 5) (Mich. U. 2).
Lake Co.: (U.S.N.M. 1); St. John's River. Hawkinsville (M.C.Z. 1);
Tavares (U.S.N.M. 2); Lakeland (A.M.N.H. 5).
Lee Co.: (U.S.N.M. 1) ; Fort Meyers (Mich. U. 1) ; Captive Is.
(A.M.N.H. 1).
Manatee Co.: Little Sarasota Bay (U.S.N.M. 3).
Marion Co.: (Field 2) (Carnegie 2) ; Eureka (Toledo Z.S. 1).
Monroe Co.: Key West (M.C.Z. 1) (U.S.N.M. 1) ; Tortugas (M.C.Z. 2) ;
Pine Key (M.C.Z. 1); Paradise Key (M.C.Z. 3); (?) Boca Chica
Key (M.C.Z. 1).
Nassau Co.: (U.S.N.M. 1).
Orange Co.: Chuluota (U.S.N.M. 1).
Osceola Co.: Kissimmee (M.C.Z. 1); Lake Kissimmee (U.S.N.M. 1);
(?) Kissimmee Prairie (A.M.N.H. 3).
Palm Beach Co.: West Palm Beach (M.C.Z. 1); Ritta (U.S.N.M. 3);
Lake Worth (U.S.N.M. 1) ; Hobe Sound (A.M.N.H. 2).
Pasco Co.: Argo (A.N.S.P. 3).
Pinelas Co.: Long Key (Mich. U. 2); near Clearwater (Mich. U. 1);
near Gulfport (Mich. U. 2) ; St. Petersburg (Cornell 3).
Polk Co.: Lake Kissimmee (U.S.N.M. 1 ) ; Auburndale (U.S.N.M. 6).
St. Lucie Co.: Sebastian (M.C.Z. 2).
Volusia Co.: Volusia (A.N.S.P. 8) ; New Smyrna (U.S.N.M. 1).
Indeterminate localities — as regards county: Lake Okechobe (M.C.Z.
1); East Florida (M.C.Z. 1); Florida (M.C.Z. 6) (A.M.N.H. 2)
(Carnegie 1) ; Cabbage Key I Mich. U. 1) ; St. John's River (U.S.M.N.
1); South Fla. (U.S.N.M. 1); Arcadia Is. (U.S.N.M. 1); Central
Fla. (U.S.N.M. 1); Royal Palm Hammock (U.S.N.M. 1); Oak Lodge
(A.M.N.H. 5).
234 The University Science Bulletin
Georgia: (M.C.Z. 1).
Liberty Co.: Riceboro (U.S.N.M. 1).
Charlton Co.: Cypress Bayou. Floyds Is., Okefenoke Swamp (A.M.N.H.
2); Okefenoke Swamp (Cornell 10).
Alabama:
Lee Co: (U.S.N.M. 1).
Mobile Co.: Whistler (U.S.N.M. 2); Mobile (M.C.Z. 1); 10 miles west
of Mobile (M.C.Z. 1).
Greene Co.: Eutau (U.S.N.M. 1).
Mississippi :
Lafayette Co.: University (Mich. U. 6).
Hancock Co.: Bay St. Louis (Mich. U. 3) (U. S. N. M. 1).
Harrison Co.: Biloxi (Field 1) (U.S.N.M. 3).
Jackson Co.: Ocean Springs (Cornell 1).
Louisiana :
East Baton Rouge Co.: Camp Wilson, Indianmound (Field 10; one
number, 4831, with five young fasciatns).
East Carrol Co.: Mellville (U.S.N.M. 3).
?Indiaxa: (Several specimens in M.C.Z. from the Blatchley Collection bear
the following records: Putnam Co., Ind. (M.C.Z. 2); Knox Co., Ind.
(M.C.Z. 1): Crawford Co., Ind. (M.C.Z. 1); Indiana (M.C.Z. 3). I am
strongly inclined to regard these localities as doubtful until further ma-
terial is discovered in this state.)
Eumeces tunganus Stejneger
(Fig. 35, Distribution)
SYNONYMY
1896. Eumeces Xanthi Giinther. Ann. Mus. Zool. St. Petersbourg, I, 1896, p. 203 (non
Gunther, 1889).
1924. Eumeces tunganus Stejneger. Journ. Washington Acad. Sci., XIV, No. 16, Oct. 4, 1924,
pp. 383, 384 (type description; type locality, Tung River Valley near Luting Kiao,
western Szechwan); and Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., LXVI, Art. 25, 1926, pp. 51, 52; Gee,
Bull. Dept. Biol. Yencliing U., I, 1929-'30, p. 63.
History. The types of this species were discovered August 9,
1923, by the Rev. D. C. Graham in the Tung River valley near
Luting Kiao in western Szechwan. Doctor Stejneger (1924) pointed
out that the Russian explorer Potanin had obtained specimens in
August, 1894, at Li-Fangfu (also in the Tung River valley), which
Gunther (1896) identified as Eumeces xanthi Gunther. Doctor
Stejneger had these specimens compared with drawings of the type
of tunganus by Mr. S. Czarewsky, who pronounced them identical
with the species from which the drawing was made.
The type specimen is injured by a great gash across the shoulders,
and the preservative (apparently formalin) has discolored the
specimen and perhaps obscured certain color markings. The smaller
paratype is in good condition, but is likewise discolored.
Taylor: The Genus Ia mixes 235
A second scries of eleven specimens was later sent to the U. S.
National Museum. These are U.S.N.M. Nos. 81976-81978, and
82750-82757, collected by Reverend Graham at Lu Ding Chiao,
Szechwan, China, altitude 5,000 ft., July, 1930.
Diagnosis. A typical five-lined species with the median light
line bifurcating at the nuchal and later reuniting on the snout; a
patch of irregular, enlarged scales on the posterior surface of the
thigh; a keeled, lateral postanal scale is absent. A postnasal
present; two postmentals; limbs overlapping when adpressed; 28
scale rows about the body; 64 scales from parietals to above the
anus. The upper secondary temporal large, the posterior border
greatly elongate, notched below by the small, nearly parallel-
sided lower secondary temporal.
Description of the species (from the type, U.S.N.M. No. 66736,
Luting Kiao, western Szechwan, "Where the road to Tatsienlu
crosses the Tung River;" alt., 5-6,000 ft.; collector, Rev. D. C.
Graham, Aug. 9, 1923). Snout relatively slender, the part of rostral
visible above pointed, the area much less than the frontonasal;
supranasals large, forming a median suture; frontonasal six-sided,
relatively narrow due to height of the anterior loreals which border
it laterally, not or scarcely larger than the prefrontals; latter
pentagonal, forming a median suture, and sutures with the frontal,
frontonasal, second loreal, first loreal, first supraocular, first super-
ciliary and each other, the length of the sutures in the order named ;
frontal elongate, obtusely angular at each end, its length a little
greater than its distance from the end of the snout, bordered by
three (two on left side) supraoculars, broadly separated from the
frontonasal; frontoparietals larger than the prefrontals, their median
suture greater than half their length; interparietal rather small,
elongate, not enclosed by the parietals; parietals angular, dis-
tinctly longer than wide; two pairs of nuchals; four supraoculars;
nasal small, divided by a suture, the lower suture reaching the first
labial; a postnasal slightly wedged between first and second labials;
anterior loreal much higher than wide, much higher than posterior,
which is very much longer than high; two presuboculars; eight
superciliaries, the anterior large, elongate, the last relatively very
small compared with the typical condition in the genus; four post-
suboculars; primary temporal rectangular; upper secondary very
large, the posterior part curved, greatly elongated, the lower side
notched by the small, nearly parallel-sided lower secondary tem-
poral; tertiary temporal rather short and wide, separated from the
236 The University Science Bulletin
nuchal by another scale longer but less wide; first pair of post-
labials large, the upper scale the larger; the second pair small; two
or three tiny serrate auricular lobules; seven upper labials, last
largest, widely separated from the upper secondary temporal, the
four anterior not greatly differing in height, all lower than the sub-
ocular; five or six lower labials; two azygous postmentals (ab-
normally divided in the type so that the second part is separated
from the labials); three pairs of chinshields, the first in contact;
the postgenial large, bordered on anterior inner border by a slender
elongate scale; mental with a much larger labial border than rostral.
Eye small, its length much less than its distance from the nostril;
most of the upper palpebral series contact the superciliaries ; lower
eyelid with three enlarged scutes separated from the subocular labial
by two granular rows of scales; a tiny preocular; two small post-
oculars; ear surrounded by about twenty or twenty-one scales.
The median dorsal scale rows widened anteriorly, not or only
slightly widened in the middle of back; scales around neck behind
ear, 40; about narrow part of neck, 34 rows; 38 rows in axillary
region; 26 about middle of body; 21 about base of tail; space of three
subcaudals occupied by four or five series of small scales following
anus; subcaudals distinctly widened, about four times as wide as
long; tail regenerated posteriorly; eight preanal scales, the two
median greatly enlarged, the outer scales overlapping the inner,
their posterior edges forming a curve; the lateral postanal scale in
males lacking any noticeable keel.
Limbs strong, elongate, overlapping a length of about 18 scales
when adpressed; seventeen scales about insertion of the forelimb;
palm with two (or three) outer wrist tubercles, the inner of the two
largest; palm with five or six enlarged padlike tubercles irregularly
disposed, all contiguous; other tubercles small; lamellar formula of
fingers: 6; 10; 12; 13; 6; no laterally intercalated series of scutes;
terminal lamellae not bound tightly about toes; claws narrow,
elongate; 18 scales in series about the insertion of the hind limb;
on posterior surface of thigh a well-defined, irregular series of en-
larged scales; lamellar formula of toes: 7; 9; 16; 17; 11.
Color and markings (preserved in formalin). Above dark black-
ish-brown with five distinctly outlined light stripes. The median
bifurcates on the nuchal or interparietal and its branches run for-
ward to unite on rostral; behind it is visible a short distance on
tail; the dorsolateral lines begin on the first superciliary, pass along
sides of head to the third scale row, continuing back along this
Taylor: The Genus Eumei i s
237
c
c
r.
I
v.
-
CO
3
CN
CN
f^ tc
^
w
M
c
c
00
oc
i-
CO
00
«
i-l
CN
CO
•—
Ol
£o
t«3
p
IN
U5
"^ M
oc
■*
iO
(M
c
o:
OS
<N
C>4
OC
co
00
u;
c-
1- <
C-4
CN
»H
OJ
sbSi
*s
p
c^
^ IT5
00
U5
C-l
OS
c
OC
t^
co
00'
55
l-l
—
CO
•H
CN
Zn
CO eo
p
p;
co
cn
CO
iO
CO
o
^00
_
i-
c-i
Q
O)
c
t^
CO
oo
■x
~1
CO
—
—
—
OJ.
Zao
=»ss
~
<N
•o
s*
W
w
■*
co
a
_
C)
OC
CO
oo
<e
iH
CS
CN
—
CN
£g^
«s
&
CN
X
*
s~
c
-#
co
CO
■*
-?
c
oc
o
t^
—
~^
CN
■fl-
1—
O)
CN
^H
CO oo
P
co
sV
co
t^
I-
■*
OC
CI
i0
c<
1-
OC
o
1^
CN
p;
D
cs
rH
fc»t
03 3
p
CN
CD
■
T—
0C
a
tC
lit
•x
1-0
r-
oc
c
f^CO
0C
T—
CN
Tf
CS
PI
T—
SiS*
>
«IS
p
b
c
s
>
t-
T
i.
c
z
I
1
s
e
a
>
c
a
c:
b
1 —
£■
o
=' c
c
c
c
c
c
"e
<*-
b
b
[ «
1 n
IS
- -
4-
-*-
—
a
-f
C
""
V
0.
a
1
S
I
I a
_
\
V.
=
c
c
a
s
c
c
a
—
• -
<
&
h
c
a
c *
I
i
1
1
o
.5
IS
U
to
c
r
—
CD
238 The University Science Bulletin
row occupying medially a little more than the half of the width of
the scales, visible some distance farther on the tail than the median
line; lateral line begins apparently on the rostral, follows the lower
part of labial series back to eye, then rises, passing diagonally
above the ear and continues back to insertion of the hind leg; the
region both in front of and posterior to ear light but not the shade
of the light color of the lateral stripe; head a lighter shade than
back; a differentiated darker stripe between the dorsolateral and
lateral light lines; chin, throat, underside of limbs, anal region, and
underside of tail light cream. Tail lighter brown. (A dark line
present below the lateral light line.)
Variation. It is with the greatest reluctancy that I have placed
under this species, the paratype U.S.N.M. No. 66737, U.S.N.M. Nos.
82751-55 and U.S.N.M. Nos. 81976-78, owing to the fact that all
show a completely different color pattern from the type. Doctor
Stejneger has pointed out to me that the preserving fluid may have
been responsible for the loss of the typical marking. However, it
appears to me that the type itself was preserved in the same fluid
as the cotype.
These specimens lack the typical ''quinquelineatus" pattern which
is typical in every way in the type; not only is it wanting in the
adults, as might be. expected, but likewise in the very young ones
as well. There is no trace of bifurcating lines on the head. The
general color is apparently gray-olive (in life; now somewhat
darkened) with three indefinitely-edged, lighter olive lines bounded
by slightly darker stripes, likewise indefinitely-edged. There is
also a suggestion of a lateral darker stripe. Another specimen,
No. 82754, is uniformly dark olive above, slightly darker on the
sides; head buffy. No. 82752, head discolored buff; tail lighter
than back; a suggestion of a median line on the neck; chin, labials,
and an area before and behind the ear light.
An examination of the scales, however, shows a strict conformity
to the type pattern. The temporal pattern, with the peculiar notch
in the upper secondary temporal, is identical, as are the general re-
lations of the head scales. The body scales exhibit only the nor-
mally expected amount of variation. Thus, the scales in a row from
parietal to above anus vary between 63-71, 66 being the most
frequent number; scales about the neck, 32 to 36; about middle
of body, 26-28, the former number being the most frequent. There
is one pair of nuchals, but in three specimens there is an extra
nuchal on one side or the other; superciliaries vary from 6-8, the
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 239
higher numbers being most frequent; subdigital lamellae of the
fourth too vary from 16-20, the number 18 being most frequent.
When adpressed the limbs in all cases overlap, a greater propor-
tional distance in the young. This varies from 6-16 scale lengths
L'i marks. It is conceivable that two species having such similar
scale patterns might occupy the same general region and yet not
interbreed. The number of specimens available at present of these
Szechwan forms is so small, that, lacking data on habits and
habitats, it seems wiser to leave this association as it now is, for
the present if not for all time.
Distribution. The records available show western Szechwan as
the only known habitat, with the following localities: Tung River
valley near Luting Kiao, 5.000-6,000 ft. alt.; type locality (U.S.N.M.
2 I : Lu Ding Chiao (this may be a different spelling of the foregoing
name) (U.S.N.M. 11); Lifang fu (Gunther, 1896); Valley of the
Tung river (Gunther, 1896). (See Fig. 35 for distributional map.)
Eumeces xanthi Gunther
(Plate 17; Figs. 33, 35)
SYNONYMY
1889. Eumeces xanthi Gunther. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., (6), 1889, p. 218 (type description;
type locality, Ichang, Hupeh, China; Pratt, collector; four specimens); Boulenger,
Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1890, p. 80 (type referred to) ; Werner, Abh. K. Bayer
Akad. Wiss., II, kl. XXII, B., 2, II Abt., 1903, pp. 343-384 ("Hupe, Szetschwan") ;
Mell, Lingnan Sci. Journ., 1930, p. 225 (mentioned, as of west China) ; Stejneger,
Journ. Wash. Acad. Sci., XIV, 1924. pp. 383-384 (discussion in relation to Szechwan
skinks).
1924. Eumeces pekinensis Stejneger. Occ. Papers Boston Nat. Hist. Soc, V, July 21, 1924,
p. 120 (type description; type. U.S.N.M. No. 60863; H-:n-Lung-Shan district,
Imperial Hunting Grounds, Chihli Province, 665 mi. NE of Peking, China; A. de C.
Sowerby); and Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., LXVI, Art. 25, 1926, pp. 49-51, fig. 2 (three
line drawings of head); Schmidt, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat, Hist., LIV, Art. 4, 1927,
pp. 502, 503; ? Mell, Lingnan Sci. Journ., 1930, p. 225 (discussion of distribution);
Tchang, Bull. Fan Mem. Inst. Biol., Ill, 1931, pp. 275-276 (short description; speci-
mens from Peiping); Boring, Liu Cheng-Chao, Shu-Ch'un Chow, Handb. N. China
Ainph. Rept., Handb. 3. Peiping Nat. Hist. Bull., 1932, p. 58, fig.: Pavlov, Pub. do
Mus. Hoangho Pai ho, No. 12, 1932, p. 8 (lists specimens from localities in "Tchewli"
and Mongolia).
History. This species was di-covered at Ichang by Mr. Pratt,
who sent specimens to the British Museum. These were described
under the name Eumeces xanthi. The description, while accurate
so far as it goes, leaves unmentioned three characters of importance:
the characters of the temporal scales and the presence or absence of
specialized postfemoral and lateral postanal scutes. Moreover, the
character of the median dorsal scales was unduly emphasized, and
the relationship was stated to be with Eumeces skiltonianus.
It is small wonder that Stejneger, on receipt of specimens collected
240 The University Science Bulletin
by A. de C. Sowerby from a northern province, should regard them
undescribed. His presumed new form was named pekinensis, the
holotype being U.S.N.M. No. 60863, with two paratypes, Nos. 60864
and 60865. The type description, a very brief diagnosis published
in 1924, was supplemented in 1926 by a very complete description
and figures depicting the squamation of the head scales from three
views. He compares the species with latiscutatus and elegans.
Clifford Pope, at a somewhat later time, obtained a series of
twelve specimens at a point 13 miles north of Hsien-Lung Shan,
Eastern Toombs, Chihli, which were sent to the American Museum
of Natural History, New York. Schmidt (1927) reported on this
series and published Pope's field notes on the habits of the form.
In the beginning of my study of these forms, Mr. H. W. Parker
of the British Museum was kind enough to prepare photographs of
the type specimens of Giinther's xanthi. An examination of these
photographs indicated that this species and pekinensis are closely
related. The photo was later compared with the type of pekinensis,
and my suspicion that the two species are the same was confirmed.
At a somewhat later date I had the privilege of examining two
of the types then at the American Museum of Natural History,
due to the characteristic kindness of Mr. Clifford Pope. He like-
wise had independently concluded that pekinensis and xanthi are
synonyms.
Stejneger has already pointed out the possibility that the speci-
mens of xanthi reported from Li Fang-Fu, Szechwan, may very
probably belong to his recently described species Eumeces tunganus,
though I believe this is based upon probability only. It likewise
appears probable that the Szechwan specimens reported by Werner
(1903) may likewise be referable to tunganus.
Diagnosis. A medium sized species, characterized by typical
dorsolateral and lateral white lines, and a median line bifurcating
on the nuchal and joining again on the snout; the median line as
well as the others tends to become obsolete in old specimens. One
postnasal; two postmentals; primary temporal large, in contact
with the larger fan-shaped lower secondary temporal; scale rows
22-24 (rarely 26); nuchals two pairs; seven upper labials; limbs
overlap when adpressed except in very large specimens; a group
of enlarged, differentiated postfemoral scales and a differentiated
lateral postanal; subcaudals widened.
Descnption of the species. Portion of the rostral visible above
triangular, with an area more than half as large as frontonasal;
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 241
supranasals relatively large, as large as or slightly larger than the
prefrontals, more than double the size of the nasals, forming a
strong median suture; frontonasal broader than long, forming a
relatively broad suture with the frontal, the sutures with the nasals
largest, touching the anterior loreal laterally; frontal longer than
its distance from the end of the snout, narrowly truncate anteriorly,
rounded posteriorly, touching three supraoculars, wider anteriorly
than posteriorly; frontoparietals not noticeably larger than the
prefrontals, more elongate, forming a median suture; interparietal
with an acute anterior angle, somewhat rounded behind; parietals
broad, relatively short, truncate posteriorly, not enclosing the inter-
parietal; two pairs of nuchals (two-three in one specimen).
Xasal completely divided, low, elongate, the nostril almost di-
rectly above point where the rostrolabial suture reaches the mouth;
postnasal large; anterior loreal much higher than wide, higher than
the posterior; anterior part much higher than posterior part of the
second loreal. the scale longer than high (vertically broken in one
specimen); four supraoculars; seven superciliaries (normally), the
anterior very much larger than the last, which is fan-shaped and
not greatly higher than wide; a tiny preocular and two small
postoculars; presuboculars two; postsuboculars five; upper palpe-
bral scales not wholly separated by intercalated granules, at least
three or four touching the superciliaries; usually four enlarged scales
on the lower eyelid, separated from the subocular by three rows of
M'ales; primary temporal large (approaching the size of the sixth
labial in one specimen), touching lower secondary temporal; latter
fan-shaped, larger than primary temporal; upper secondary large,
its upper and lower sides parallel for more than half its length; two
tertiary temporals, the upper largest; two superimposed postlabials,
followed by three very tiny scales; two low lobules on the edge of
ear; 21 or 22 scales about ear opening; seven upper labials, the first
not larger than others of the four preceding the subocular; seventh
labial largest; lower labials six.
Mental large, with a much larger labial border than the rostral;
two postmentals; three pairs of chinshields, the anterior pair nar-
rowest, in contact; postgenial very large, bordered anteriorly by a
small narrow scale much longer than wide; scales about the neck
posterior to ear, 32; about constricted portion of neck, 30; in
axillary region, 40; about body, 24 (26 in one) ; about base of tail,
20; scale rows generally parallel, but forming somewhat irregular
lines on the sides; the median scale rows rather distinctly but not
16 — 1123
242
The University Science Bulletin
greatly widened, except on neek; 59 to 60 scales from parietals to
a point above vent; eight scales bordering anterior edge of vent,
the two median greatly enlarged, the three laterals diminishing in
size toward the outer edge, the outer scales overlapping the inner;
99 subcaudals, the two nearest anus broken into smaller scales; legs
moderately large, overlapping length of three or four scales when
adpressed; about 15 scale rows about insertion of foreleg; outer
wrist tubercle well developed, with the adjoining scale modified; a
second padlike tubercle on palm below base of first digit; seven
enlarged tubercles on the palm; lamellar formula: 6; 10; 12; 12;
8; lamellae not compressed or keeled below; 18 scales about in-
Fig. 33. Eumeces xanthi Gunther. Field Mus. Xo. 7396; Hsien-Lung-
Shan district, Chihli, China. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of
head. Actual head length. 10 nun.; width, 8 mm.
sertion of hind leg; a group of greatly enlarged scales on lower
posterior edge of femur, the scales not following the regular series;
scales on heel enlarged, separated by two granules; two enlarged
tubercles on inner side of foot greatly differentiated from all other
granules on the foot, which are subequal and not imbricated on the
outer part of foot. Lamellar formula of toes: 6; 11; 14; 17; 11.
Claws on the toes distinctly smaller than those on the fingers;
the lateral postanal scale modified, with a low but usually dis-
cernible keel.
Color (in alcohol). Dorsal ground color grayish, flecked with
brown; a median bluish-gray (in young, whitish) stripe, bifurcating
on the nuchal, runs forward to the rostral, covering the inner third
of the two median scale rows; a pair of dorsolateral lines, originat-
Taylor: Tin: (Ikxus Eumeces
243
ing oe anterior superciliary, continues hack passing through the
middle of the third scale row, occupying at least one half of each
-rale; median line clearly edged with dark brown, the dorsolateral
line dimly edged with brown above. A broad, brown, lateral stripe
covers a width equivalent to two scale rows. The labials are all
rather light, hut a more distinct whitish or bluish white line begins
below anterior part of eye, passes across the upper part of the last
labials to upper part of ear, then continues behind the ear, passing
three scale rows above insertion of forearm along the side; it is
broken by the insertion of the hind leg, then continues some
distance on the sides of the tail; this lateral line borders the lateral
brown stripe and is bordered below by an indefinite brown stripe.
The lower sides and abdomen are bluish to bluish-gray; throat and
breast, underside of limbs and tail and preanal scales, cream.
Usually a small brown area is present on the labials in front of the
ear.
Measurements of Eumeces xanthi Giinther
Museum
Xumber
B.M.N.H.
Cotype
B.M.N.H.
Cotype
1 s N.M.
60865
U.S.N.M.
60864
U.S.N.M.
60863
Snout to vent
76
72
62
59
54
Tail
132
6.3
reg.
6
Snout to eye
5.1
5
5
Snout to ear
I.'. 1
14
12
11.7
11.5
Snout to foreleg
25
22
22
20
19.5
Axilla to groin
41
40
32
30
21
Foreleg
22
20
17.5
16
16
Hind leg
29
27 3
22 4
•>9
20 2
Width of head '
11
10.3
9
9
8
Length of head
14
1 2 .".
10.5
10.2
9
Width or bo:lv
14
14
8
10
10
Longest toe
10.4
10
7.5
7.5
7 . 5
Cotypes, Hupeh, Irhang; U.S.N.M. Nos. r,ost;3 -608G5, Hsien-Lung-Shan District, Chihli
Prov., China.
Variation. Stejneger (1926) has noted in the paratypes a some-
what smaller frontonasal and states that the enlarged postfemoral
scales are more localized as '"patches," and smaller in the paratypes
than in the type. The following variations are evident in northern
'" [>< Linensis" specimens: Scale rows about middle of body 22 to 24,
the number 22 occurring seven times, 23 two times and 24 once.
The number of scale rows from occiput to above anus 54 to 58, 5(i
244 The University Science Bulletin
being the most common number. The labial number is seven (one
shows only six), the last constantly largest; superciliaries vary from
six to eight ; lamellae under fourth toe from 14 to 16. The relation
of the supraoculars to the frontal is generally constant (in one case
only is the third separated slightly from the frontal).
Older specimens tend toward a loss of the light lines. These are
very strongly defined, and strongly contrasted with the black or
black-brown ground color, in the young. In young adult specimens
the ground color becomes more brownish and in some males the
ground color is greenish-olive instead of black or brown, and the
head is olive-brown.
The species is relatively small, the largest specimen being 79
millimeters, snout to vent; the tail is 130 millimeters; snout to fore-
leg, 25; foreleg, 16; hind leg, 23. The snout to foreleg distance
averages 34 percent of the body length; the hind leg, 34 percent;
the tail length averages 60 percent of the total length. The axilla
to groin measurement is approximately 50 percent of the body
length; the limbs in larger specimens overlap or are very narrowly
separated when adpressed to body.
Remarks. The northern form "pekinensis" differs from the south-
ern xanthi in slightly different scale averages, which will doubtless
disappear with larger series of the southern specimens. Thus,
usually three out of four specimens of xanthi have 24 scale rows,
while one shows 26 rows ; in pekinensis the usual number is 22 rows,
23 and 24 rows also occurring. This variation is no greater than
occurs in many other species of Eumeces; the number of scales
from parietals to above anus is 59 to 60 in xanthi and from 56 to
59 in pekinensis; the lamellae under the fourth toe in xanthi are
16 to 17, in pekinensis 14 to 17.
Giinther seemed to emphasize the size of the median body scales.
The northern pekinensis, when compared with the xanthi types,
shows that in certain specimens there is no difference or only a slight
apparent difference in the size of these scales in the two forms, while
in others they are somewhat smaller. The color patterns, when speci-
mens of equal age and sex are compared, show no differences.
Eumeces xanthi agrees with elegans in having enlarged post-
femoral scales, the postnasal and the less specialized granular scales
on the feet, but E. elegans has only one postmental, one pair of
nuchals, more numerous scales under the fourth toe, and temporals
like E. latiscutatus. E. xanthi agrees with chinensis in having two
postmentals and in temporal scalation, but it has a postnasal, en-
Taylor: The Genus Fa mixes 245
larged postfemorals and lacks the specialized foot scales; from K.
hit is, -id at us it differs in having the double postmental, the longer
snout, fewer scale rows and very different temporals.
Pope, quoted by Schmidt (1927, pp. 502-503), states that the eggs
of the species are deposited in burrows under rocks. The burrows
are twelve inches in length, two inches wide and less than an inch
in depth; the number of eggs varies from four to eight. The female
remains with the eggs, and from the number of nests found in one
small locality it appears that the breeding females assemble in
colonics. The eggs were being deposited August 1-4.
Distribution. If one disregards Giinther's (1896) record of this
species at Li-Fang-Fu Valley of the Tung river, Szechwan, and that
of Werner (1903) for Szechwan (which are quite likely records of
Eumeces tunganus Stejnegcr), this species is only known with cer-
tainty from the provinces of Hupeh, Chihli and Mongolia. One
may surmise that it must also occur in Honan. Stejneger (1926)
has suggested that specimens collected by Elpatjewsky and Sabane-
jew on the Ussuri coast at Olga and Vladimir Bays may belong
to this species (pekinensis) rather than to marginatus or latis-
cutatus, as they were identified by Nikolski (1915). Should Stej-
neger be correct in his surmise, the range would be extended a con-
siderable distance to the northeast. (See Fig. 35 for distributional
map.)
Locality records:
China: Hupeh: Ichang, in the valley of the Yangtze-Kiang river (types,
British Mus. 4; Pratt Coll.) (Werner, 1903, "Hupe," 9).
Chihli: Imperial Hunting Grounds, Hsien-Lung-Shan District (U.S.N. M.
3, types of pekinensis; Sowerby Coll.); 13 miles north Hsien-Lung-
Shan, Eastern Toombs (Field 3) (M.CZ. 1) (A.M.N.H. 8); Peiping
(M.C.Z. 1) (Tchang, 1931, 1); Pait'a (Pavlov, 1932); Paiho (Pavlov,
1932); Hei lung tans (Pavlov, 1932); Nanjeli, Western Chihli (Pav-
lov, 1932).
Mongolia: "Siao wan wan kiow" (Pavlov, 1932).
Eumeces elegans Boulenger
(Plate 18; Figs. 34, 35)
SYNONYMY
1863. Mabouia chinensis Gray. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., (3), XII, 1863, p. 225 (Tamsui,
Formosa); Giinther, Rept. Brit. India, 1864, p. 83 (part.), pi. X, fig. f (elegans)
(Ningpo, China; non Gray, 1838).
1879. Eumeces pulchra Bocourt. Miss. Sci. Mex., Zool., Rept., Liv. 6. p. 423 (Non Dumeril
and Bibron).
1887. Eumeces elegans Boulenger. Cat. Lizards Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, pp. 271, 272 (type
description; type not designated; Shanghai, Ningpo, Formosa, Pescadore Is., Ku Kiang
Mis.); and Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1899, p. 162 (Fukien) ; Boettger, Offenb. Ver.
246 The University Science Bulletin
Naturk., 24-25 Ber., 1885, p. 144; Boettger, Cat. Rept. Samml. Mus. Senckenb. Nat.
Ges., Teil I, 1893. p. Ill (Ningpo) ; and Ber. iiber Senckenb. Nat. Ges. Frankfort,
1894, p. 146 (Ningpo); Stejneger, Jour. Sci. Coll. Imp. Uni. Tokyo, XII, 1898, pi.
III. p. 22(1 (Taipa, Formosa; Pescadores); Werner, Abh. K. Bayer. Akad. Wiss., II,
Kl. XXII, Bd. II, Abt., 1903, pp. 169, 203, 372; Ste.ineg.T, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus.,
58, 1907, pp. 202-205, figs. 182, 183 (Taipa, Formosa, Pescadores); and Proc. U. S.
Nat. Mus., XXXVTII, 1910, p. 99; Van Denburgh, Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci., (4), III,
1908-1913, (1912), pp. 223-225 (China, Pescadores, Formosa; description with notes
on variation); Stanley, Jour. N. China Asiat. Soc, XIV, 1914, p. 25; Vogt, Sitz.
Ber. Ges. Naturf. Freunde Berlin, 1914, p. 100 (Canton); Vogt, Arch, fur Natur.,
88 Jahr, 1922, Abt. A., Heft 10, pp. 135-146; Mell, Arch, fur Naturg., 88 Jahr, 1922,
Abt. A., Heft 10, p. 114; Stejneger. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., LXVI, 1925, p. 45;
Schmidt, Bull. Arner. Mus. Nat. Hist., LIV, 1927, p. 505 (numerous localities); Pope,
Bull. Amer. Mus., LVIII, 1927, pp. 386-388, Fig. 2b (numerous localities, with notes
on variation); Wu, Sci. Reps. Nat. Cent. Univ.' Nanking, Ser. B., I, No. 7, 1930,
p. 53; Gee, Bull. Dept. Biol. Yenching Uni., I, No. 1. 1930, pp. 53-84; Tchang,
Bull. Fan Mem. Inst. Biol., II, 1931, p. 276 (Nanking); Chang, Cont. Biol. Lab. Sci.
Soc. China, VIII, Zool. Ser. 2, 1932. p. 18, fig. 4 (description of specimens from
Szechwan); Boring, First Ann. Rep. M. B. A. G, 1932. p. 112 (locality records).
1912. Eumeces xanthi Barbour. Mem. Mus. Comp. Zool., XL, 1912, p. 134 (Ichang) (not
of Giinther, 1889).
1926. Plestiodon elegans Sun. Cont. Biol. Lab. Sci. Soc. China, Vol. II, No. 2, 1926, p. 5.
History. The brevity of Gray's early description (1838) of a
Chinese skink under the name of Tiliqua chinensis seems to have
been responsible for certain subsequent writers referring all Chinese
specimens of the genus to Gray's species. Thus, Swinhoe (3863),
Giinther (1864), and perhaps others confused the species under
discussion with chinensis. Apparently, it was not recognized until
1887, when Boulenger described it from specimens from China,
Formosa, and the Pescadores Islands. He failed to designate a type
or type locality. After this time the name appeared in literature,
with reports of specimens from various localities. Stejneger (1907)
gives a very good description of a Formosa specimen and discusses
the relationships of the species, concluding that the form is more
closely related to latiscutatus than to marginatum. Van Denburgh
(1912) gives an excellent summation of the variations in the Chinese
specimens, and in those from Formosa and the Pescadores, present-
ing the data in tabulated form. Stejneger (1926) points out that
Barbour (1912) has mistaken a young specimen of elegans from
Ichang for Giinther's xanthi from the same locality.
Schmidt (1927) and Pope (1929) discussed the Chinese specimens
in the American Museum of Natural History, the greater part of
which were collected by Pope. This series is very extensive, com-
prising 198 specimens of all ages.
Diagnosis. A typical five-lined species of large size, the median
light line bifurcating on the nuchal; dorsolateral line from the pre-
frontal extending more than two thirds the length of tail; the
lateral line begins as a series of labial dots more or less connected,
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 247
pacing through the car, involving all except lower part; no sub-
lateral line; brown lateral stripe distinct; a large patch of irregular
scutes on postfemoral region; a keeled lateral postanal scute; post-
nasal absent; a single postmental; series of scutes following the
emarginate, fan-shaped upper secondary temporal well differenti-
ated in males; lower secondary temporal with sides nearly parallel;
scales in 26-28 rows.
Descriptioji of species (from Chinese specimens). A consider-
able portion of the rostral visible from above; supranasals moder-
ately large, not or rarely approaching the size of the prefrontals;
frontonasal usually large, usually in contact with the loreals (rarely
not) and usually in contact with the frontal (frequently not) ;
prefrontals variable in size, apparently never as large as the
frontoparietals, in contact with both loreals, their longest suture
with the frontonasal. Frontal moderate, much longer than its
distance from the end of the snout, usually only slightly widened
anteriorly, the sides converging slightly posteriorly, in contact with
three supraoculars; frontoparietals longer than wide, occasionally
as wide as long, forming a median suture equal to half their length;
interparietal usually less in area than the frontoparietals, narrowed
posteriorly, and usually rounded behind, always in contact with the
nuchal; parietals large, their greatest width about three fourths of
their length; a single pair of nuchals (very rarely two complete
pairs), very deep; this followed, behind the outer half of the scale,
by two differentiated scales, one following the other, the hindermost
largest, separated from their fellows by two scales; nasal moderate,
at least partially divided, the posterior part behind nostril larger
than anterior part; no postnasal; anterior loreal not twice as wide
a- high, very little higher than the posterior, which is usually three
fourths as high as long, touching usually only two labials; two
presuboculars; four supraoculars, three touching the frontal; usually
eight or nine superciliaries, the anterior nearly three times as large
a- the last; a small preocular, followed by a small scute and one or
two small granules; a pair of postoculars; usually four postsub-
oculars; primary temporal large, rectangular, broadly in contact
with the two secondary temporals; the upper of these is very large,
nearly triangular, the posterior edge emarginate, followed poste-
riorly by three nearly equal-sized vertical scales, the last of which
contacts the larger of the postnuchal scales; lower secondary tem-
poral with sides nearly parallel, the posterior end somewhat rounded;
tertiary temporal small, entering ear; seven upper labials, the first
248
The University Science Bulletin
slightly higher and larger than succeeding three; seventh labial
always very much larger than sixth; four median palpebral scales
directly in contact with the superciliaries; lower eyelid with four or
five large plates separated from the subocular by two (rarely three)
granular rows; two superimposed postlabials follow the seventh
labial, separating it from the ear; two or three inconspicuous
auricular lobules; about 20 scales surrounding the ear; mental large,
with a labial border much greater than rostral ; postmental relatively
small, undivided; three pairs of chinshields, the anterior smallest,
the third pair largest, followed by an enlarged postgenial which is
bordered on its anterior inner edge by a scale longer than wide.
Fig. 34. Eumeces elegans Boulenger. Field Mus. No. 7327; Ningkwo,
Anhwei, China. Male. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head.
Actual head length, 12.4 mm.; width, 11 mm.
Scales parallel on the sides, the median pair of scale rows not or
very slightly larger than adjoining rows or the lateral scales; about
38-40 scales about neck behind ear; 32-36 scales about constricted
portion of the neck; 38-40 scales about body in axillary region;
about middle of body, 26-28 rows; about base of tail, 15; sub-
caudal scales greatly widened, about 105 in the series; lateral
postanal scute strongly keeled; eight preanal scales, the median pair
very large, the smaller outer scales overlapping inner scales.
Fifteen scales about insertion of arm; a series of five or six rows
of granular scales in axilla; outer wrist tubercle prominent, with
two or three smaller adjacent scutes; palm with about four unequal-
sized, enlarged tubercles; lamellar formula of fingers: 6; 10; 12; 13;
8; the basal lamella of each toe enlarged and thickened.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 249
Eighteen scales about insertion of the leg. A patch of enlarged
irregular scales on lower back part of femur; heel with two pairs of
padlike tubercles separated medially; sole with one or two larger
tubercles; a series of more or less equal-sized scales reach the base
of the fourth toe; the scales of the outer side of the sole flat,
imbricated. Lamellar formula of toes: 6; 12; 16; 18; 13. Terminal
lamellae not tightly bound about claws; intercalated series of
digital scales on the basal phalanx only.
( 'olor. Young, dark blackish or brownish-black, with five strongly
defined cream lines, the median bifurcating on nuchal, extending
halfway back on tail; dorsolaterals from the prefrontals or the
first superciliaries, follow the lower two thirds of the third scale row,
rarely encroaching on the edges of the fourth posteriorly; lateral
line on labials a series of more or less connected spots, passes back
involving the upper half or two-thirds of ear, then passing back
along the sixth and seventh row, chiefly on the sixth posteriorly;
below the lateral stripe there is a lateral dark line, which grows
lighter on its lower edge, merging into the lighter gray color of the
sides of abdomen; immaculate cream below. Tail blue above.
lighter below, sometimes lavender. This type of coloration is re-
tained with little change in the adult females save the dark ground
color, which is less intense save on the sides where a broad darker
stripe is evident. In adult males the lighter lines gradually become
obsolete, and in the oldest males there is practically no trace of the
typical pattern. The dorsal surface becomes olive, the head yel-
lowish-red (red in life?). There is, however, usually a lateral brown
stripe evident.
Variation. Thanks to the authorities of the American Museum
of Natural History, and to the courtesy of Dr. G. K. Noble and Mr.
Clifford Pope, the very extensive series of specimens of this museum
was made available despite the fact that Mr. Pope himself was
studying them at the same time for a work on the herpetological
fauna of China. Altogether about 330 specimens from a large num-
ber of localities have been available. The large number of speci-
mens has been almost bewildering, and complete statistical data on
variation was not taken on more than a half of the specimens by
me. The variational data here presented is largely a compilation
from Pope, Schmidt, Stejneger, and Van Denburgh, as well as data
taken by myself.
Seven is the typical number of upper labials, eight occurring (in
about 300 specimens) only six times. In these eight specimens,
250
The University Science Bulletin
■—
c
hi
a
c
s
6
Os
&q
i-0
tc
CM
CJ
St. ■
4. CM
co
X
CM
t~
c-i
i-
m
t>-
tc
rt
"*
CO
•"*•
rH
rH
1—1
'V-
^
CM
X
<^ Lt>
03
■*
c
IG
CO
i-
X
o
-t-
c
<£ cm
T}<
rH
C)
~
1—1
oigS :
fcj
in
X
« X
t^
L«
^
o
c
X
03
O)
i-
CO
LO
1 — 1
CM
CO
rH
■ — '
CM
z^t
aiS
t>
CO
i-O
CO
X
<5rH
,_,
re
in
co
_
04
_
CM
JO
a
m
Ol
i5S"fc
CO
i — i
rH
CM
CO
— H
i — i
T-H
< — i
CM
..
^
P
t^
sic.
Oct
■*
<x
l£
CO
CM
m
O
_H
-H
X
t^
o
x
CI
1 — 1
C-I
co
rH
— H
CM
^H
™
<N
m
CO
. ■ — ■
o ~. o
IN
lO
co
CM
_
c
CM
Q
X
o
r-
CM
■*
CM
CM
i_;°°
S"
CM
sir-
t-
r>
r-
IS
co
_
—
,~
o
_
O)
r-
Tf
h*
CM
CO
..
—
—
CM
CO
rH
CM
CM
sico
OS*
c
CO
X
t-
CM
iC
r~
to
CO
CO
„
X
Tj
rH
CM
■*
rH
..
^
O)
co
rH
i_;x
■tf
si-*
to
to
c
r-
-*■
lO
!»
I-
in
■*
CO
X
rH
cm
■*
'
CM
CO
^"
^J oo
§"
X
m
CM
co
•X
CM
c
X
it
1-0
-X
-*
X
X
>
CM
~
*"
CM
CO
^^
fcHCO
<SCO
<
b
[I
a
t
>
J_
£\
c
a
1 c
c
>
a
! c
a
c
a
«=
c
'c
c
I
0 -=
*c
i
X
i
.
b
a
c
1 *
)
|js
X
b
D _a
a
-*-
^_
s
X
X
_a
a)
£0 H
3 — t.
e
r7
! C
c
c
—
• -
—
1
C T
c
bo
S2
5
7
: c
E=
3 C
c
a
c
a
*
<
£
«
IS
^
•-
n
J
>
5
to
c
J3
O
"Si
c
3
J3
o
o
bt
C3
C8
a
'3
x;
en
bn
C
3
b£
C
'E
c
o
o
Taylor: The Genus Eumfxes 251
five rather than the typical four labials precede the subocular.
Aboui 22 specimens have only six upper labials on one or both sides,
with only three preceding the subocular. The supraoculars are
invariably four, but in 22 specimens only two supraoculars touch
the frontal on one or both sides. The number of scales between the
parietals and a point above the anus is 54-58, the number 56 being
most frequent, while 54 or 55 is a close second. Higher numbers
are very rare. In 264 specimens the scale counts about middle of
body are: 2.") in nine specimens; 26 in 166; 27 in 33; 28 in 56. The
maximum size is 93 mm., snout to vent measurement, five specimens
having been examined which measure 90 mm. or more. Recently
hatched specimens measure 25-28 mm., the larger size being the
more frequent.
Van Denburgh (1912) gives a "key" to the variable characters
with relation to geographical habitat. The characters noted as to
number of scale rows were: China, usually more than 26; and
Koshun Formosa, usually 24. From my foregoing statements it is
seen that the mainland specimens have in far larger proportion only
26 scale rows. I have had access to Van Denburgh's material from
these localities and the only point of difference that seems pertinent
is a slightly lower average of lamellae under the fourth toe and a
-mailer size in the Pescadores specimens. Moreover, the color
pattern appears to be lost earlier in both males and females, and
the posttemporal scales become thickened, as do the other head
scales when the specimens are smaller. One specimen of this lot has
the parietals enclosing the interparietal; one has the anterior loreal
divided; a third has a postnasal on one side.
Boulenger (1899), in speaking of the coloration of adult males,
mentions that they "have the sides of head and neck of a bright
vermillion, which color is continued on the side of the body as more
or less distinctly defined stripes above and below the light streak
extending from the ear."
Szechwan specimens mentioned by Stejneger (1926) have the
first pair of chinshields separated.
Pope (1929) notes that the color of the stripes in young is gilt.
Remarks. Pope (1929) expresses the opinion that this species
is generally a mountain form, and states that it was never seen
on the open irrigated plains of the plateaux and the valleys. Pope
1 1929 I also states that the young emerge from their underground
"ne<ts" about the first and second weeks of August. There are from
7 to 10 eggs in a clutch. The size of the fully developed eggs
252
The University Science Bulletin
(ready to hatch) are 24 to 26 mm. by 12 to 13.2 mm. The shell is
yellow-brown. The largest specimen measured by Pope was 96 mm.
snout to vent.
Both Stejneger and Van Denburgh realized the lack of wisdom
in naming the Formosan and Pescadores Islands forms. In neither
are the scale variants of such a character as to warrant such treat-
ment; while the precocious attainment of adult characters, and the
apparently smaller size of the specimens from the Pescadores
Islands may seem important, I do not care to christen them with a
trinomial.
Distribution. The species is widely distributed on the Asiatic
mainland, occurring from the coast to the central plateau region, in
the Chinese Provinces bordering the Yangtze, and lying to the south.
I have records for all provinces except Kweichow and Kwangsi. It
is also known from the Chusan Archipelago, Pescadores Islands,
and Formosa.
# &legans
Fig. 35. Distribution of the continental Asiatic species of the
Fasciatm group.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 253
Locality records:
China:
Chekiang: Mo-Kan-Shan, near Hue-how. 1.000-1,500 ft. elev. (C.A.S. 5);
Xingpo (Brit. Mus. 5); Snowy Valley, Ningpo (Brit. Mus. 4); Chusan
Archipelago (Brit. Mus. 2); Da-laensaen, s\\ Ningpo (Brit. Mus. 4) ;
Tune; Yung Is. (Brit. Mus. 6) ; Tunglu (Mich. 20); Chapoo (Boettger.
1S94); Wenchow (U.S.N.M. 1) (M.C.Z. 2); Zungli (U.S.N.M. 10)
(M.C.Z. 63) ; Geng-shin (M.C.Z. 2).
Kiangsu: Nanking (C.A.S. 4); Shanghai (Brit. Mus. 2) (Sun. 1926).
Fukien: (Basel 1) (A.M.X.H. 2); Foochow (C.A.S. 6) (U.S.N.M. 6)
(K.U. 1); Kuatun, N. W. Fukien (Brit. Mus. numerous specimens)
(Field 2); Yenping (Field 3) (A.M.X.H. 15); Ch'ungan Hsien
(A.M.X.H. 179).
Kiangsi: Kiukiang Mts. (Brit. Mus. 1); Pingshiang (Senckenb. 1)
(Miinchen Z.S.B.S. 4) (Basel 1).
Yunnan: (A.M.X.H. 2); Yunnan Fu (Brit. Mus. 3) (A.M.X.H. 1).
Hunan: Changsha (A.M.X.H. 1).
Anhwei: Ningwo (Field 7) (A.M.X.H. 27).
Hupeh: Ichang (M.C.Z. 1).
Kwangtung: Canton (Yogt, 1914).
Szechwan: Wanhsien (A.M.X.H. 1); Suifu (U.S.N.M. 3) ; Kiating
(U.S. X.M.I).
Formosa: {CAS. 1); Kan-shirei (C.A.S. 18); Maru Yama (C.A.S. 2);
San-shi-ka (C.A.S. 1) ; Taiuan (C.A.S. 1) ; Keelung (C.A.S. 2) ; Taipah
(C.A.S. 1); Tamsuy (Brit. Mus. 1); Taipa (U.S.X.M. 1) (Sci. Coll.
Tokyo 2).
Pescadores Is.: (C.A.S. 15) (Brit. Mus. 4) (Sci. Coll. Tokyo 1).
Eumcces oshimensis Thompson
(Figs. 36, 40)
SYNONYMY
1881. Eumeces quinqudincatus Doederlein. Mitt. Deutsch Ostasian Ges., Bd. Ill, Heft 24,
1880-1884 (1881), p. 147 ('Amami Oshima").
1912. Eumeces oshimensis Thompson. Herpetological notices, No. 2. June 28, 1912, p. 4,
privately printed (type description: type locality Kikaigashima, Loo Choo Islands;
type C.A.S. No. 21729: Kuhne Coll.); Barbour, Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. U. of Mich.,
Nn. 44. Sept. 12, 1917. pp. 1-9 (regarding date of publication of type description).
1912. Eumeces maryinatus amamiensis Van Denburgh. Advance Diagnoses of New Rept.
Amph. from Loo Choo Is. and Formosa, privately printed, July 29, 1912, pp. 4, 5
(type description; type locality, "Amami Oshima. Loo Choo Islands, Japan": type
C.A.S. No. 21615); and Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci., (4), III, 1908-1913 (Dec. 16, 1912),
pp. 217-219 (Amaniensis [sic]) (detailed description with a discussion of variations
and relationshipl.
1912. Eumeces maryinatus kikaigensis Van Denburgh. Adv. Diag. New Rept. Amph. Loo
Choo Is. Formosa, July 29, 1912, p. 5, privately printed (type description; type
locality "Kikaigo shima, Loo Choo Islands"; Kuhne Coll.); and Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci..
(4), III, 1908-1913 (Dec. 16, 1912), pp. 219-221 (complete description, with a dis-
cussion of variation and relationship).
History. Apparently the first record of this species is that of
Doederlein (1881) who reports Eumeces quinquelineatus from
"Amami-Oshima" as follows: "Von Eidechsen fand ich Eumeces
(|iiinquelineatus L. sehr hausig."
254 The University Science Bulletin
In 1912, from a large series of specimens in the California Acad-
emy of Science, the species was described by Surgeon J. C. Thomp-
son as follows: "Specimens from Amamioshima and Kikaigashima,
two islands in the Oshima group of the Loo Choos may be distin-
guished from the typical form found in Okinawa Island. They
differ in having regularly 28 scale rows round the middle of the
body, and in the two dorsal series not being enlarged. These
differences appear constant through a fairly large series."
'Tor those who feel the necessity of giving to such a geographical
variation a new name or of promoting it to subspecific rank, the
name Eumeces oshimensis is proposed. The type would then be
No. 21729, California Academy of Sciences; male; April, 1910,
Kikaigashima, Loo Choo Islands." The date on the private pub-
lication is June 25, 1912.
A little more than one month later (July 29, 1912) Dr. John
Van Denburgh published privately a short paper describing two
subspecific forms of Eumeces marginatus from the material men-
tioned in the preceding paper, a form called Eumeces marginatus
kikaigensis and one called Eumeces marginatus amamiensis.
The first of these is from the type locality of Thompson's
oshimensis. It is described as follows:
"Diagnosis. One azygous postmental ; no patch of much enlarged scales on
back of thigh; no postnasal; posterior loreal usually long, usually in contact
with three superlabials ; sixteen to twenty-one plates under fourth toe; usually
twenty-eight (sometimes twenty-six) scales around middle of body; young
with one median and two lateral light lines, latter narrow and separated by
not less than width of two scales; lower lateral line separated from forelimb by
less than distance between lateral lines, and running at about the level of top
of hind limb but below top of ear; scales of first row on each side of middorsal
line usually not appreciably wider than those of next dorsal rows. Super-
ciliaries not less than eight; upper lateral line broader, on scales of third and
fourth rows from middorsal line."
"Type. California Academy of Sciences, No. 21.628. Kikaig Oshima. Loo
Choo Islands, Apr. 30, 1910."
The second subspecies is described as follows:
"One- azygous postmental; no patch of much enlarged scales on back of
thigh ; no postnasal ; posterior loreal long, usually in contact with three supra-
labials; seventeen to twenty-one plates under fourth toe; twenty-six (rarely
twenty-four or twenty-eight) scales around the middle of body; young with
one median and two lateral light lines, latter broader but separated by not
less than width of two scales; lower lateral line separated from forelimb tax-
less than distance between lateral lines, and running at about the level of top
of hind limb but below top of ear; scales of first row on each side of middorsal
line very rarely wider than those of next dorsal rows; superciliaries not less
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 255
than eight; upper lateral line broader, on scales of third and fourth rows,
from middorsal line."
"Type. California Academy of Sciences. No. 2161"). Amami Oshima, Loo
Choo Islands. Japan. April 26 to May 1. 1910."
It is obvious from a perusal of the two Van Denburgh descrip-
tions that the characters used to separate the subspecies are so
trivial that in my opinion the separation is unwarranted; hence the
two forms are here regarded as synonyms and. likewise, synonyms
of Eunn ccs oshinn nsis Thompson.
Diagnosis. Closely related to and having general characters of
Eumeces marginatus but the two median scale rows not distinctly
widened; the dorsolateral light line on the third and fourth scale
rows; 26 or 28 scale rows around the body; no postnasal; one
postmental.
Description of species (from topotypes). Portion of rostral visi-
ble above, large, often approaching the size of the frontonasal;
supranasals rather large, occasionally nearly as large as the pre-
frontals; frontonasal moderate, wider than long or the length
equalling the width, almost always in contact rather broadly with
the frontal; prefrontals variable in size, their longest suture with
the frontonasal; frontal elongate, longer than its distance from the
end of the snout, wider anteriorly, touching three supraoculars;
frontoparietals longer than wide, forming a median suture al-
most always larger than the prefrontals; interparietal usually of
equal or greater area than a frontoparietal, in contact with the
nuchal; normally one pair of nuchals, rarely none, or two; the two
scales following outer half of nuchals enlarged, the anterior usually
the smaller; nasal moderate, divided by a suture, the anterior part
often the size of the posterior; no postnasal; anterior loreal higher
than posterior, the lower part usually wider than upper; posterior
loreal longer than high, usually in contact with three labials; two
presuboculars, the anterior usually not larger than the posterior;
usually nine super ciliaries, rarely eight or ten, the anterior at leas!
twice as large as posterior; a small preocular; four supraoculars.
the largest wider than the frontal; four or five postsuboculars; two
small postoculars. The median palpebral scales in contact with the
superciliaries ; primary temporal nearly rectangular, rather large;
lower secondary narrow, elongate, the sides nearly parallel, some-
what rounded posteriorly; upper secondary very large, triangular.
emarginate behind, followed by two or three scales, the anterior
usually the smallest. (These more or less thickened in old males.)
256
The University Science Bulletin
Seven upper labials, the last largest, much larger than sixth; the
first larger than the three succeeding scales; lower eyelid with five
or more large opaque scales, separated from the subocular by two
(rarely more) rows of granules; two superimposed postlabials, the
lower largest, both entering auricular border or separated from it
by a small scale; usually three small auricular lobules; usually six
lower labials; postmental single, large; three pairs of chinshields,
the anterior smallest; a large postgenial, bordered internally by
scales longer than wide; 17 to 20 scales about the ear.
Scales on sides parallel ; median scales on the back not wider than
adjoining rows. Scales about neck behind ear 34 to 36; about con-
Fig. 36. Eumeces oshimensis Thompson. U.S.N.M. No. 64210 (C.A.S.
No. 21547) ; Amamioshima, Loo Choo Islands, Japan. A, lateral view of
head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length, 14 mm.; width, 12 mm.
stricted portion of neck 28-32; about axillary region 36-38; about
middle of body 26-28; 15-17 about the base of the tail; 100-103 sub-
caudals, much widened; six or eight scales border the anus, the
median pair greatly enlarged, outer diminishing in size, the outer
scales overlapping the inner. A large, well-differentiated, keeled,
lateral postanal scute; about thirteen scales about arm insertion;
lateral wrist tubercles usually two or three; four or five scattered
palmar tubercles; lamellar formula for fingers: 7; 12; 12; 13; 9,
the basal lamellae enlarged. About 19 scales around insertion of
hind limb; two inner heel tubercles, usually padlike, outer pair
either flat or rounded; outer scales on sole somewhat large, usually
imbricate; no or only one small sole tubercle; lamellar formula for
toes: 8; 12; 18; 21; 13. Terminal lamellae not tightly bound about
claws; intercalated scales on the fourth toe not or rarely extending
Taylor: Thk Genus Eumeces 257
beyond the basal phalanx. Limbs well developed; limbs, adpressed,
overlapping the length of fourth toe or somewhat more. Pitting
on scales rather inconspicuous, largely obsolete in adults, but some
in posthumeral and postfemoral region.
Color. Typically five-lined in young, the median cream line
bifurcating on the nuchal, the branches running forward and re-
uniting in very young, but in somewhat older specimens appear to
terminate on the prefrontals; posteriorly the median line terminates
a short distance back of the base of the tail; the dorsolateral line
begins on the first supraocular and follows back the edges of the
third and fourth scale rows, continuing a short distance on the tail;
lateral light line represented on labials by a few spots, then passes
through the middle of the ear and follow- along side on the sixth
scale row, usually. The general ground color is blackish in young,
but very early becomes a dark brown, and later an olive color ap-
pears in the middle of each scale, while the darker color is evident
only along the dorsolateral and median cream lines. The area be-
tween the dorsolateral and lateral lines is usually darker brown than
the back and this color is never completely lost; the ventral surfaces
are creamy white, save on the tail in very voting, where, like the
dorsal surface, it is blue.
Young adult and old males lose practically all evidence of cream
lines, becoming a uniform brown-olive above, with a lateral brown
or reddish-brown stripe from the snout along the side to the base
of the tail. This brown line is bordered below by light grayish,
which merges into the cream color of the ventral surfaces. There
is in many specimens a suggestion of the lateral line and it is most
evident behind the ear, when present.
The heads of old males become much widened, and take on an
amber or light yellow-brown color. In certain old males the entire
upper surface of body is light brown, with no evidence of markings
in front or back of ear. The adult females retain some trace of the
median and dorsolateral lines, but these are now of a shade of brown
or olive and usually dim, and the ground color never becomes as
uniform as in the males.
Variation. Among the 79 specimens available to Van Denburgh,
he noted that all have one postmental, no postnasal. There were
only two exceptions in which the frontal and frontonasal were
separated. Two specimens had the frontonasal divided. Only two
specimens failed to have the posterior loreal touch three labials on
one side or the other; the scales around the middle of the body are
17—1123
258
The University Science Bulletin
Measurements of Eumeces oshimensis Thompson
Museum .
Number*.
Sex
Snout to vent. . .
Tail
Snout to foreleg.
Snout to eye. . . .
Snout to ear. . . .
Axilla to groin . .
Width of head . .
Length of head . .
Width of body. .
Foreleg
Hind leg
Longest toe
C.A.S
21610
a*
99
35
8.5
24
52
18
22
18
29
40
14 2
C.A.S.
21539
99
37
8.8
23
52
20
23
19
28
40
14
C.A.S.
21565
9
80
24
7
15.5
44
15
14 . 5
18
23
32
12
C.A.S
21568
74
11.5
25
7
15.5
39
14
16
16
22
31
12
C.A.S.
21613
9
69
22
6
14
35
12
14
12
20
28
11
C.A.S
21561
cT
56
20
5.2
12
2S
10
11.4
12
17
24
10
C.A.S.
21585
56
97
20.4
5.4
12
28
10
11.8
12
17.2
25
10
C.A.S
21562
&
52
18
4
11
26
8
9
11
15
21
9
.8
C.A.S.
21580
yg-
42
66
16
4
9.2
22
6.8
8.8
9
13
19.2
8
* All from Amamioshima.
26 in all but three specimens; two have 24, and one has 28 (if
counts are made three scales farther forward the percentage with
28 increases to nearly 50 percent) . The frontal touches three
supraoculars on each side except in three cases, where there are
two on one side only. Lamellae under the fourth toe vary between
17 and 21, 18 and 19 of most frequent occurrence.
The scales on the back of the femur are slightly enlarged, but
Fig. 37. Eumeces oshimensis Thompson. C.A.S. No. 21554; Amamio-
shima, Loo Choo Islands, Japan. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view
of head. Actual head length, about 17.5 mm.; width, about 14.2 mm.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 259
these do not form a patch nor are the scales irregular in shape.
Van Denburgh notes that some of the specimens have slightly en-
larged middorsals. This seems to be relatively true, due to the
smaller size of the adjoining scale rows.
The variation obtaining in the specimen from Kikaigashima
[Eumeces marginatum kikaigensis Van Denburgh) is small. Here,
too, the relations of the temporals, dorsal head scales and lateral
head scales are unusually constant. The upper labials are eight
on one side in three specimens; in the others the usual seven are
present. There is only a single pair of nuchals normally in the
series of 17 specimens examined (in one specimen there are two on
one side). I am at a total loss to understand Van Denburgh's
statement (1912, p. 220): "One specimen has a single pair of
nuchals: one has two on one side and three on the other; the others
all have three pairs, the anterior larger." The larger number of
specimens have 28 scale rows about the middle of the body, but
the percentage is just above 60. The largest specimen from this
island I have measured is a male of 87 mm. from snout to vent.
Ii'< marks. The use of the name oshimensis Thompson for the
form from Amamigunto is necessitated by the date on Thompson's
privately printed paper dated June 25, 1912. Van Denburgh's
privately printed paper (see synonymy) was not issued until July
29, 1912. Regardless of the ''right" in this controversial melange
Thompson's name is the earlier, unless it can be proved that the
date is fictitious, a matter in which I have no opinion (see Bar-
bour, 1917 i .
The separation of oshimensis from marginatus is based perhaps
on relatively minor characters, but on the whole these appear as
constant as characters are in the genus. Furthermore, satisfactory
series are available and in the case of oshimensis a very large series.
However, an attempt to separate the Amamioshima specimens
from those on Kikaigashima is, I believe, futile. The characters
on which Van Denburgh made such a separation are of such a
nature, and their variability so great, that I am of the opinion that
this should not stand. Moreover, one of the chief characters given
is the presence of three nuchals, a statement due to error.
Distribution. As here interpreted the species is confined to
Amamigunto, comprising Amamioshima, Kikaigashima, Tokinosh-
ima, Okinoyerabujima and Yoronjima, although at present records
are confined to the two larger islands only. (See Fig. 40 for dis-
tributional map.)
260 The University Science Bulletin
Locality records:
Amamioshima (C.A.S. 73, including types of amamiensis and oshimensis)
(Doederlein, 1881) (A.M.N.H. 2) (U.S.N.M. 1) (M.C.Z. 1) (A.N.S.P. 1,
No. 9380)
Kikaigashima (C.A.S. 19, including types of kikaigensis.) (Brit. Mus. 2).
Eumeces stimsonii Thompson
(Plate 19; Figs. 38, 40)
SYNONYMY
1912. Eumeces stimsonii Thompson. Herp. Notices No. 2, Desc. New Spec. Rept. Batr. from
the Far East, privately printed, San Francisco, June 28, 1912, p. 4 (type description;
the type locality, Ishigaki Is., Loo Choo Islands; type. No. 2104."). Cal. Acad. Sci.,
V. Kuhne Coll.); and Herp. Notices No. 3, privately printed, San Francisco, July 31,
1912, p. 4 (mentioned as an addition to the fauna of Loo Choo Archipelago).
1912. Eumeces ishigakiensis Van Denburgh. Advance Diagnoses of New Reptiles Amph.
from Loo Choo and Formosa, privately printed, San Francisco, July 29, 1912, pp. 5, f>
(type description; type locality, Ishigaki Shima, Loo Choo Islands, Japan: V. Kuhne
Coll.); and Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci., (4), III, 1908-1913 (Dec. 16, 1912), pp. 221-223
(redescription).
1917. Eumeces stimpsonii Barbour. Occ. Papers Mus. Zocil. Univ. Mich., No. 44, Sept. 12,
1917, p. 2.
History. The species was collected in Ishigakijima by V. Kuhne.
who obtained a large series consisting of 33 specimens. These, to-
gether with other species, were studied by Doctor Van Denburgh
and the descriptions placed into manuscript previous to January,
1911. This manuscript was presented for publication on May 18,
1912, and was published on December 16, 1912. Between the time
the manuscript was presented and the date of its publication, both
the manuscript and the specimens were available to Surgeon J. C.
Thompson, U. S. N., who published privately a series of three
papers, one of which, the second, contained a description of Eumeces
stimsonii, based on C.A.S. No. 21645 of the Ishigakijima series.
Van Denburgh learned of Thompson's intention to do this, but not
knowing that the descriptions were in print, extracted from his
manuscript short diagnoses and printed them privately, the paper
appearing July 29, 1912, a month later than the date which appears
on the second Thompson paper. At the present time it seems
unavailing to question the date of this latter paper, and regardless
of the ethical question involved it seems that Thompson's name
must be recognized, since it has a technical priority of thirty days.
[See Barbour (1917) for further data on this "regrettable tangle
of names."]
Diagnosis. A seven-lined species, having a median line bifurcat-
ing on the head, a dorsolateral line from the first superciliary, a
lateral line passing above the ear, and a sublateral line; scale rows
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces 261
26 (rarely 24 or 28) : no postnasal; one postmental; upper secondary
temporal large, fan-shaped, emarginate behind; lower secondary
narrow, elongate; a keeled lateral postanal scale; limbs overlapping
when adpressed.
Description of the species (from the paratype series i. Portion of
the rostral visible above more than half the size of the frontonasal;
supranasals very large, sometimes approaching the size of the
prefrontals, forming a median suture; frontonasal broader than
long, in contact with the anterior loreal (rarely not I , and usually
forming a suture with the frontal; prefrontal variable in size,
usually separated, occasionally forming a median suture, the suture
8
Fig. 38. Eumeces stimsonii Thompson. C.A.S. Xo. 21670; Ishigakijima.
A. lateral view of head; B. dorsal view of head. Actual head length, 10
mm.; width, 11 mm.
with the frontonasal always largest; frontal elongate, about one
fourth longer than its distance from the end of the snout, somewhat
wider anteriorly than posteriorly, touching three supraoculars,
pointed (or truncate) anteriorly; frontoparietals usually larger than
the prefrontals, generally rectangular in shape, larger than, or
about equal in area to, the interparietal; latter usually in contact
with nuchals (one exception I ; parietals rather narrower than usual
in the genus; a pair of nuchals widened longitudinally; two differ-
entiated scales following the nuchals on their outer ends, one follow-
ing the other, the posterior the larger, the two separated from their
fellows by two body scale-.
Nasal moderate, not completely segmented, the posterior part as
large as part anterior to nostril; no postnasal; anterior loreal a
262 The University Science Bulletin
little higher than the posterior; latter typical, longer than high;
two presuboculars; a small preocular, followed above by a smaller
scale and five granules; four or five postsuboculars and two small
postoculars; eight or nine superciliaries, the anterior three times as
large as the posterior; primary temporal nearly rectangular, of
about same width as, but shorter than, the lower secondary, with
which it is in contact; lower secondary narrow, rounded posteriorly,
the upper and lower sides approaching the parallel ; upper secondary
temporal large, fan-shaped, emarginate behind, followed by three
enlarged, nearly equal sized scales, one following the other. In
the adult males these scales, together with those previously men-
tioned following the nuchals, become much thickened and of the
same general character as the head scales; tertiary temporal rela-
tively short, entering (usually) the edge of ear, in contact with
the small lobules.
Seven upper labials, the first a little larger and higher than the
three succeeding labials; seventh more than once and a half the area
of the sixth, followed by a superimposed pair of postlabials, the
lower larger and more elongate; usually six lower labials; mental
large, deep, with a much greater labial border than the rostral; a
single undivided postmental, followed by three pairs of chinshields,
the anterior smallest (rarely fused with the postmental) ; postgenial
differentiated, bordered on the anterior internal side by a scale
longer than wide; five upper palpebral scales join the superciliaries
directly; lower eyelid with four or five enlarged plates separated
from the subocular by two rows of granules (sometimes part of a
third); ear surrounded by 18 to 20 scales; usually three incon-
spicuous ear lobules; scales parallel on sides, the median rows equal
to or somewhat smaller than the lateral series; scale rows behind
ear, 34 to 37; around neck, 29 to 31; about middle of body, 24 to 26
(one specimen 28); 15 to 16 about base of tail; scales in a row
from parietals to above anus, 54 to 57; subcaudals much widened;
a well-differentiated, keeled, lateral postanal scale; preanals eight,
median pair very large, outer diminishing in size and overlapping
the inner; about 14 scales around insertion of arm; a group of three
or four scales of unequal size in place of the outer wrist tubercle;
four enlarged, padlike tubercles on the palm, the basal lamellae of
fingers also padlike; lamellar formula for fingers: 7, 11, 13, 13, 7;
about 15 scales around the insertion of the hind limb; a pair of
rather large padlike scales on the heel, separated by granules, each
preceded by one or two enlarged tubercles or padlike scales; outer
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces
263
side of foot covered with rather large, flat, imbricate scales; lamellar
formula for toes: 7. 11, 15, 20, 12; basal lamellae not enlarged;
terminal lamellae not tightly bound about the claws; lateral inter-
calated scales on fourth toe not extending beyond the basal joint.
Usually three or four pits are present on the scales on the side of
the neck, more numerous in the axillary region and in the post-
humeral and postfemoral regions. In the post femoral region there
is a suggestion of the enlarged and irregular condition of the scales
such as one finds in elcgans; the larger scales, however, are in
regular series.
Color. Above black (in young) or brownish-black to olive (old
males i. In the young the pattern consists of seven cream lines,
the median dividing and forming a pair of lines on the head that
reunite anteriorly. The dorsolaterals begin on the first superciliary,
follow the third scale row and extend about one fourth the length
of the tail. The lateral line begins near the rostral, follows the
labials (as a continuous line or as a series of irregular spots in
older specimens), diagonally rising posteriorly passing above the
ear, following the fifth scale row to the tail; the sublateral begins
behind the ear and passes back along the side on the seventh
scale row.
The chin, throat, breast and underside of limbs are cream; the
abdomen is dull greenish or bluish-gray, the tail usually bluish.
The hind leg has traces of light lines. In males the median line
Measurements of Eumeccs stimsorrii Thompson
Museum.
Number.
Sex
Snout to vent . .
Tail
Snout to eye. .
Snout to ear. . . .
Snout to foreleg.
Axilla to groin. .
Width of head . .
Length of head. .
Width of body. .
Foreleg
Hind leg
Longest toe
CAS.
21646
cf
63
5.2
13
23
33
10.2
12
12
1.5
23
9
C.A.S.
21670
cf
60
4.7
13.5
20
31
10
11
11
15
23
8.5
C.A.S.
21655
9
60
89
4.3
10.5
19
30
8.4
9.5
9
16
22
8.9
C.A.S.
21672
cf
5.s
4.7
11.7
21.5
28
9
10.7
10
16.2
23
8.2
C.A.S.
21663
&
56
4.7
12.1
19
30
10
11.2
10
15.2
22
8
C.A.S.
21674
cf
54
4.2
11
18.7
28
8.3
10
9
14. S
21 6
9
C.A.S.
21656
cf
52
82
4
10.5
19
27
8.2
10.2
8
15
20.3
8.5
C.A.S.
21653
9
49
79
4
10
17.4
25
7.2
9.4
9
14
21
8
C.A.S.
21652
yg-
27
35
2.4
6.3
11.4
11.2
4.4
6.5
4.8
8
12
4.4
264 The University Science Bulletin
grows dim in early middle age as does the sublateral; the dark
line between the dorsolateral line and the lateral becomes a deep
brown; the head becomes a yellowish-brown. The underside of the
tail becomes dirty white and the upper part gray or olive. In very
old males the color is nearly uniform olive, with usually some trace
of the lateral brown stripe.
Variation. A total of 29 specimens have been available of the
original series of 33. Van Denburgh (1912) has called attention to
the fact that certain of the specimens show an incipient enlarge-
ment of certain postfemoral scales. These, however, are usually
in regular rows, the scales only occasionally showing a change in
shape suggestive of those in elegans and related species on the main-
land. None show more than a single postmental and the postnasal
is invariably lacking. Two anomalies occur in the supraoculars:
one has the third left supraocular divided, and another has the third
and fourth left supraoculars fused into a single scale. Van Den-
burgh gives the following data: "Scales around the body are 26 in
28 specimens, 24 in three and 28 in two." He further notes that:
"In the largest specimens (snout to anus 64 mm.) the lateral lines
have quite or nearly disappeared, and the temporal regions and
sides of the body and neck are suffused with brick-red." This red
color is not evident now, presumably having faded in the preserva-
tives, despite the fact that the other coloration is very bright.
Remarks. It is rather futile to attempt to determine the exact
relation of stimsonii to Eumeces elegans, marginatus and latiscuta-
tus, as it seems to have pretty much the general characters of all.
The change in the position of the lateral stripe, the addition of the
sublateral stripe in the young and the reduction in size all speak
of a long era of isolation. The presence of this species in the
neighboring islands of Iromotijima, Yonakunijima and the smaller
neighboring islands may be postulated, although it may be doubted
that it occurs on the islands of the Miyakojima group. Stejneger
(1907) mentions specimens of "marginatus" (Hamburg Mus. Nos.
1182 and 1900) from Iromotijima. These may be specimens of
stimsonii, as is certainly the case with another specimen from
Ishigakijima (U.S.N.M. No. 34185) listed by Stejneger as Eumeces
marginatus. Nos. 21223 and 21224 in the collection of the American
Museum of Natural History, from the "Yaeyama" islands appear
to belong to stimsonii. Both have the sublateral line, and the lateral
line passes above the ear.
It is a bit remarkable that in the 28 specimens examined only
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 265
two were females. These apparently had recently laid their eggs.
One may presume that most of the females were in burrows brood-
ing eggs.
Distribution. Known certainly only from Ishigakijima of the
Vaeyama group, Riu Kill Islands (C.A.S. 29, including the type of
stimsonii Thompson and ishigakiensis Van Denburgh) (M.C.Z. 1)
(U.S.N.M. li (A.M.N.H. 2) (Brit. Mus. X.H. 2). (See Fig. 40 for
distributional map.)
Eu nieces barbouri Van Denburgh
(Fig. 40, Distribution)
SYNONYMY
1912. Eumeces barbouri Van Denburgh. Adv. Diag. New Rept. Amph. Loo Choo Is.,
privately printed, July, 1912 (type description; type locality Amamioshirna, Riu Kiu
Islands; type No. 21545 Cal. Acad. Sci.)j Van Denburgh, Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci., (4),
III, 1908-1912 (Dec. 12, 1912), pp. 215, 216 (redescription of type); Barbour, Occ.
Papers Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich., N't). 44, Sept. 12, 1917, p. 4.
History. The two specimens on which the species was founded
were a part of a collection made by V. Kuhne between April 20
and May 1, 1910. The preliminary diagnosis was published pri-
vately by Dr. John Van Denburgh in San Francisco July 29, 1912
i see Barbour, 1917). Later in December of the same year a de-
tailed description was published, which is here reproduced. The
type is now in the California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco;
the paratype was presented to the British Museum by J. C. Thomp-
son. As I have been unable to examine the type or cotype I include
the description and discussion given by Doctor Van Denburgh.
Diagnosis. ''One azygous postmental; no patch of enlarged scales on back
of thigh; postnasal present; posterior loreal short, normally touching two
labials; fifteen or sixteen plates under fourth toe; twenty-two scales around
middle of body; young with one median and two lateral light lines; latter
narrow, and separated by not less than width of two scales; lower lateral line
separated from fore limb by less than the distance between the lateral lines,
and running below the level of top of hind limb and top of ear."
Description of the type (California Academy of Sciences, No. 21545.
"Amami O shima, Loo Choo Islands," Japan; April 20-30, 1910): "Similar
to E. liilisrutatus. Nasal small, in contact with rostral, supranasal, postnasal,
and first labial plates. Anterior loreal forming sutures with postnasal, supra-
nasal, prefrontal, posterior loreal. and second labial plates. Posterior loreal
longer than high, in contact with two (right) or three (left) labials. First
labial in contact with rostral, nasal, postnasal, and second labial. Frontal just
separated from frontonasal, in contact with three supraoculars on each side.
Parietals large, separated by interparietal. One left and two right nuchals.
Upper temporal largest. Seven supralabials, the seventh largest. One azygous
postmental. Scales smooth, except one behind each corner of vent; twenty-two
266 The University Science Bulletin
around middle of body; fifty in a row from parietals to line joining backs of
thighs; two middorsal rows slightly enlarged. Median subcaudal row broad.
No patch of enlarged scales on back of thigh. Fifteen or sixteen scutes under
fourth toe. Hind limb reaching between wrist and elbow. Tail forked at
point of regrowth.
"The color above is nearly uniform light brown, with a few dark brown
spots at the bases of the scales posteriorly. A dark brown band extends from
the temporal region to the base of the tail, and is edged above and below
with lighter brown indications of the lateral light lines. The upper lateral
and middorsal lines are evident on the tail. The limbs are brown, the centers
of the scales being lighter. The lower surfaces are greenish white, clearer
yellowish white on the chin, preanals and midcaudals.
"A young specimen is black above with two narrow lateral pale blue lines
on each side, and a broader middorsal line which bifurcates on the head as
in other species of the group. The tail is very bright blue.
Length to anus 66 49 mm.
Length of tail 90 mm.
Snout to ear 13 10 mm.
Snout to fore limb 22 28 mm.
Fore limb 19 15 mm.
Hind limb 28 22 mm.
Base of fifth to end of fourth toe 12 10 mm.
Variation. "The smaller specimen differs from the type in having the
frontal in contact with the frontonasal, the second loreal touching only two
labials on each side, the superposition of the first loreal, the presence of two
nuchals on each side, and sixteen plates under each fourth toe. The scale
counts around the body and along the back arc twenty-two and fifty."
Remarks. "This lizard must be rather rare; for of eighty-one specimens of
this genus taken on Amami Oshima only two are of this species, the others
being Eumeces marginatus. Eumeces barbouri is practically a Eumeces latis-
cutatus with the scales around the middle of the body reduced in number
to twenty-two.
"The presence in the Loo Choo Islands of a close relative of Eumeces
latiscutatus is one of the most interesting facts brought out by these collec-
tions, since it affords, as I believe, the first definite evidence of a former
land-connection between these islands and Japan proper.
"It is a pleasure to name this lizard in honor of Mr. Thomas Barbour of
Harvard University."
The extremely low scale count on this derivative of the Japanese
latiscutatus is surprising, since the form okadae varies from latis-
cutatus in a marked increase in the number of scale rows. Whether
Van Denburgh is justified in thinking that the presence of this
species affords the first definite evidence of a land connection with
the mainland may be doubted. Marginatus itself is a species closely
related to latiscutatus and its distribution might offer just as con-
vincing evidence of such a connection. The surprising fact, and the
one not so easily accounted for, is the presence of two such deriva-
tives on a small island. The fact that so large a series of the mar-
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 2(>7
ginatus form was obtained (79 specimens) and such a small one of
barbouri (2 specimens i, suggests a very definite habitat difference,
rather than rarity of the latter form.
Distribution. Known only from two specimens from Amamio-
shima. (See Fig. 40 for distributional map.)
Eumeces marginatus (Hallowell)
(Plate 18; Fig. 40)
SYNONYMY
- 0. Plestiodon marginatus Hallowell Proc. Arad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1860, p. 492 (type de-
scription: type locality, Ousirna, Japan and Loo Choo Islands; lectotype [Stejneger,
1907], U.S.N.M. No. 11713, "Loo Choo Islands" Okinawajima, W. Simpson Collector).
1887. Eumeces marginatus Boulenger. Cat. Lizards Brit. Mus. Ill, 1887. p. 371 (part.)
(.Vara"); Okada, Cat. Vert. Anim. Japan, 1891, p. 70 (part.); Boulenger, Ann. Mag.
Nat. Hist.. (6), X. Oct., 1892, p. 302 (Okinawa); Fritze, Zool. Jahrb., Syst., VII, 1894,
p. 860 (part.) (Okinawa); Boettger, Jahrb. Offenb. Ver. fiir Naturk., 1895, p. 115
(part.) (Okinawa); Brown, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., Apr., 1902, p. 185 (Okinawa);
Stejneger, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., 58, 1907, pp. 205-207, fig. 184 (head) (part.) (de-
tailed discussion of types and a careful description); Barbour, Proc. N. Eng. Zool.
Club, IV, Nov. -24. 1009. p. 63 (Okinawa); Van Denburgh, Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci.,
(4). III. (190S-'13), Dec. 16, 1912, pp. 216-217 (Okinawa): Terentjev, Copeia, No.
119, 1923, p. 76 (discredits records of the species from the Asiatic mainland).
History. The first specimens of this island species were included
in the collections of Dr. W. Stimpson, the naturalist of the Rodgers
North Pacific Exploring Expedition. These specimens were studied
by Dr. Edward Hallowell, who (according to Stejneger, 1907, p.
xviii) died before the paper was published. He mentions two
cotypes, one from "Ousima," Japan (— Amamioshima), and one
from Loo Choo Island (= Okinawajima). Stejneger (1907) states
that the larger of the two specimens from "Ousima" is lost. He
therefore designated the smaller Loo Choo specimen, now U.S.N.M.
No. 11713, as the type (lectotype).
When examining specimens in the Philadelphia Academy of
Sciences in 1933, I discovered a specimen of a skink belonging to
the marginatus section of the Fasciatus group, in a bottle, labeled
"Eumeces fasciatus." The container, however, had a label which
showed the specimen to be from the Rodgers North Pacific Ex-
ploring Expedition, and is, I believe, the missing cotype.*
Boulenger (1887) considered the island forms from the Riu Kius
and those from the large islands of Japan to be conspecific, as did
Okada (1891) and Boettger (1893). Stejneger (1907) clearly de-
fined and limited latiscutatus (Hallowell) to the Islands of Japan
proper, and restricted the name marginatus to the species occurring
* The specimen is A.N.S.P. No. 9309. The measurements are: head and body, 92 mm.;
tail. 74 mm.; axilla to groin, 49 mm.; snout to foreleg, 21 mm.; snout to ear, 23 mm.;
head width, 20.2 mm.; head length. 21.1 mm.; foreleg, 25 mm.; hind leg, 35 mm. This
specimen must be considered now as belonging to oshimensis Thompson.
268 The University Science Bulletin
in the Riu Kius, believing it to occur throughout the group, mention-
ing specimens from Ishigakijima and Irornotijima.
Van Denburgh (1912, 1912a) has essayed to break up the Riu
Kiu species into several forms. The southern specimens he named
ishigakiensis, while those of the islands to the north of Okinawa,
he named amamiensis and kikaigensis, from their island habitats.
Thompson (1912), anticipating the change, likewise described the
two latter forms as E. oshimensis.
One report of the species from the mainland on the Ussuri coast
by Elpatjewsky and Sabanejew has been discredited by Terentjev
(1923).
Diagyiosis. A typical member of the Fasciatus group; five light
lines present, the median bifurcating on the nuchal, the branches re-
uniting on the snout; the dorsolateral light line arises on the first
superciliary, follows usually middle of the third scale row to middle
of the tail ; the lateral light line broken on labials, passes back from
middle of ear and follows usually the sixth scale row. No sublateral
light line. Median dorsal scale rows distinctly widened ; no distinct
patch of differentiated postfemoral scales; a keeled lateral postanal
scale; subcaudals widened; no postnasal; a single postmental; scale
rows, 26. Limbs long, overlapping when adpressed. Adult males
lose practically all trace of white lines. The markings and color
of young similar, save the tail is a bright blue.
Description of species (from topotypes). Portion of rostral visi-
ble above usually between one half and three fourths the size of
the frontonasal; supranasals relatively large, forming a median
suture, always separating the rostral from frontonasal; latter scale
somewhat variable, usually about as long as wide, in contact with
the frontal in practically all cases (one exception in 30), the suture
often broad; prefrontals variable, usually relatively small, often of
equal or smaller size than the supranasals, their sutures with
frontonasal longest, the sutures with the other scales subequal, that
with frontal variable; frontal slender, frequently (if not usually I
more narrow than the supraocular region in its widest part, and
distinctly longer than its distance from the end of the snout;
frontoparietals always longer and larger than the prefrontals, al-
ways forming a median suture; interparietal always in contact with
the nuchal; parietals relatively slender; normally only a single pair
of nuchals, but frequently there may be two on one side, one on the
other, rarely two complete pairs.
Nasal moderate, apparently only partially divided by a suture;
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces 269
anterior loreal little higher than the posterior, which is much longer
than high, in contact, normally, with three labials; four supra-
oculars, three broadly in contact with the frontal; seven to nine
superciliaries (eight usually), the anterior more than double the
size of the posterior; a small preocular, followed by a smaller scale
and one or two granules; two small, elongate postoculars; median
palpebral scales touching the superciliaries; enlarged scales on lower
eyelid separated from the subocular by one or two rows of granules;
two presuboculars ; four or five postsuboculars (very rarely three);
anterior temporal usually rather large, in contact with both second-
ary temporals; upper secondary large, triangular, or fan-shaped,
definitely emarginate posteriorly, usually followed by three moder-
ately well-defined, vertically elongate scales, one following the
other, which are bordered above by two scales posterior to the
outer part of the nuchal, the second of these largest (in adult males
these -rales become thickened as do the other head scales. This
pattern of posttemporal scales only a little less distinct than that of
E. elegans) ; lower secondary temporal narrow, elongate, somewhat
rounded posteriorly (broken in two cases* ; tertiary temporal small,
not well differentiated. Seven upper labials, the seventh largest.
but not relatively as large as the same scale in elegans, and con-
sequently the difference in size between the sixth and seventh labials
is not so great; the first labial is usually higher and larger than the
three following; a pair of post labials, superimposed, the lower
largest, usually in contact with ear, the upper sometimes separated
by one or two very small scales; two or three small auricular
lobules; ear surrounded by 19 or 20 scales; usually six lower
labials; mental rather large, the labial border much greater than
that of rostral; usually a single postmental; three pairs of chin-
shields, followed by an elongate postgenial, which is bordered in-
ternally by a scale longer than wide.
Scales on body parallel, the median dorsal series usually a little
wider than the two adjoining, those in posterior half of body some-
times only as large as the adjoining rows; scales in a row from
parietals to a point above anus from 55 to 60, the usual numbers
being 56 or 58; scales about neck behind ear, 34 to 36; constricted
part of neck, 29 to 32; in axillary region, 36-38; about middle of
body, 26 (one 25; one 28). The pits on the scales are usually pres-
ent over the usual lateral areas; about arm and leg insertion and in
posthumeral and postfemoral regions the pits are more numerous.
Subcaudals wide, about 98 to tip of tail, when complete; a well-
270 The University Science Bulletin
defined, keeled, lateral, postanal scute, less distinct in females; the
postfemoral scales frequently show some irregularity and enlarge-
ment suggestive of the postfemoral patch of scales in Eumeces
elegans; about 14 scales about insertion of arm; outer wrist tubercle
usually not strongly differentiated, represented by three or four
small tubercular scales; palm with five or six scattered enlarged
tubercles; basal lamellae of digits usually somewhat enlarged;
lamellar formula for fingers: 7; 10; 12; 12; 8. About 19 scales
around insertion of hind limb; four large, paired, padlike, heel tuber-
cles separated medially by small scales; none or at most only one
larger tubercle on sole. Terminal lamellae not tightly bound about
toes; intercalated series of scales on outer side of fourth toe usu-
ally does not extend beyond basal phalanx. Limbs strong, well-
developed, overlapping, when adpressed, about the length of the
fourth toe.
Color. Young brownish or olive-black, with a median bluish
white stripe from middle of tail to first nuchals, where it bifurcates,
the prongs uniting on the frontonasal or, in slightly older specimens,
terminating on the prefrontals; dorsolateral light stripe from first
superciliary, following the middle of the third scale row, the outer
edges of adjoining scale rows often with minute bluish-white flecks;
the lateral line in youngest specimen available (50mm. snout to
vent ) , shows four cream spots on the posterior labials in front of
ear; it emerges from lower half of the ear posteriorly and follows the
sixth scale row or edges of the fifth and sixth to middle of tail; tails
blue in young.
Male specimens lose the median stripe when about 60 mm. snout
to vent ; the dorsolateral lines are distinct and the area between these
and the lateral lines is a deep brown, while the dorsal surface is
olive. The heads are lighter; females of this age retain the typical
lines and stripes, the lateral brown stripe being very distinct. The
belly is bluish-gray, but the remainder of underside is cream. Old
males loose all trace of the white lines, becoming brownish-olive
above with a well-defined brown lateral stripe. The heads are
yellowish (probably reddish in life). In younger specimens the
light lines may have dark borders and the olive color is at first in
the centers of the scales. Limbs similarly colored above.
Variation. Most of the variable characters have been noted in
the description. Three specimens have been found with the post-
mental divided (21221-21223 A.M.N.H.) ; a fourth is reported by
Brown (1902), but whether in this form or in oshimensis it is im-
possible to say, as he does not state the source of the specimen. In
Taylor: The Gent s Eumeces
271
Measurements of Eumeces marginatus (Hallowell)
Museum
Number
Sex
\ X S.P.
9309
M C.Z.
7409
d1
M.C /.
7409
9
1 S \\M.
23893
( ■ \ s.
24254
ci"
c \ s
21639
CAS
212."..".
9
c \ s.
21640
(' \ S
21642
yg-
Snout to vent
93
85
76
76
70
65
64
60
52
Tail
79 reg.
21
114?
102
Snout to foreleg. . .
23v
21
24
2.-.
22 6
19.8
20
18
Snout to eye
7 .">
6.2
5.3
5.5
5.8
5
4.6
4.4
:<, 5
Snout to ear
23
19
17
18
16
15
13
12
10.2
Axilla to groin. . . .
49
44
43
40
37.5
34
:?s
:<2
26
Width of head . .
20
15
14
14
12
115
9.4
10
8
Length of head. . . .
21
16
15.5
14
14
13
12
12
10
IS
22
16
21
15
22
13
19
11.6
19
1.".
17.6
114
16.4
10
Foreleg
2o*
15
36*
29
29
32
29
30
26
25
21
Longest 'oe
14
12
11
12
11
11
10
10
9
* Claw missing. All specimens from Okinawa.
one specimen, Xo. 21222 A.M.N.H., the frontonasal is fused with
the left prefrontal. The frontonasal varies markedly in size, and as
it is larger or smaller, the prefrontals are smaller or larger. When
of small size the frontonasal loses contact with the anterior loreal.
The color variation already noted is typical. However, certain
males tend to retain the median and other light stripes until a
greater size is reached. The old males have reddish heads. (One
female examined has six eggs, three in each oviduct.)
Remarks. This form may be distinguished from oshimensis by
the widened median scales, the greater length of the white lines on
the tail (in oshimensis they do not extend one fourth the length;
in marginatus, one half to three fourths the length) ; and by the
fact that the dorsolateral line passes along the middle of the third
scale row instead of along the edges of the third and fourth. The
amount of differentiation between these two forms is less than be-
tween marginatus and stimsonii.
Distribution. Apparently confined to Okinawajima and possibly
also to the near-by islands, Iheyajima, Kumeshima, Iyeshima and
Kerumashima, although no records are available for any except the
first mentioned island. (See Fig. 40 for distributional map.)
Locality records:
Okinawa: (U.S.N.M. 7. including type; "Loo Choo Island," April, 1855, Cat.
Xo. 11713; Dr. W. Stimpson Coll.) (M.C.Z. 3. A. Owston Coll.) (A.M.N.H.
5. M. Oshima Coll.); Nago (Brit. Mus. 4. "Great Loo Choo Is.." Hoist
Coll.) (Fritze. 1894) (Brown. 1902) (C.A.S. 11).
272 The University Science Bulletin
Eumeces okadae (Stejneger)
(Plate 19, Figs. 1 and 2; Fig. 40)
SYNONYMY
190U. Eumeces latiscutatus okadae Stejneger. Bull. I". S. Nat. Mus., No. 58, 1906, pp. 200-
202, fig. 181 (type description; type Locality Miyakeshima, Idzu Islands, Japan; type,
U.S.N.M. No. 23891; also Niishima); Van Denburgh, Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci., (4), III,
1908-'13 (Dec. 16, 1912), p. 214.
History. The first specimens of this' species appear to have
been collected by Okada in the Idzu Islands, May 3, 1887, but
were not described until 1906 when Stejneger's monumental work
on Japanese herpetology appeared. Stejneger had nine specimens,
from two of the islands, the type being U.S.N.M. 23891 from
Miyakeshima. It was named for the collector. Since that time
apparently no further specimens have reached American or Euro-
pean collections and the only other literature reference merely re-
counts characters of a specimen from Niishima, one of the original
series studied by Stejneger.
Diagnosis. A species related to Eumeces latiscutatus, having a
five-lined pattern, the median not bifurcating on the head, the
pattern early becoming very dim or obsolete. Scale rows about
middle of body, 28; a large postnasal, which usually separates the
anterior loreal from the labials; postmental single; a keeled postanal
scale in males, less distinct in females; seven, rarely eight, upper
labials, median dorsal series somewhat widened.
Description of the type (U.S.N.M. No. 23891, Miyakeshima, Idzu
Islands, Japan. May 3, 1887, by N. Okada). Rostral high, the
part visible above somewhat less than the area of the frontonasal;
supranasals very large, probably equal in area to the prefrontals,
forming a median suture; frontonasal as broad as long, touching
the anterior loreals, forming a broad suture with the frontal; pre-
frontals small, widely separated medially; frontal elongate, longer
than its distance to the end of the snout, touching three supraocu-
lars; frontoparietals very much larger than the prefrontals, form-
ing a median suture less than half their length; interparietal slender,
not enclosed by the large parietals; one pair of nuchals; nasal
moderate; a small, well-defined postnasal; anterior loreal high,
much higher than the posterior, narrow; second short, only little
longer than high; four supraoculars, three touching frontal; eight-
nine superciliaries, the anterior three or more times as large as the
second or last; two presuboculars, four-five postsuboculars; two
small postoculars and one preocular, with a small scute above fol-
lowed by a series of granules; only four median palpebral scales
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 273
touching the superciliaries ; five or >ix enlarged scales on the lower
eyelid, these separated from the subocular by three rows of gran-
ules; primary temporal rather large, rectangular; upper secondary
very large, triangular, its posterior border sinuous; the lower sec-
ondary temporal narrow, elongate, the upper edge slightly curving
but nearly parallel with lower edge, posterior edge slightly rounded;
tertiary temporal elongate, separated from the nuchal by a small
scale; seven upper labials, the anterior slightly higher and equally
as large as. or larger than, the three succeeding scales; seventh labial
largest, widely separated from the upper secondary temporal; two
superimposed postlabials; six lower labials; mental large, wide, its
labial border much greater than that of the rostral; a single post-
mental, followed by three pairs of chinshields, the last followed by
a large, strongly differentiated postgenial, which is bordered on
anterior inner side by a narrow, elongate scale; ear opening large,
surrounded by about 21 scales, the three anterior lobules very
minute; scales of the median series of the back slightly wider than
adjoining scales and distinctly wider than the lateral series; 56
scales from parietals to above anus; 36 rows about neck behind
ear; 32 rows about narrow part of the neck; 43 rows in the axillary
region; 30 scale rows about middle of body; 20 rows about base of
tail. Tail regenerated; median preanals very large, the laterals,
two or three on each side, diminishing in size, the outer overlapping
the inner; lateral postanal scale bearing a well-developed keel.
Well-developed area of axillary scales, with a few at the upper
anterior insertion of the limb; two or three granular series behind
insertion of hind limb; about 17 scales around insertion of forelimb;
outer scale on the wrist rounded, padlike; palm with a triangular
area of six enlarged, rounded, padlike scales, with other smaller
ones; basal lamellae on toes padlike; lamellar formula for fingers: 6,
13; 13; 11; 7. About 24 scales around insertion of leg; heel with
several enlarged scutes, only part of which are padlike; two hundred
padlike scales on outer mid-portion of sole; rest of sole covered with
small granules. Lamellar formula for toes: 7; 12; 16; 19; 12.
Subcaudals widened.
Color (in alcohol). Above nearly uniform dark olive, the head
very little lighter; a very obscure brown lateral band visible from
the temporal region to groin along each side and bordered above
by a very slightly lighter shade of olive than back (visible only in
liquid) ; below grayish, the chin, throat, underside of limbs lighter,
nearly cream; underside of tail also light for a part of its length.
18—1123
274
The University Science Bulletin
5-.
<D
tl
<U
d
c«
B
o
3
a
a
d
03
CD
a
>>
a)
-3
d
a)
U.S.N.M.
23896
yg-
— i O
a »
< x r^ x ci r~ r~ ».o
co oo r-
t- ci o ci — i o o o» >-i r- » s o
lOO "-HCICO— rt — Cl-H
i-^CO
rig
p
iH lO
X h» l- CO — 3". CI 05 h O X o co
■O g> i-H CI CI — I i-H (N CN iH
<5 r*3
CD O
Tf LO
-H O CI — I CI o o
CI CO >-l i-H i-H "H CI
t~
o
CO O 00 "5
CO i-0 CO '0 1" CO CO -h X ci o>
■H C4 CQ I-l i-H I-H CI CI i-H
hrMit
Zio'b
o
co 3 co ci co co o ci c:
Cl *T i-H i-H i-H ci CO H
Type*
U.S.N.M.
23891
x ci io ci
O „■„ o -r -f -r co -h co — i CT> —i o:
t~ S? « 'M CO i-H i-H h CI CI <-<
Ip-H
p
CS IO CO CI CI CI —I ci —
n-r^-i-H — cico-h —
e
3
0)
p.
OJ
-
E
3
1!
CO
*a
C
>
0
-*J
-^
3
o
c
co
'3
03
>
o
3
O
CO
03
0)
O
3
O
a
CO
a
"a
o
o
s
c
CC
c
'3
ill
O
°S
<5
>
-3
0
ft
"3
+:
> -3
C3
a
"3
X
i
OJ
"o
w
c
£
-
Li
O
Ph
4
Ji
T3
C
£
o
CO
OJ
M
C
o
j:
X
e
CO
O
o
2
00
CO
co
o
2
3 OJ
_ ^
- CT)
0 00
CD
« CO
Taylor: The Genus Ki.mi.cks 275
Variation. The three specimens from the type locality agree in
the absence of lines on the hack, the presence of a dim, brown,
lateral line and the presence of thirty scale rows.
The specimens from the island of Niishima, Idzu Islands, Japan,
differ strikingly in color and markings and appear to approach
more closely their large-island relative, Eumeces latiscutatus. The
dorsolateral lines are narrower and the median line appears to stop
at the interparietal, not forming the typical bifurcating line evident
in all the young specimens of the typical latiscutatus. (The young-
esl specimen. 42 mm., has only a suggestion of lines on the snout.)
The typical five lines are retained quite clearly in a specimen
(U.S.N.M. No. 23895 2 ) 79 mm. snout to vent. In the largest male,
70 mm. snout to vent, the five lines are still rather clearly visible,
while the head has become buff.
The postnasal appears to be normally present, and the lower part
of the anterior loreal is missing or fused with the postnasal or the
posterior loreal, and only rarely is the anterior loreal in contact
with labials. In all the Niishima specimens, the anterior loreal is
divided into two regular scales. A second small postnasal is present
on the left side in No. 36533; in No. 23895, the anterior loreal is
fused with the prefrontal.
In the specimens from Miyakeshima, the postnasal is typically
present in two specimens; in the third it is wanting or fused with
the lower half of the anterior loreal.
The normal number of upper labials is seven, but one specimen
has eight on the left side only. The number of scale rows is 28 in
five specimens, 30 in four. The scales in a row from parietals to
above anus vary between 56 and 58. The lower number occurs
three times, the higher four times. The superciliaries are 8-8 except
in two specimens, one having 7-7, the other 8-9. The frontonasal
usually is about as long as broad or slightly broader, in contact
with the anterior loreal. The frontonasal is in contact with the
frontal in all specimens examined. Three supraoculars touch the
frontal in all cases. The postsuboculars are either four or five, four
being of most frequent occurrence. The limbs are strong, well-
developed, overlapping widely when adpressed in all specimens.
Remark*. My reason for recognition of this form as a distinct
species from Eumeces latiscutatus is based on the following char-
acter-: an average of 3.6 more scale rows; an average of three
more scales in the distance between parietals to a point above ami-;
the reduction of the anterior loreal to a small scale widely separated
276 The University Science Bulletin
from the labials, and the consequent increase in size of the posterior
loreal. The color pattern has been modified and the bifurcating
lines on the head appear to be wanting in the very young, the
median line not even reaching the nuchals in a specimen 41 mm.
in snout to vent measurement.
That the species is derived from latiscutatus stock cannot be
doubted, but the period of isolation from the mainland form appears
to have been as long as that which brought about the related
species, marginatus, in the Riu Kius.
The Idzu archipelago stretches to the south of Honshu, the
largest Japanese island, a distance of about 180 miles. Whether
the species reaches the outermost islands of Hachijo, Awoga and
Bayonaise is not known, but if so it would not be surprising to
find forms that would warrant subspecific designation. I have al-
ready noted the differences between specimens from Niishima and
Miyakeshima.
Distribution. Known only from Idzu archipelago. (See Fig. 40
for distributional map.)
Miyakeshima: (U.S.N.M. 3, including type) (Science college Tokyo 1).
Niishima: (U.S.N.M. 4) (C.A.S. 1).
Eumeces latiscutatus (Hallowell)
(PI. 21; Figs. 39, 40)
SYNONYMY
1838. Scincus quinquelineatus Schlegel. Fauna Japon., Rept., 1838, pp. 99, 139, Saurii et
Batr., pi. 1, figs. l-4b (non-Linnaeus).
1839. Plestiodon quinquelineatus Dumeril and Bibron. Erp. Gen., V, 1839, p. 70 (part.);
Gray, Cat, Liz. Brit. Mus., 1845, p. 91 (part,); Bleeker, Naturk. Tijdschr. Nederl.
Ind., XVI, 1858, p. 204 (Japan).
1860. Plestiodon latiscutatus Hallowell. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1860, p. 496 (type
description; type locality Simoda, Japan. Coll. Rodgers, N. Pacific Explor. Exped.).
1864. Eumeces (Plestiodon) quinquelineatus var. Japonicus Peters. Mon. Ber. Berlin Acad.
Wiss., 1864, p. 57 (type description; type locality Nagasaki; von Martens collector);
Martens, Preuss. Exped. Ost.-Asien, Zool., I, 1876, p. 376 (Nagasaki).
1878. Eumeces (Plestiodon) japonicus Boettger. Offenb. Ver. Naturk., 17-18 Ber. Mitth.,
1878, p. 4 (Japan).
1879. Eumeces japonicus Bocourt, Miss. Sci. Mexique, Rept,, Livr. 6, 1879, p. 423.
1880. Eumeces quinquelineatus Hilgendorf. Sitz. Ber. Ges. Naturf. Freunde Berlin, 1880,
p. 113; Fritze, Mitth. Deutsch. Ges. Ost.-Asiens, V, 1891, p. 299 (Yezo).
1887. Eumeces marginatus Boulenger. Cat. Liz. Brit, Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 371 (part.)
(description; "Miyanoschita" and Nikko) (non Hallowell); Okada, Cat. Vert. Jap.,
1891, p. 70 (part.) (Tokyo, Hakone, Nikko, Aevaji, Surva.); Boettger, Kat. Rept.
Mus. Senckenb., 1, 1893, p. Ill (part.) (Nikko, Yezo); Fritze, Zool. Jahrb. Syst.,
VII, 1894, p. 860 (part.) (Hondo; Yezo.).
1907. Eumeces latiscutatus Stejneger. Bull. U. S. Nat, Mus., 58, pp. 195-200, 1907, pi.
XV, figs. 1, 2, 3, and text figs. 179, 180; Barbour, Proc. N. England Zool. Club. IV,
Nov. 24, 1909, p. 63 (Yokohama); Van Denburgh, Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci., (4), III,
1908-'13, (1912), pp. 213, 214 (Kobe Hondo, and Kagoshima, Kinsin) ; Hatta, Zool.
Anz., XLIII, Nov. 4, 1913, p. 32 (Hokkaido); Terentjev, Copeia, June 16, 1930, No.
119, p. 76; Nikolski, Faun. Ross., Petrograd, I, 1915, p. 508 (doubts identification
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 277
of lizards collected at Imperator on mainland); Pavlov, Pub. Musee Hoang ho Pai ho,
\ 12, 1932, p. 8 (Kanson, Koankia ho; doubtful).
?1931. Eumeces latisculatus (sic) Tchang. Bull. Fan Mem. Inst. Biol., II, Dec, 1931,
pp. 271, 275 (reports from Peiping; apparently wrung locality data or error of identi-
fication).
History. The collections made in Japan by Buerger and Von
Siebold reached the Leiden Museum, and furnished the material
upon which Schlegel and Temminck based their Fauna Japonica.
The specimens of this >ihth>s were regarded as identical with
Linnaeus' Lacerta quinquelineata. Schlegel writes, after compar-
ing these with specimens of a skink from Tennessee: "L'examen
dun si grande nombre d'individus m'a demontre qu'il n'existe pas la
moindre difference entre ces animaux, recueillis sur cleux points
du globe assez distants, Tun de l'autre quoique situes a-peu-pres
sous le meme parallele."
Schlegel's account contains considerable detail regarding the
color evolution from juveniles to old adults, together with data
on habits and habitats. He gives the Japanese name, awo-to kague.
Subsequent accounts persisted in referring the Japanese skink to
the American species until 1860, when Hallowell discussed this
matter after examining specimens brought back by the Rodger's
North Pacific Exploring Expedition. He concluded that the Japa-
nese form was different and proposed the name Plestiodon lati-
scutatus.
Peters, in 1865, apparently independently arrived at this same
conclusion and suggested the varietal name japonicus, after an ex-
amination of specimens brought from Japan by Doctor von Martens.
No further account of particular import was made until that of
Boulenger (1887) when he united Hallowell's latiscutatus, and
marginatus under the latter name. In 1906 Stejneger, in his mono-
graph on the Herpetology of Japan, reviewed the literature, and
again separated the two forms. With the aid of Dr. W. Stimpson's
field catalogue he fixes the type locality as Simoda, Japan. Stej-
neger pointed out the salient characters which separate the Asiatic
from the American forms, and commented on the value of the
temporals as diagnostic characters.
Certain records report the occurrence of this species on the
Asiatic mainland, but doubt has been cast on these records, by
Nikolski (1915) and Stejneger (1907). Recently Terentjev (1923)
examined presumed Asiatic specimens in the Zoological Museum of
Moscow, and pronounced them as being latiscutatus. Stejneger
(1926) still questions the identification, offering as a suggestion
278 The University Science Bulletin
that the specimens are in reality E. pekinensis (=xanthi) , which is
the most northern of the five-lined skinks known to occur on the
mainland, but admitting the possibility of accidental introduction.
Diagnosis. A medium-sized species of the Fasciatus group, hav-
ing in the young a typical black ground color with a narrow median
white line extending from the proximal half of the tail to the
interparietal, where it bifurcates, the branches running forward and
reuniting on the frontonasal or supranasals. Dorsolateral line from
first supraocular to midway of the tail, following the middle of the
third scale row; labials spotted; a lateral line from the middle of
the ear to tail, along the sixth scale row. Tail blue. Adult males
become olive, losing stripes. Normally a single postmental; a
postnasal; upper secondary temporal largest, wedge-shaped, emar-
ginate behind; lower secondary narrow, elongate, the sides often
nearly parallel. Normally 24 or 26 scale rows about the body.
Description. A medium-sized species. The part of the rostral
appearing above smaller than the frontonasal, rarely equal; supra-
nasals smaller than the prefrontals, in contact normally (one ex-
ception with a small intercalated scale between them), usually
smaller than the prefrontals ; frontonasal somewhat variable in size,
in contact with or separated from the frontal, normally in contact
with the loreal (rarely not) ; prefrontals somewhat variable in size,
in contact or separated; frontal normally distinctly longer than its
distance from the end of the snout, in contact with three supra-
oculars; four supraoculars; frontoparietals larger than the pre-
frontals, in contact medially; interparietal moderate, sometimes
approaching the area of a frontoparietal; usually a single pair of
nuchals (rarely more) ; nasal moderate, apparently divided by a
suture; a postnasal normally present (very rarely absent), small or
larger, very often so large as to separate the anterior loreal from
the labials (or may be regarded as absent and the anterior loreal
split transversely) ; anterior loreal frequently small, and separated
widely from the labials, or touching the labials, much higher than
wide, very much higher than posterior loreal, which is usually
relatively short in proportion to its width and in contact with two
upper labials; eight or nine superciliaries, the anterior more than
double the size of the most posterior; a very small preocular, fol-
lowed by two or three granules; two small postoculars; median
palpebral scales in contact with the superciliaries; lower eyelid
with enlarged scales separated from the subocular by three rows of
granules.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
279
Two presuboculars, and tour (normally) postsuboculars ; primary
temporal relatively large, often approaching area of lower secondary,
which is elongate, somewhat wider posteriorly than anteriorly, or
the upper and lower side approaching a parallel; upper secondary
very large, wedge-shaped, slightly emarginate behind; tertiary
temporal usually small, poorly differentiated; scales following the
superior secondary temporal and nuchals are not strongly differ-
entiated in males as in the Riu Kiu island forms, but approach the
same general relationship. Upper labials normally seven, the last
greatly enlarged, the first usually scarcely larger than the three
succeeding scales; a pair of postlabials, superimposed, separate the
seventh labial from the auricular opening; two or three auricular
Fig. 39. Eumeces latkcutatus (Hallowell). Stanford U. No. 5629; Waka-
rnura. Japan. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head.
lobules, small, inconspicuous; mental with a slightly longer labial
border than the rostral; one postmental; three pairs of chinshields;
a long postgenial bordered internally by scales longer than wide;
usually six lower labials; 18 to 20 scales about ear; scale rows on
sides parallel, the median dorsal rows slightly wider (rarely very
distinctly wider) than the adjoining rows; scales around neck be-
hind ear, about 30; about constricted portion of neck, 26-29; in
axillary region, 35-39; about middle of body, 26-28; scales from
parietals to above anus, 53-57. Pits present on part of lateral scales,
growing dim or obsolete in adults. Subcaudals widened; usually
six preanals, the median pair much enlarged, the lateral diminishing
in size, the outer scales overlapping inner; a well-differentiated,
lateral, keeled, postanal scute; a few granular scales in axilla, none
or but a single row posterior to the insertion of femur.
280
The University Science Bulletin
About fourteen scales around insertion of forearm; usually two,
occasionally three, outer wrist tubercles; five or six large padlike
tubercles on the palm. Lamellar formula for fingers: 6; 8; 10,
11; 8. The basal lamellae of toes usually enlarged. About 18
scales around insertion of the hind limb; usually two pairs of pad-
like heel plates, separated medially; sole usually with only one or
two larger tubercular scales; lamellar formula for toes: 6; 9; 14;
17; 11. Intercalated row of scales on fourth toe not extending half
way on the basal phalanx; terminal lamellae not tightly bound
about claw.
Color (in alcohol). Young, black or brownish-black, with five
longitudinal white lines (see diagnosis for detail). This coloration
in males grows lighter brown or olive, and the lines gradually dis-
appear, the area between the dorsolateral and the lateral lines be-
coming a deep brown, forming a conspicuous lateral stripe. Adult
males may be nearly uniform brown or olive above and the lateral
dark stripe remains distinct. The heads widen and the color is
yellow-brown (reddish-brown in life). Females tend to retain the
general pattern of juvenile coloration, save that the ground color
becomes lighter, usually brownish, or olive, with darker edges on
the scales; the blue of the tail is lost early.
Variation. As is typical of members of the genus, certain char-
acters are variable. Thus, the interparietals vary in size in propor-
tion to the variation in size of the frontonasal. When large, the
Measurements of Eumeces latiscutatus (Hallowell)
Museum
Number*
C.A.S.
33032
C.A.S.
33048
d1
C.A.S.
26133
9
C.A.S.
24274
<?
C.A.S.
24276
C.A.S.
35929
d"
C.A.S.
24275
9
C.A.S.
33050
yg.
C.A.S.
35921
yg-
C.A.S.
26128
Sex
Snout to vent
80
76
73
72
65
62
59
50
46
32
Tail
reg.
25
125
22
20.4
98
19.8
80
17.6
78
16
57
Snout to foreleg
24
23
25
13
Snout to eye
6.3
17
42
6
17
40
5
13
42.4
5.6
15
38
5
14
36
4.9
14
33
4.5
11
35
4.2
12
25
4
11
20
3
8.2
16
Width of head
14
13
10.4
12
11
11
S
8
7
5.5
Length of head
16
15.8
13.3
15
14
13
11
9
8.5
7.3
23.5
31
21
31
19
27
21
28
20
27
20
28
17
25
15.3
20
15
18
10
14
10.5
12
9.6
11
11
10
8
7
6
*Nos. 24274-21276, 35921, Kagoshima, Japan; 33048, 33050, Miyazo; 33032, Kobe;
20133, 2G128, Ikishima Is.; 35929, Sakurajima Is.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 281
two prefrontal scales form a median suture. This condition occurs
32 times in 50 specimens. Two of these arc anomalous, one hav-
ing a prefrontal joined with the frontonasal, the other having the
frontonasal segmented, leaving a moiety inserted between the pre-
frontals and leaving them in contact at a single minute point. I
have mentioned above details regarding the postnasal. It would
appear that the segmentation of the loreal (the postnasal fusing
with the lower part) is most frequent in specimens from Hondo.
In a series from Kobe, five of the twelve have the anterior loreal
widely separated from the labials; a series from Miyazo has five
out of six so arranged. Doctor Stejneger (1907) remarks on the
variation that occurs in a series of specimens from Fujiyama and
notes five lacking a postnasal.
The usual number of scale rows is 26. I have counts on 68 speci-
mens. The number 26 occurs 41 times; 24 occurs 19 times. Most
of the specimens having a count of 26, if counted a few scales
farther forward, have 28, those with 24 may have either 26 or 28,
so counted. The intercalated axillary series should normally termi-
nate before a distance equal to the length of the arm is reached.
Remarks. The general uniformity of this species and the lack
of fixed variation on the several Japanese islands bespeaks no great
degree of isolation as regards time; or, the closeness of the various
islands still permits an exchange of specimens.
The species does not appear to be uncommon. I have collected
it on the hills about Nagasaki and on the road between Nagasaki
and Moji on the island of Kyushu. Here, the lizards were seen in
considerable numbers sunning themselves in bright sunlight, which
had made its appearance after a period of four cold, rainy days.
The lizards would lie motionless on the rocks until one approached;
then they would dart into a crevice in the rock walls. Being ill-
equipped for collecting-, only a few specimens were obtained.
Distribution. The species appears to occur on the southern islands
Kyushu. Shukoku and Hondo (at least in the southern part of the
latter island), with equal frequency. Stejneger (1907) has pointed
out the lack of records from the northern half of the island. A few
records occur for the island of Hokkaido. The records for the
Asiatic mainland must be verified before they are to be accepted.
Those of Hokkaido are not questioned by Okada (1933) in his
distributional studies of Japanese lizards.
282
The University Science Bulletin
40
*«
/
-— —^^y^ \
\
\ J^fctf'' \ V^"A V-A
30
1
1
1
jft
ill v^vY
20
f \
r «a ,-^***
^ >-\ \^T
• /c3ff/5cufafu5
' \
-A
t&~ i i
▼ oka dae
-V
O iarioun'
V stimsonii
Q oshimetnsi-s
i
t^^\~"jfts
10
"t \\jL
A^\ JHf \
J
Fig. 40. Distribution of island species of the Fasciatus group, in
Eastern Asia.
Locality records:
Japan: (Boettger, 1878) (U.S.N.M. 5) (Brit. Mus. 5) (A.M.N .H. 2) (Basle 6).
Kyushu: Satsuma Prow: Kagoshima (C.A.S. 7); Yamagawa (U.S.N.M.
6). Hizen Prow: Nagasaki (Peters, 1865, type locality of japonicus)
(Martens, 1876) (Stanford 1). Hyuga Prow: Miyazaki (U.S.N.M. 1).
Shikoku: Tosa Prow: Kochi (U.S.N.M. 9).
Hondo (Nippon): Idzu Prow: Simoda (Hallowed, 1860; type locality;
type lost). Kanagawa Pref.: Yokohama (M.C.Z. 2) (U.S.N.M. 2)
(Basle 3). Suruga Prow: Mt. Fujiyama (U.S.N.M. 21). Settsu
Prow: Kobe (C.A.S. 12). Sagami Prow: Miya-noshita (Brit. Mus.
6); Hakone (Okada. 1891). Tochigi Pref.: Nikko (Brit. Mus. 6).
"Musashi Tokyo Fu": Tokyo (Okada, 1891). Kawachi Prow:
Kiyotaki (Stejneger, 1907). Kii Prow: Wakamura (Stanford 6).
Osaka Prow: Yodo (Stanford 1).
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces 283
Yamato: Koriyama (U.S.N.M. 1).
Awaji: Awaji Prov.: (Okada, 1891).
Hokkaido (Yczo) : (Fritze, 1891) (Hatta, 1913) (Boettgcr, 1893) (Stej-
neger, 1907).
Doubtful Chin,.-, Records: (Nikolski, 1915) (Sun. 1926) (Gee, 1930)
(Tchung, 1931) (Pavlov. 1932) (Terentjev, 1923).
BREVILINEATUS ( tftOUP
Three small species are associated in this group. They occur in
northern Mexico, and in southern United States in the states of
Texas, New Mexico and Arizona.
The group may be characterized as follows: skinks of medium
size; small median preanals overlapped by smaller outer preanal
scales; the subcaudal series only slightly widened; the median dor-
sal white line is either short or long, bifurcating on the nuchals
and extending a greater or lesser distance on neck or completely
wanting in old adults; dorsolateral and lateral light lines present
with a well-defined brown lateral stripe between them, their length
varying in the four species; labials seven; postmental one (rarely
two in tegragrammus) ; no postnasal; scale rows 24-28; interparietal
enclosed or not; postgenial bordered on its inner edge by a scale
longer than wide; tails in young azure.
Key to the Species of the Brevilineatus Group
A. Parietals enclose the interparietal; scale rows usually 28; lateral brown stripe vari-
able in width ; postnasal variable, present or absent, usually absent in Arizona
specimens; an elongate postlabial follows the seventh labial which is often no larger
than sixth labial. (Arizona, New Mexico and northwestern Mexico).
Etimeces callicephalus Bocourt, p. 290
AA. Parietals not enclosing the interparietal.
B. Scale rows 26-28, usually the first number much more frequent; nuchals two
(rarely three) ; dorsolateral and lateral light lines with lateral brown stripe,
rarely extending more than a half the length of body and often not this dis-
tance ; median line often scarcely discernible behind the point of bifurcation.
(Southcin Texas and northern Mexico) Eumeces brevilineatus Cope, p. 283
BB. Scale rows, usually 28; nuchals, usually three pairs; seventh labial separated
from ear by two postlabials or two superimposed postlabials ; bifurcating
lines on the head are never joined posteriorly and no median line present in
young ; dorsolateral and lateral lines present, enclosing a broad, brown stripe ;
all lines extending entire length of body; lines obscured in old adults.
(Southern Texas and northeastern Mexico) .. Eumeces tetragrammus (Baird), p. 298
Eumeces brevilineatus Cope
(Plate 22; Figs. 41, 42, 43)
SYNONYMY
1880. Eumeces brevilineatus Cope. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 17, 1880, pp. 18-19, 44, 46
(type description; type locality Helotes, Bexar Co., Texas, G. W. Marnock, collector — ■
also, Fort Concho, Texas); Boulenger, Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 376 (Texas);
and Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1890, pp. 77, 85; Cope, Ann. Rept. U. S. Nat. Mus.,
1898, (1900), pp. 664-665, fig. 137 (redescription and comparison with tetragrammus
and anthracinus) ; Brown, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1903, p. 553 (range restricted
284 The University Science Bulletin
to Texas district) ; Bailey, North Amer. Fauna, No. 25, 1905, p. 45 ; Streeker, Proe.
Biol. Soc. Wash., XXI, 1908, p. 169 (Burnet Co., Texas); and Baylor Uni. Bull.,
XII, No. 1, 1909, pp. 5, 6 (Burnet and Brewster counties; gives data on habits and
color); Ditmars, The Reptile Book, 1915, p. 200; Stejneger and Barbour, Check List
N. Amer. Amph. Rept., 2d Ed., 1923, p. 75; Streeker, Cont. Baylor Uni. Mus., No. 6,
1926; Ortenburger, Uni. of Okla. Bull., Proc. Okla. Acad. Sci., Vol. VI, pt. 1, 1926,
p. 95 (Caddo Co., Okla.); Streeker and Williams, Cont. Baylor U. Mus., No. 12, 1927,
p. 14 (Hays, Bexar, Comal, Kendall, Burn -t and Travis counties, Texas); Streeker,
Cont. Baylor Uni. Mus., No. 16, 1928, pp. 1-21 (common name); idem, No. 23, 1930,
pp. 10-11 (Austin, Texas); Stejneger and Barbour, Check List N. Amer. Amph. Rept.,
1933, p. 80.
1917. Plestiodon brevilineatus, Stejneger and Barbour. Cluck List N. Amer. Amph. Rept.,
1917, p. 69; Streeker, Bull. No. 4, Sci. Soc. San Antonio, 1922, p. 22 (Bexar county
records).
History. The original discovery of this species was made by
Mr. G. W. Marnock at his farm on the eastern edge of the Edwards
plateau region, near Helotes, twenty miles northwest of San Antonio,
Tex. Specimens were sent to the National Museum, which Cope
described in 1880, two of the cotypes being still at the National
Museum (No. 10159) and two in the collection of the Academy of
Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.
At the time the species was described specimens were in the
National Museum from Fort Concho (across the river from San
Angelo, Tex.), collected by Mr. Boll, and these specimens were like-
wise divided between the two institutions. Two specimens collected
by Geo. Stolley were sent to the Museum of Comparative Zoology at
about this time.
Within the past few years a considerable number of specimens
has been collected. Seven specimens from San Marcos and San
Antonio are in the American Museum of Natural History; eight
from Brewster and Jeff Davis counties are at the Museum at the
University of Michigan; three from various localities in the Field
Museum, Chicago, and 24 in the Kansas University Collection
collected by myself in various parts of Texas. The first record for
a specimen collected in Mexico is one taken by Hobart Smith and
myself in Nuevo Leon in 1932.
Since no single type was designated of the four cotypes, I shall
designate the specimen (U.S.N.M. No. 10159) measuring 59 mm.
snout to vent, tail length 66 mm. (incomplete) as the lectotype.
The types are in fair condition, showing the typical coloration, in
spite of being somewhat shrunken.
Diagnosis. A medium-sized species, characterized by an olive
coloration with dorsolateral cream lines beginning on the anterior
supraocular and continuing along the third, and later the fourth
scale rows, a short distance on the back; a lateral line beginning
Taylor: The Genus Eume< i -
285
near or on the first labial and passing along the side of head and
body a similar distance. On the side of the head and anterior part
of the body is a brown stripe which extends as far as the cream lines.
A pair of curving lines begin on the rostral, and pass back follow-
ing the edges of the frontal, to unite on the first nuchal (or may
fail to unite in older specimens). Posterior to the terminations of
the lateral and dorsolateral lines, the sides are uniformly of the same
shade as the back. One postmental; no postnasal; seven upper
labials, the sixth or seventh largest or of equal size; limbs touch in
young when adpressed; separated in adults. Scale rows about mid-
dle of body 26 or 28; subcaudals not or only slightly enlarged;
median preanals relatively small.
Fig. 41. Eumeces brevMneatus Cope. K.U. No.7744, topotype; Helotes,
Texas. A, lateral view of head ; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head
length, 9.4 mm.; width,- 8.6 mm.
Description of the species (drawn from topotypes). Portion of
the rostral visible above equal to more than half the area of the
frontonasal; supranasals forming a median suture; frontonasal
broader than long, touching the anterior loreal; prefrontals forming
a very small median suture, and forming sutures with the fronto-
nasal, frontal, second loreal, first superciliary, first supraocular and
first loreal, the length of the sutures in the order named. Frontal
angular anteriorly (greater than a right angle), very obtusely
angular posteriorly or slightly lobulate, much longer than its dis-
tance from the end of the snout; frontoparietals as large as or
larger than the prefrontals, forming an elongate median suture; in-
terparietal in contact with nuchals, about size of a frontoparietal.
Parietals normal, the posterior and lateral edge curved or slightly
angular, scales not in contact with each other; nasal small, divided,
286 The University Science Bulletin
the anterior part equal to posterior part with nostril ; anterior loreal
a little higher than wide, very little higher than the posterior, which
is longer than high ; a small preocular, followed by a single small
scale; two small postoculars ; two presuboculars ; four supraoculars,
three touching the frontal ; seven or eight superciliaries, the anterior
more than twice the size of the last ; upper palpebral scales directly
in contact with the superciliaries; four or five elongate, enlarged
scales on lower eyelid separated, by two or three rows of granular
scales, from the subocular labial.
Primary temporal small, quadrangular or somewhat rectangular,
in contact, sometimes narrowly, with the lower secondary; upper
elongate, widened posteriorly; tertiary temporal small, separated
from the auricular opening by a single scale; seven upper labials,
the first largest of those preceding the subocular; latter scale much
longer than high ; sixth and seventh labials of equal size, or seventh
largest (rarely the sixth) ; last labial separated from the ear by two
pairs of superimposed postlabial scales, occasionally the scales of
each pair fusing to form two large scales; auricular lobules small
but rather distinct; ear surrounded by 16-19 scales. Scale rows
about neck in postauricular region, 30; constricted portion of neck,
28; about axillary region, 30-32; about middle of body, 26 or 28;
about base of tail, 22. Subcaudals small, only slightly enlarged;
six preanals, the median pair largest but relatively small, the outer
scales overlapping the inner. Limbs relatively small, similar in
practically all characters to tetragrammus save that they appear a
little less robust. The granular area of scales in axilla likewise
reduced, as in tetragrammus.
Subcaudals, 105; scales from occiput to above anus, 56-59. Other
characters not mentioned are as in tetragrammus.
Color {in life). A well-defined greenish-olive (rarely olive-
brown) above, each scale with a slightly darker indistinct anterior
area. Dorsolateral and lateral lines as described in the diagnosis,
save that frequently the dorsolateral line is edged with dark brown
above; sides of head and throat reddish in males during breeding
season; chin, throat, breast, and underside of limbs cream; abdomen
and lower surface of tail greenish or greenish-blue. Young speci-
mens much darker, with a brilliant azure tail.
Variation. Forty-five specimens were studied in detail. Most of
the characters of the head scales are fairly constant. The pre-
frontals, however, are in contact in about 40 percent of the speci-
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
287
o
s
a
B
o
—
03
-
I.e.
t.O
o5
3
l< CO
M
fr-
01
-
to
r-
X i-
4 -q<
Mf
co
I-H
f^'u
5 X
CI
ee
M
co
LO
- a CT
W
00
i *
—
to
i-
: ■* >-o
; •* cs
pH
N
<
T.
W
10
CM
co
IO
£i
5 00
PQ
3)
00
»
r~
X
< to «
«'£
■*
CI
^ *— i
-■'.-
O
Cl
i-O
5 ■<*<
1"
OS
r~
CI
00
35
CO X 1^
MS
3
CO
CM
CO
lO
-^
1
T
o
„
OT
00
CT>
Ol l> l^
wS
o
CI
cc
< 1— 1
i*
t^
to
-f
to
i es o
Tj-
—
0
JO
00
g^
-C X t^
vj-
—
cj
co
St>
pi*
s
N
.
CI
CI
■J
«?5
; fc
■*
3
*
d
*
—
co x to
z^
«o
rH
~~
" T-H
«T
^
oo
—
-
CO
■ci
«?5
«>
x
o
t^
—
X
C^
CM X to
*£
> "5
'""
co
<-H r-1
«i
**
r^
oj to
CIQf
£ M
-f
—
—
ZQ
z
—
1
o to
fcc
° S
"~ '
01
M
■>
«T
-r
-r
-
^
-i
•
_
_
~
r~
-.
-
t^
■••-
r-H
C*l
co
rH
— t-
--
T
m
N
c
CO
X '■"
"2 ■
-T
—
—
-.3
X
=
-f
~
to
£c
eo
—
"'
co
™
<~
00
CI
»~
•
so
-T
<N
_
X
d
,_,
-
CM
X
'>' ^
to
—
C]
CO
^
i^
CN
Phoc
•
5
_
3
■
^_
c
■p
re
t'
i:
>.
w
.5
*5
J5
-
>
C
01
5
1 — i
^_
o
- *
- -
- -
- —
o :
3
o
♦a
o
o
—
"o
O
;
□Q
§ =
3 _'
a
3
cc
-~
*-
Ti
1
"5
H
O -
o
o
o
.—
—
re
o
-
Z
ta H
X
X
X
4*
£
a>
z
i
-
to
3
O
2
o .
-O
§ J
o
^0
0J
0
a
tu
w
-
X
0
n
c:
~
-
'J
-
-*
7t
to
r^
**
r^
^O
-.
-T
r-
i-
m
Ol
to X
V
-
>,
ot
*J
at
O
s
'*-'
-
-r
ltd
Z.
u
IH
—
—
i-
CC
w
9d
■s
;.
CO
-
t-
3
a)
H
a
_
-
<
x:
S
-
a>
z
C
■»
The University Science Bulletin
mens. The interparietal is never enclosed. Four supraoculars is
the constant number, save in one specimen, which has the fourth
transversely split on one side, making five; four postsuboculars, save
in one specimen with five. The scales about the ear vary from 14
to 18; the scales in a row from occiput to above anus from 54 to
60, 57 occurring in about half of the specimens examined. Scale
rows about the middle of the body are 26-28, save in a single speci-
men from Fort Concho, Tex., which has only 24. The number 26
occurs thirty-two times, 27, six times, 28, six times. The nuchals
usually are two or three pairs, 2-2 occurring twenty-nine times;
2-3 occurring eleven times, 2-1 occurring six times. Only two of
Fig. 42. Eumeces brevilineatus Cope. E.H.T. and H.M.S. No. 276;
near Sabinas Hidalgo, Nuevo Leon, Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B,
dorsal view of head. Actual head length, 9 mm.; width, 8 mm.
the 45 specimens have two postmentals. The lamellae under the
fourth toe vary between 13 and 16, the number 13 occurring five
times, 14, nineteen times, 15, thirty-seven times, and 16, twenty-
nine times.
Remarks. The relation between brevilineatus and tetragrammus
is indeed close. I have retained the former as a distinct species
because I have found no positive evidence of intergradation be-
tween the twyo. The color pattern is seemingly the only positive
character that will separate them, since all other characters seem to
break down in large series. It appears that ranges of the two species
overlap for a known distance of three hundred miles,* another
* This is true if a specimen identified by Strecker (1909) from Burnet county is actually
of this specirs. I have been unable to examine this. There is a probability that it is actually
Eumeces septentrionalis obtasirostris. If this is incorrectly identified, the known overlap is
less than two hundred miles north and south.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
289
reason for maintaining them as distinct species. Should intergrada-
tion occur I would expect it to occur somewhere in southern Nuevo
Leon.
The second loreal in bn vilineatus is usually longer, and the
frontoparietals longer than in tetragrammus; the legs average
slightly shorter, proportionally, to the axilla to groin distance.
This species is apparently much less shy than tetragrammus.
Most of the specimens 1 have collected have been seen moving about
in daytime. At Helotes the specimens were usually seen along the
small gullies which empty into Helotes creek. They would take
refuge in masses of leaves or brush and were usually near pools of
water. At Alpine, in Brewster county, they were captured from
piles of rotting brush along the edge of a tiny stream fed by a
spring. Some escaped by entering the water, diving and entering
piles of brush which were in the water. Specimens captured near
Sabinas Hidalgo in Nuevo Leon were in rotting piles of brush,
formerly the "nests" of pack rats. At Somerset, Atascosa county,
Texas, the species was observed about large plants of Opuntia and
some were captured with the assistance of Mr. A. J. Kirn by re-
moving the large spreading cacti and digging about among the roots.
Distribution. The species occurs through southern Texas west
of 97° east long., and south of 31° 30' north lat., and through the
northern part of Nuevo Leon, and probably also Tamaulipas and
Coahuila and eastern Chihuahua.
Fin. 43. Distribution of Eumeces brevilineatus Cope, in Texas
and Mexico.
19—1123
290 The University Science Bulletin
A single record for Caddo Co., central southern Oklahoma, by
Ortenburger (1926) has not been verified by me, but it is possible
that these records are based on Eumeces septentrionalis obtusirostris
Bocourt. Whether these specimens are lost or not I cannot say.
They were evidently not in the National Museum in August, 1933.
The Nuevo Leon specimens were collected 31 miles south of Sabinas
Hidalgo (3 specimens), and four miles west of Sabinas Hidalgo
(1 specimen).
Locality records:
Texas :
Brewster Co.: 3 miles southwest of Alpine (K.U. 5); Chisos Mts. (K.U.
1); Glass Mts., 5 mi. north of Marathon (K. U. 1); East Ranger
Canon, Alpine (Cornell 1) ; Paisano, 5,300 ft. (Bailey, 1905).
Jeff Davis Co.: Cherry Canon, Davis Mts. (Mich. 3) (M.C.Z. 1).
Valverde Co.: Near mouth of Devils river (K.U. D ; 10 miles north
of Comstock (Cornell 1).
Dimmit Co.: Near Carrizo Springs (K.U. 2).
Atascosa Co.: Near Benton (K.U. 1).
Jim Wells Co.: Nueces river, near Casablanca (K.U. 2).
Travis Co.: Near Austin (K.U. 1).
Bexar Co.: Helotes (U.S.N.M. 2 Cotypes) (A.N.S.P. 2 Cotypes);
Helotes, 20 mi. NW San Antonio (Cornell 6) (Baylor 6) (K.U. 2) ;
Somerset (K.U. 1); San Antonio (K.U. 1) (Taylor Coll. 1); near
San Antonio (A.M.N.H. 4); Medina river, San Antonio (Cornell 1).
Comal Co.: New Braunfels (K.U. 2).
McCulloch Co.: Brady Creek (Taylor-Smith 2).
Hays Co.: San Marcos (A.M.N.H. 4) (Mich. 1) (Field 1) (Baylor 2).
Kendall Co.: Boerne State Park (Cornell 1); Boerne (Strecker, 1926).
Wilson Co.: Cibolo creek (Baylor 6) ; C. A. Goeth Ranch (Baylor 3).
Tom Green Co.: Fort Concho (A.N.S.P. 3).
McLennan Co.: (Field 1) ; Bluff creek (Baylor 10) ; Tonkaway creek
(Baylor 13) Rock creek (Baylor 1).
Burnet Co.: Morgan creek (Field 1); White Eagle Copper Mine (Bay-
lor 1).
Unidentified locality : Texas (M.C.Z. 2).
Nuevo Leon: Four mi. west Sabinas Hidalgo (Taylor-Smith 1); 31 miles
south of Sabinas Hidalgo (Taylor-Smith 3).
Eumeces callicephalus Bocourt
(Plate 23; Figs. 44, 45)
SYNONYMY
1879. Eumeces cailicephalus Bocourt. Miss. Sci. Mexique et Cent. Amer., Liv. 6, 1879, pp.
431-433, PI. XXII D, figs. 2, 2a, 2b, 2c, and PI. XXII E, fig. 2 (type description;
type locality, Guanajuato, Mexico, Duges Coll.); Cope, Proc. Amer. Phil. Soc, XXII,
Jan. to Oct., 1885, p. 170 (Key); Giinther, Biol. Cent. Amer., Rept., Batr., (1885-
1902), 1885, Oct., p. 431; Boulenger, Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 378 (Ciudad,
Forrer Coll.); Cope, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 32, 1887, p. 46; Cope, Ann. Rept,
U. S. Nat. Mus., 1898 (1900), p. 628 (key); Taylor, Uni. Kansas Sci. Bull., XIX,
Nov., 1929, pp. 67-69 (Huachuca Mts., Arizona; first report for U. S.).
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 291
1882. Eumeces fasciatus (part.) Yarrow. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, 1882, p. 12 (speci-
men from Gila river, Arizona); Burt, Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. Univ. Michigan, No.
201, 1929, p. 4.
1897. Plesthiodon callicephalum Duges. La Naturaleza, (2), II, 1896, (1897), pp. 480 and
l-::.
?1900. Eumeces quinquclineatus (part.) Cope. Ann. Rept. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1898 (1900), p.
639 (specimens from Gila river, Arizona, No. 9231).
71900. Eumeces guttulatus (part.) Cope. Ann. Rept. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1898 (1900), p. 646
(specimen from Gila river, Arizona; No. 0231).
1922. Eumeces obsoletus (part.) Van Denburgh. Occ. Papers California Acad. Sci., X, Vol.
I, Liz., 1922, p. 592 (young specimens; Huachuca Mts.).
History. Apparently the earliest specimen (or specimens) of this
species was collected by Dr. C. G. Newberry in 1873, along the
Gila river, Arizona ; at least there is a small specimen in rather bad
state still listed under Cat. No. 9231 in the U. S. National Museum.
The original listing of this number by Yarrow (1882) gave three
specimens, all identified as Eumeces fasciatus, collected by Dr. C.
G. Newberry, Gila river, Arizona. Cope (1900, p. 639) first lists
No. 9231 under Eumeces quinquelineatus, "3 spec. Gila river, Ari-
zona; Dr. C. G. Newberry, collector," and later (p. 646) under
Eumeces guttulatus, "Gila river Arizona, 1 spec. Dr. C. G. New-
berry, collector." Burt (1929) has recently examined the (appar-
ently) sole remaining specimen of the original lot and incorrectly
identified it as Eumeces fasciatus.
The discovery of the type specimen of this species was made by
Dr. Alfredo Duges near Guanajuato, Mexico, who sent a specimen
to the Paris Museum, prior to 1879. It was carefully described by
Bocourt (1879) in the "Mission Scientifique au Mexique." He noted
that the species shows certain similarities to Eumeces sumichrasti.
There is, however, no close relationship between them, as they be-
long apparently to widely differing groups. Mr. Forrer collected a
specimen for the British Museum in Ciudad, Mexico (presumably
one of three villages of this name in Durango, rather than Sinaloa),
which is described in Boulenger's Catalogue of Lizards, 1887. In
1928 I found and recognized the species in the Huachuca Mountains
in southeastern Arizona, and subsequently a specimen, which is now
in the Museum of the University of Michigan, was collected there
by H. K. Gloyd.
Two specimens in the California Academy of Sciences from the
Huachuca Mountains (mentioned by Van Denburgh, 1922, as young
obsoletus) ; one specimen in the Field Museum, Chicago, collected
at Tombstone, Ariz., a specimen in the Harvard Museum from
Madera, Chihuahua, Mexico; and four specimens in the Alfredo
Duges Museum, Guanajuato, represent the material I have had
available for study besides specimens collected by myself.
292
The University Science Bulletin
Diagnosis. A medium-sized species probably not reaching a body
length greater than 70 mm. (largest specimen known 65 mm.) ;
dorsolateral and lateral light lines present which may disappear or
become obsolete before the middle of the body is reached; a short
median light line forking on the nuchal ; a dark, blackish or brown-
ish lateral stripe ; limbs fail to touch when adpressed, even in young ;
scales from parietals to above anus, 56 to 59; scale rows on the
middle of the body, 28, rarely 26; two postmentals; postnasal pre-
sent or absent (usually absent in Arizona specimens) ; subcaudals
very slightly widened; seven upper labials, the last largest or equal
to sixth; prefrontals in contact.
Fig. 44. Eumeces ccdlicephalus Bocourt. K.U. No. 6474, Ash Canon,
Huachuca Mts., Arizona. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of
head. Actual head length, 10 mm.; width, 8.5 mm.
Description of the species. (From M.C.Z. No. 15928, Madera,
Chihuahua, Mexico.) The portion of the rostral visible above,
large, nearly equal to the area of the frontonasal ; supranasals large,
separating the frontonasal from the rostral; the frontonasal hex-
agonal, somewhat broader than long, touching the anterior loreal;
prefrontals only slightly smaller than the frontonasal, forming a
broad median suture; frontal moderate in size, about equal in
length to its distance from the tip of the snout; the sides very
straight, converging somewhat, the anterior part forming an obtuse
angle, the posterior a right angle (posterior tip of the frontal ab-
normally segmented transversely) ; frontoparietals pentagonal, form-
ing a median suture; interparietal small, broadly enclosed behind
by the large parietals; two pairs of nuchals, both rather narrow, but
transversely elongate; nasal small, the nostril large, the anterior
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 293
part of the scale much larger than the posterior part, when postnasal
is present; postnasal distinct (absenl sometimes in more northern
specimens), touching two labials and supranasals; anterior loreal
much higher and narrower than the second, the two forming equal
sutures with the prefrontal; second loreal longer than high, touching
three (or two) labials below, separated from the first supraocular;
two presuboculars. the upper largest; four supraoculars, the two
anterior (or three) touching the frontal; eight superciliaries, the
anterior large, forming a suture with the prefrontal equal to that of
the first supraocular; one or two small preoculars and two post-
oculars; upper palpebral scales transparent, in contact with super-
ciliaries (at least five); enlarged >eales on lower eyelid separated
from the subocular by twro or three series of small granular scales;
four postsuboculars; seven upper labials, four preceding the sub-
ocular labial, all more or less of equal height and seeming to differ
little in size, the seventh larger than the sixth (frequently about
equal) ; primary temporal as large as sixth labial, more or less
rectangular, distinctly less than half the size of the elongate upper
secondary temporal and also forming a distinct suture with the
lower secondary temporal ; latter relatively large, as large or larger
than seventh labial, and about one third of its bulk extending be-
hind the seventh labial (usually about one half or two thirds) ;
tertiary temporal not large or well differentiated, separated from the
auricular opening by a large preauricular scale; an elongate post-
labial following the seventh labial, lies below the lower secondary
temporal and is separated from ear by two tiny preauricular scales;
two well-defined auricular lobules. Six lower labials, last very
large; two postmentals, the anterior small, touching only the first
labial; mental with a much longer labial border than the rostral;
three pairs of chinshields, the anterior pair in contact; the postgenial
scale somewhat enlarged, bordered internally by a narrow, elongate
scale.
The auricular opening moderate, surrounded by about 18 scales;
32 scales about neck immediately behind the ear; 29 about con-
stricted part of the neck; 34 about body in axillary region; 28 about
middle of body and 21 about base of tail; the dorsal scales are not or
but slightly larger than laterals and are practically parallel on sides
save in axillary region and in groin. Scales on side of neck, above
and behind insertion of the arm, on side and in groin, with one or
two small pits; on the sides these are less distinct but appear to
be absent elsewhere; the preanal scales are relatively small, but
294 The University Science Bulletin
the median pair distinctly enlarged, the three on each side smaller;
the outer scales overlap inner; the median ventral subcaudal scales
slightly larger than the adjoining rows; those under regenerated part
of tail are, however, distinctly widened; a scale at the posterior
corner of anus is large and shows a slight raised area (present only
in males) ; a very small group of small scales in the axilla.
Arm small; brought forward it fails to reach eye; palm with
several enlarged tubercles and a few intercalated smaller granules;
a prominent tubercle on wrist behind base of the fifth finger;
lamellar formula for fingers: 5; 8; 11; 11; 7; heel bordered by five
larger tubercular scales; sole with rather uniformly small tubercles,
a single larger one posteriorly; lamellar formula for toes: 6; 10;
12; 15; 11. Scales under tail, 100.
Color. Above, generally olive-brown, the scales with a more olive
center, the edges bordered with brown; a dim line begins medially
between shoulders and passes forward to the nuchals; here two
lines begin and run forward along the edges of the frontal and later
unite on the rostral; these lines are very narrow; the dorsolateral
light line begins on the first superciliary and runs back across the
sides of the neck and along the sides where it follows the inner half
of the fourth lateral scale row; it is separated from its fellow by
six complete scale rows; it can usually be traced dimly to the tail;
a light lateral line runs from rostral along the upper edge of the
posterior labials to the upper edge of the ear; below this line
posteriorly, labials dark; the lateral line continues from middle part
of the ear above arm to groin; between the two light lines is a deep
chocolate to blackish-brown stripe beginning on snout, passing back
to base of the tail where it ceases; the stripe on the side is two
whole- and two half-scale rows wide, narrowing greatly above inser-
tion of the hind limb; lower lips and chin, underside of limbs and
anal plates light cream to white (alcohol), while the remainder of
the sides and belly is bluish-gray, becoming somewhat brownish be-
low lateral stripe; head dark brown and the light lines on neck
bordered Math the same color. The light lines on neck are prominent
but become less prominent posteriorly.
Variation. The small number of specimens fail to give any com-
plete picture of the variation, but the Arizona specimens seem to
differ in the absence usually of a postnasal (absent seven times;
present on both sides once; on one side once, while the three Mexican
specimens have it present on both sides ) . They differ, too, in having
a narrower lateral brown stripe, one and one half to two scales wide,
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
295
•-
^
CN
OC
X
11C
CO
ijx
Woe
oc
1>
•IC
r-
cc
1^
CN
ec
C3
cn
r-
r-
CN
•— '
D
j:
—
U
s
#
00
pq
CN
1C
CO
CO
0
•O
CN
■t
ec
rH
•-H
ct>
0
rH
,.
10
IC
■*
T—
H
WS
ec
■*
cc
ec
00
ec
O
iC
X
*E
Tf
CN
<
c
r'S
LC
t>
X
0
■+->
to .
Wee
C
t^
1-
t^
00
UC
CN
iC
X
-£-2
L-
•"
CN
t^
*" '
l§
t-i -
" CC
CJ
cog
*
ec
t>
rH
0 =
1— t -C
• x
q
OC
ec
t^
X
-X
CN
ec
r. ^
B
oc
r-
CN
1-1
^~
.« 3
«w
t- -
■4-3
■ CT
CM
*
OC
oc
r-
t^
X
c
CN
X
ec
<2
■ X
p
UC
OC
1—
CN
•^
r-<
■2
o
#^ tft
O
RS
OC
10
CN
IO
CN
— r;
eg
OC
Tf
c
CN
00
0
[^
CC
I--
c
■S a
o>
10
c
CN
CC
rH
' — 1
r-
Cv -^
*—
~ —
5s
-s
K 5
C2
sioc
t~-
ecK
I-
/
CN
0
O
t>
CC
X
c>
x 5
■*«
ir.
CC
"
raU
CO
IS
en
CO
oc
*
oc
a
c
■*
0
0 >>
X a>
E
s
E-i
IC
t^
^H
»-l
CN
§
nCh
<*H
2c
KC
CN
LC
< 6
O
cc
r—
ec
oc
c:
N
CN
X
_ 0)
%
ec
O
cc
1-1
c
S- 3 •
c ^ -
<L>
<— —
- ^ u
a
&'S
cn
CN
CN
eu 03 •-
<D
MS
■<*
CN
ec
oe
c
t>
LC
fc*
ec
CN
cc
CN
-■-' Q ...
Tfi
"* tS
^o
LC
^ ~ G
ifl
C
C
c
c
t~
cc
O
£
ec
CN
t
CN
«-°
°J3 »
— v. a
^< >■
-H
,. eo
rS
• >o
ut- «
»HI O
2 C
0 eo rH
t, CO 'V
c t^ cc
~
-y-O
^
Jc :
4:
a
D
C
-
7
i
, s g 0
Z
>
"a
u
!
i
[ —
1—
1
c
a
c
ccT
c
C
c
"e
c
■S
C.
1 -
a r —
s 0.
-*-
-
C
C
1 j
D a
s
1 -," >-* V'
—
■c
6
0 _
r a
-
a
* H— >th'
c
•-
C
> ~
C
&.
c
c
<i
£
£■
■;
A
. £
1 c
1 V
! <
K
<
0
E-
1 c
< &
e
c
«
296 The University Science Bulletin
with the lateral and dorsolateral stripes missing from the posterior
part of the body even in young specimens, and the lines, where
present, wider; the frontonasal is generally smaller and is occa-
sionally (twice) separated from both anterior loreals, and in three
cases from one; in four cases they touch on both sides as in the
Mexican specimen described.
Scale rows in middle of body vary from 26 to 28, 28 appearing 9
times, 27 once and 26 twice; the number of nuchals is variable:
1-1 is the typical number in the northern specimens, 1-2 and 2-2
occasionally occurring. In all specimens examined, save the one
described, the three anterior supraoculars touch the frontal. The
parietals usually enclose the interparietal, save in one case a small
intercalated scale separates them, and in three others the inter-
parietal. In the younger specimens the adpressed limbs are in
contact; in adults they are narrowly separated in males, widely so
in females.
The distinctness of the lines in the Chihuahua specimen here
described seems to differ from the type as well as from Arizona
specimens. A young specimen from the Huachuca Mountains has
the light lines no more distinct than the adults from the same region.
The tails of the young are bright blue to ultramarine and the color
is retained until about half grown. The adults of the Arizona speci-
mens are more grayish than Mexican specimens.
In the Alfredo Duges Museum, Guanajuato, are four specimens
labelled "Plestiodon callicephalus San Bias, L. Boc." I was unable
to examine the specimens save through their container. My in-
ability to discern all the characters must leave their identity in
doubt, although a part of them are certainly of this species.
Remarks. The specimens which I collected in Ash Canon, Hua-
chuca Mountains, Cochise Co., Arizona, were taken at approxi-
mately 6,000 feet elevation. Three were captured by overturning
small, flat stones exposed to the sun. Another specimen was found
running over stones in a tiny stream that trickled at the bottom of
the canon at this elevation. A very young specimen was taken
about 1,000 feet lower on the edge of a small flat among weeds and
grass.
The stomach contents show the typical food consisting of insects,
with a predominance of small Coleoptera, and occasional dipterids
and blattids.
The specimen described differs from both the Arizona and Gua-
najuato specimens in having somewhat narrower dorsolateral lines,
and in having distinctly wider brown lateral stripes. They agree in
Taylor: The < 1km s Ei mm es
297
the general color pattern and in most of the details of squamation.
One of the specimens in the Alfredo Duges Museum, and two in
Philadelphia, have the parietal- separated.
Probably the mosl significant character is thai the Lower secon-
dary temporal extends more of its area behind the vertical line
drawn from posterior edge >^\ the last labial than other specie-.
Distribution. This species is a very wide-ranging one. occurring
as it doe- along the southern part of Arizona, and extending south
to the state of Michoacan, Mexico. It is to be found on both sides
of the Sierra Madre, at least in the more northern part of its range.
Records are available for Arizona, in the United States, and Chi-
huahua. Durango (probably), Zacatecas, Guanajuato and Micho-
acan, in Mexico. Specimens have been taken within three miles of
the northern boundary of Sonora in the Huachuca Mountains,
Arizona.
Most of the records suggest that the species is a highland form,
but in the state of Arizona the records for Tombstone and Gila
river show that it is not necessarily confined to highland-.
Fig. 15. Distribution of Eumeces callicephalus Bocourt, in
Arizona and Mexico.
298 The University Science Bulletin
Locality records:
Arizona: Gila river (U.S.N. M. 1, Newberry Coll.).
Cochise Co.: Huachuca Mts. (C.A.S. 2, Slevin Coll.); Ash Canon,
Huachuca Mts. (K.U. 5, Taylor. Wright and Lunceford Colls.) ;
Ramsey Canon, Huachuca Mts. (Mich. 1, Gloyd Coll.) ; Tombstone
(Field 1, Willard Coll.); Carr Canon, Huachuca Mts. (A.N.S.P. 1,
Hebard and Rehn Colls.).
Santa Cruz Co.: Penablanca Canon, Tumacacori Mts. (A.M.N .H. 1).
Chihuahua: Madera (M.C.Z. 1, Brownlee Coll.).
Durango: Ciudad (B.M. 1, Forrer Coll.).
Zacatecas: Mesquital del Oro (B.M. 1. Buller Coll.).
Guanajuato: Guanajuato (Bocourt; type locality; Duges Coll.) (A.N.S.P. 2)
(Duges, 1897).
Michoacan: Michoacan (Duges, 1897).
Nayarit: 3 mi. west Tepic (E.H.T. 1, Taylor Coll.).
Eumeces tetragrammus (Baird)
(Fig. 46, Distribution)
SYNONYMY
1858. Plestiodon tetragrammus Baird. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sei. Phila., 1858, p. 256 (type
description; type locality Lower Rio Grande; type number 3124 U.S.N.M.); Baird,
U. S. and Mexican Boundary Surv., Rept. of Bound., Vol. 2, pt. 2, 1859, pp. 12, 13
(Salado river, Doctor Kennedy; and Matamoros, Mex., Lt. Couch.); Garman, Bull.
Essex Inst., XVI, Jan. 9, 1884. p. 10; Stejneger and Barbour, Check List N. Amer.
Amph. Rept., 1917, p. 71; Pratt. Vert. Anim. U. S., 1923, p. 207.
1875. Eumeces tegragrammus Cope. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, 1875, p. 45; Boulenger,
Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus.. III. 1887. pp. 375-37G; Cope, Ann. Rept. U. S. Nat. Mus.,
1898 (1900), p. 660 (fig. 134. probably not of this species; Cook and Cameron coun-
ties, Tex.); Brown, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.. 1903, p. 553 (restricted to the Texas
region) ; Strecker, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, XXI, 1908, p. 49 (Refugio, Refugio
Co., Tex.); Baylor Uni. Bull. XII. No. 1, 1909 (Burnett Co., Tex.'); Ditmars, The
Reptile Book, 1915, p. 199; Stejneger and Barbour, Check List N. Amer. Amph.
Rept., 2d Ed., 1923, p. 77; Strecker and Williams, Cont. Baylor Uni. Mus., No. 12,
Dec, 1927, p. 14 (Granite and Burnett counties, Tex.); Stejneger and Barbour, Check
List N. Amer. Amph. Rept., 3d Ed.. 1933, p. 83.
History. The types, originally twelve (or more) in number, were
collected in Matamoros, Mexico, partly by Doctor Berlandier, and
partly by Lieutenant Darius Nash Couch, who conducted an expedi-
tion, surveying a route for a Pacific railway in northern Mexico.
Lieutenant Nash purchased a collection from Doctor Luis Ber-
landier, which probably contained some of the types, and these with
his own collections were sent to the Smithsonian Institution in
Washington. Spencer Baird described the species in 1858, listing
as the type, No. 3124, which number was applied to all the speci-
mens (at least twelve originally). Doctor Kennerly, who was with
Lieut. Col. W. H. Emory on the Mexican Boundary Survey, later
collected a specimen "Below Salado river" in northern Mexico.
Apparently no further specimens were collected until a much
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 299
later date when specimens collected by G. H. Ragsdale and C. K.
Worthen in Cook and Cameron counties, Texas, respectively, were
sent to the National Museum.
In 1900 Cope mentions that some of the specimens from Mata-
moros, Mexico, are "lustrous black" and designates two specimens
(No. 3120) as the types of a variety funebrosus. Since that time
very few specimens of tetragrammus have been found. There is a
single specimen in the American Museum of Natural History, one
in the Field Museum, two in the Museum of the University of
Michigan, and eight, which I collected in Starr and Cameron
counties, Texas, are in the Kansas University Museum. Strecker
(see synonymy) reports four specimens, three of which are presum-
ably at Baylor University, Texas. One specimen, reported by
Strecker from Brewster county, is, in fact, Eumeces septentrionalis
obtusirostris (Bocourt) (now No. 58337 U.S.N.M.). One additional
specimen from Brule, Texas, is in the U. S. National Museum.
Two specimens in the British Museum from Tampico, Mexico,
appear to belong to this species. Mr. H. W. Parker has furnished
me with an excellent photograph and a drawing of the head of one
of these specimens, and on these I have essayed an identification.
The type series, U.S.N. M. No. 3124, consists at this date (Aug.,
1933) of a series of eleven specimens, five of which are in fair con-
dition, somewhat discolored by preservative, but showing more or
less of the markings; the remainder of the series is darker, due, I
believe, to some unusual preservative. Some of the specimens are
a deep lavender, approaching black in color. It is probable that
part of this series are types of the var. funebrosus Cope. This series
bears the catalogue entry "Matamoras Tamaulipas, Lt. B. Couch,
collector, 12 specimens." An old specimen in the U. S. National
Museum, No. 9233, in bad state, without data, appearing to be of
this species, may be the missing twelfth specimen.
I am designating one of the series (specimen measuring 69 mm.
snout to vent; tail 95 mm.) numbered by me 3124A, and designated
"lectotype" (engraved on back of tag) as the lectotype. This speci-
men is in good condition, but is somewhat discolored and a few of
the scales are missing from the sides and back.
Cope (1900, fig. 134) gives a drawing of a specimen (number
15543 U.S.N.M., a specimen no longer extant) which appears to be
a figure of a specimen of Eumeces septentrionalis obtusirostris
Bocourt. It shows a divided mental (sometimes present in tetra-
grammus), one nuchal instead of the typical two or three, and the
300 The University Science Bulletin
seventh labial separated from the ear by one instead of two pairs
of postlabials.
Diagnosis. A medium-sized species characterized by narrow dor-
solateral light lines separated by six scale rows which arise on the
anterior supraocular and continue to base of tail (absent or dim in
old adult males) ; a lateral line begins on anterior labials, follows
along their upper edges, passes through middle of ear and continues
on side to groin; a pair of curved lines on head arising on the
rostral, terminating on the frontoparietals. Postmental single or
divided; no postnasal; parietals do not enclose interparietal; two
or three pairs of nuchals; seven upper labials, the last largest; 26 or
28 scale rows; limbs touch when adpressed in young, separated
about five millimeters in adults.
Description of species (from K.U. No. 7756, collected 20 miles
north of Brownsville, Cameron Co., Texas, by E. H. Taylor; the
specimen is an adult male, in alcohol). Portion of the rostral ap-
pearing above, not extensive, somewhat less than half the area of
the frontonasal; supranasals moderately large, forming a median
suture; frontonasals much broader than long, separated narrowly
from the frontal, broadly in contact laterally with the anterior
loreal; prefrontals rather large, forming sutures with the fronto-
nasal, frontal, second loreal, first supraocular, first superciliary, and
first loreal, the lengths of the sutures varying in the order named.
Frontal relatively narrow, elongate, considerably longer than its
distance from the end of the snout, forming a slightly acute angle
anteriorly, and an obtuse angle posteriorly; frontoparietals pentag-
onal, slightly smaller than the prefrontals, forming a broad median
suture; interparietal small, of about same area as a frontoparietal,
in contact with first pair of nuchals; parietals rather short, their
posterior edges forming a gentle curve; two pairs of nuchals, the
anterior wider longitudinally, and shorter transversely than the
posterior.
Nasal moderate, divided, the anterior part about equal to the area
of the posterior with the nostril ; anterior loreal higher than posterior,
higher than wide; posterior loreal much longer than high, somewhat
angular posteriorly; eight superciliaries, the anterior more than
double the size of the posterior; four supraoculars, three touching
the frontal; two presuboculars, four postsuboculars; a small pre-
ocular followed by a small scale ; most of the upper palpebral scales
directly in contact with the superciliaries; five elongate, enlarged
scales on the eyelid, separated from the subocular by two or three
rows of granular scales; two very small postoculars.
Taylor: The Genus Ki mixes 301
Primary temporal rectangular, touching the large fan-shaped lower
secondary; upper secondary temporal elongate, widened posteriorly;
tertiary temporal large, touching the upper secondary; seven upper
labials, four preceding the subocular, the first slightly larger, and
distinctly higher than the three succeeding scales; subocular longer
than high; last labial distinctly larger than the sixth, separated
from the auricular opening by (usually ) two pairs of scales (each
pair sometimes fusing) ; mental very large, having a labial border
equal to rostral and the first upper labials; post-mental single, large;
three pairs of chinshields, the second pair largest, the first pair in
contact; postgenial scale large, bordered on its inner side by a scale
much longer than wide. Six lower labials, five on right side, the
last greatly elongated. Nineteen or twenty scales around the ear;
two auricular lobules, small and inconspicuous.
Lateral scale rows parallel; fifty-six scales in a dorsal row be-
tween parietals and a point above the anus ; the neck scales follow-
ing the nuchals are transversely widened ; dorsal body scales not or
but slightly larger than laterals ; scale rows, 29 behind ear ; 27 about
constricted portion of neck; 30 rows about axillary region, 27 rows
about middle of body, and 21 about the base of the tail; six preanals,
the median relatively small, but larger than the outer scales which
overlap the inner; subcaudals only very slightly widened (103 in
specimen with complete tail, K.U. 7754). The lateral postanal
scute is not or but slightly differentiated. Limbs well-developed,
failing to touch, when adpressed, by a distance equal to two scale-
lengths; fourteen scales about the insertion of the arm. Outer
wrist tubercle well developed; a group of enlarged palmar tubercles,
the three anterior largest. Lamellar formula for fingers : 5 ; 8 ; 11 ;
11; 8. Sixteen scales about insertion of hind limb; two prominent
median heel tubercles, with another pair anterior to and slightly
lateral to these ; other granules on feet somewhat tubercular, slightly
imbricate. Lamellar formula for toes: 6; 8; 12; 16; 10. The
terminal lamellae are not tightly bound about the base of the claws;
toes surrounded by two rows of scales only, a dorsal series and the
ventral lamellar series. There is a very much reduced area of
granular scales in the axilla.
Color. Above olive-brown, each scale being slightly darker on
its anterior third; head yellowish-brown (reddish in life) ; a pair of
dim dorsolateral cream or tan lines begin on the supraocular and are
traceable to the tail, separated by six scale rows; a lateral cream
line is evident behind the ear (arises on the rostral or first labial in
302
The University Science Bulletin
the young) and can be traced to the groin; between this and the
dorsolateral line is a brownish stripe which extends from eye to
groin; two lines originate on the rostral, curve back along the sides
of the frontal and terminate on the frontoparietals. Chin, neck and
breast immaculate cream, as are the undersides of the limbs; ab-
domen grayish.
Table of Measurements of Eumeces tetragrammus Baird
Museum
Number**
Sex
K.U.
7756
d"
K.U.
7757
d1
U.S.N.M.
3124*
A.M.N.H.
8160
Mich.
54050
K.U.
7754
<?
K.U.
7747
o"
K.U.
7755
9
Mich.
69252
>g-
U.S.N.M.
78581
yg-
Snout to vent. . .
Tail
71
71
69
95f
22
5
13
34
9
10
10
14
20
8
67
64
62
109.5
23
4.5
11.2
34
9.7
10.2
10.2
15
22
7.2
58
54
52
34
39
Snout to fore-
limb
Snout to eye. . . .
26
5.2
14
39
11
12.2
12
16.5
24
8
24
5.2
13
36
11
11
13
16.5
22
8
23
19
22
34
8.5
9
9
12
17
6
17
3.5
9.2
28
8
9
8
12
17
6
IS
12.2
Axilla to groin . .
Width of head . .
34
8
9.3
10
13
20
10
38
9.S
10.8
10
13
18
7
27
8
9.2
9
13
20
7
19
Length of head . .
Width of body. .
Hind leg
Longest tos
9
11
4.8
* Lectotype. t Broken.
** Numbers 7756, 7757, 54050, 7754, 7755 are from near Brownsville, Cameron Co., Texas;
3124, Matamoros, Mexico; 8160, Padre Island, Cameron Co., Texas; 7747, Arroyo El Salado
near Rio Grande City, Starr Co., Texas; 69252 San Jose, Mexico; 78581, Brule, Rio Grande,
Texas.
Variation. Twenty-five specimens have been examined, includ-
ing the type series. The following scale variations occur: Parietals
never enclose the interparietal; frontonasal touches frontal six
times, separated 19 times; invariably four supraoculars, with three
touching the frontal; the number of upper labials 7-7 save in one
case, where the third and fourth are joined on the left side; the
seventh labial is the largest; lower labials six; scales about ear
13 to 16; nuchals 1-1, two times; 2-2, sixteen times; 2-3, five times,
and 3-3, two times. The mental is single in 21 cases, double in 4
(these latter all in the type series from Matamoros, Mexico).
Postnasal invariably absent.
Scales from occiput to above anus vary from 53 to 59 ; the highest
and lowest numbers occur only once; 54, seven times; 55, two times;
56, five times; 57, three times; 58, five times. The scale rows about
the neck are 28 or 30, the lower number most frequent; scales about
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
303
the middle of the body, 26 to 28; 2(3, occurs eight times; 27, two
times; and 28, fourteen times. The superciliaries wiry from five to
eight; presuboculars two, the postsuboculars four. One specimen
has the frontal transversely segmented. The markings are much
more distinct in the young. In a young specimen iK.U. 12746)
the dorsolateral and lateral lines are greenish, showing metallic
glints. The curved head lines terminate on the frontoparietals; on
the neck the dorsolateral line follows the third scale row. then for a
time it borders the third and fourth, and through the latter half of
the body follows only the fourth row; the dorsolateral line may or
may not join the curved head lines anteriorly. The dorsal colora-
tion of the young is much darker than in adults. It is usually
blackish-brown with minute metallic flecks. In no specimens I
have examined do the curved head lines extend back and form a
union. The tail is blue in the young and the abdominal region is
usually a light greenish-blue in life.
Remarks. I have usually found this species when tearing up the
large "nests" of pack rats. They appear to be especially secretive.
I have never observed a specimen moving about above ground. It
may probably be that the species is somewhat nocturnal.
Fig. 46. Distribution of Eumeces tetragrammus (Baird), in
Texas and Mexico.
304 The University Science Bulletin
The stomach contents examined showed a large percentage of
arachnid food. One specimen had several insect egg cases, belong-
ing to an undetermined species, probably a blattid.
Distribution. The locality data available shows this species
occupying a territory in southern Texas and Tamaulipas. The most
northern (unquestioned) record is Dilley. Tex.; the most southern,
Tampico, Vera Cruz, a north-south range of about 500 miles.
Locality records:
Texas :
Cameron Co.: Brownsville (U.S.N. M. 1); 20 miles north of Brownsville
(K.U. 5) (Mich. 1) (Field 1); Padre Island (A.M.N.H. 1).
Starr Co.: Arroyo El Salado, near Rio Grande City (K.U. 1); Arroyo
Los Olmos, 3 mi. SE Rio Grande City (Taylor-Smith 1).
Refugio Co.: Near Refugio (Strecker 1).
Burnett Co.: Honey Creek (Strecker 1).
Frio Co.: Near Dilley (K.U. 1).
Tamaulipas, Mexico: Matamoros (U.S.N.M. Types 11); San Jose (Mich. 1);
Hacienda La Clementina, near Forlon, 68 mi. S, Ciudad Victoria (Smith-
Dunkle 1).
Vera Cruz: Tampico (British Mus. 2).
OBSOLETUS GROUP
To this group I assign a single American species, Eumeces ob-
soletus (Baird and Girard), ranging throughout the southwest-
ern United States and northern Mexico, and three Asiatic forms,
Eumeces chinensis chinensis, E. chinensis pulcher and E. kishinouyei.
The group is characterized by the deep black coloration of the
young, with light body lines, or lacking all body lines and with a
series of white or cream spots on the scales of the head. Tail a
brilliant azure blue.
Adults lose the uniform black and blue color and become olive,
with a blackish area on each scale, the areas sometimes arranged
in rows, forming indistinct lines.
Scales on sides of body in diagonal rows (obsoletus, usually) or
parallel (in Asiatic forms) ; postnasal present or absent; seven or
eight upper labials; four supraoculars; scale rows 25-30; legs long,
overlapping, usually, in adults.
Two postmentals (rarely single) ; parietals not enclosing inter-
parietal; one pair of nuchals usually; postgenial large, bordered by
a scale longer than wide; two or three supraoculars touch frontal.
I believe that the closest relative of this group will be found in the
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 305
Fasciatys group, but I cannot definitely point out one member of
that group which represents a closer approach than another. The
variation in the relationship of the supraoculars to the frontal; the
variation in the postnasal; and the superimposed reddish spotting
on the sides of the body, are characters which, together with many
others, cause nie to place these American and Chinese forms to-
gether.
Key to the Species of the Obsoletts Group
A. Body lacking light lines in young and adult; the young with white or cream spots
on the head scales. (Central and southwestern United states, and Mexico).
Eumeces obsoletus (Baird and Girard), page 305
AA. Body with well-defined lines in young and adults.
B. A seven-lined form; the median light line bifurcating, and appearing dimly
on the head; the sublateral more or less broken into spots anteriorly. Very
large insular form; maximum size, 164 mm.: the limbs broadly overlapping;
24-26 scale rows; 17 lamellae under fourth toe; two or three pairs of nuchals;
normally a postnasal; three (occasionally two) supraoculars normally touch
frontal; two postmentals ; dorsal and lateral scales of adults usually showing
striae. (Yaeyama and Miyaka groups of Riu Kiu Islands).
Eumeces kishinouyei Stejneger, page 334
BB. Five-lined forms, showing no evidence of forking lines on head or striations
on scales; smaller forms, maximum size, 127 mm.; normally no postnasal.
C. Three (normally) supraoculars touch frontal ; dorsolateral light lines
broken; six (normally) upper labials; adult females retain the juvenile
color pattern. (Northern central China).
Eumeces chinensis pulcher (Dumeril and Bibron), page 328
CC. Normally two supraoculars touch frontal; dorsolateral light line con-
tinuous; lateral light line broken into spots, with other light spots above
and below it : adult females lose juvenile color pattern. (Southern
central China) Eumeces chiru rests chinensis (Gray), page 320
Eumeces obsoletus (Baird and Girard)
(Plate 24; Figs. 47, 48)
SYNONYMY
1852. Plestiodon obsoletum Baird and Girard. Proc. Acad. Sci. Phila., VI, 1852, p. 129
(type description; type locality, Valley of the Rio San Pedro of the Rio Grande del
Norte) ; Hallowell, Reptiles in Sitgreaves' Rept. of an Exped. down the Zuni and
Colorado rivers, 1853, pp. Ill, 112 (complete description of type) ; Hallowell, Proc.
Acad. Sci. Phila., 1856, p. 239 (Kansas specimens); Baird, U. S. and Mexican
Boundary Survey, Reptiles of the Boundary, Vol. 2, pt. 2, 1859, p. 12, pi. XXV,
figs. 9-16 (obsoletus); Baird, Expl. and Survey for a R. R. Route to Pacific Ocean,
1859, p. 39 ("Coal Creek, Arkansas"); Garman, Bull. Essex Inst,, XVI, Jan. 9, 1884,
pp. 14, 15; Stejneger and Barbour, Check List N. Amer. Amph. & Rept., 1917, p. 70;
Strecker, Bull. Sri. Soc. San Antonio, No. 4, 1922, p. 22; Van Denburgh, Occ. Papers
Cal. Acad. Sci., No. 1, Nov. 23, Vol. I, 1922, pp. 589, 594, pi. 57 (detailed descrip-
tion); Pratt, Vert. Anim. U. S., 1923, p. 206.
1852. Lamprosaurux guttulatus Hallowell. Proc. Acad. Sci. Phila., Dec, 1852, pp. 206, 207
(type description: type locality, Fort Fillmore below "Jornada del Muerte," N. M.) ;
Garman, Bull. Es« \ [nst., XVI, Jan. 19, 1884, pp. 14, 15; Hallowell, Reptiles in
Sitgreaves' Report of an Exped. Zuni and Colorado rivers, Is:.:;, pp. 112, 113, pi. IV
(complete description of type).
1857. Plestiodon guttulatus Hallowell. Proc. Acad. Nat, Sci. Phila., l.s.">7. p. 215; Baird,
U. S. and Mex. B. .und. Surv., Emory, Vol. 2, pt. 2. 1859, p. 12. pi. 24, figs. 20-2S;
Baird, Expl. and Surv. of a R. R. Route to the Pac. Owan, Zool., Rept., No. 3,
Vol. X, 1859, p. 18 ("Upper Arkansas"); Stejnegei and Barbour, Check List of X.
20—1123
306 The University Science Bulletin
Amer. Amph. and Reptiles, 1917, pp. 09, 70; Van Denburgh, Occ. Papers Cal. Acad.
Sci., X, Vol. I, 1922, pp. 594-597 (very detailed description); Pratt, Vert. Anim.
of U. S., 1923, p. 207.
1866. PHstodon obsoletus Cope. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1800, p. 3u4.
1866. PHstodon guttulatus Cope. Proc. Acad. Nat, Sci. Phila.. I860, p. 304.
1875. Eumeces obsoletus Cope. Bull. U. S. Nat, Mus., No. 1, 1875, p. 45; Yarrow, Rept.
Geog. Geol. Explr. Surv., West 100th Mer., Wheeler. Vol. 5, Zool., Chap. 4, 1878,
p. 556; Coues, Rept. Geog. & Geol. Explr. and Surv., West 100th Mer., Wheeler,
Vol. 5, Zool., Chap. V, 1878, p. 604; Cope, Bull. U. S. Nat, Mus., No. 17, 1880,
pp. 18, 39, 40 (variations in species); Cragin, Kansas Acad. Sci., VII, 1879-'80, p.
115 (reprint, 1906); Bocourt, Miss. Sci. Mexique, Liv. 7, 1881, pi. XXII A, figs. 4.
4a, 4b, and pi. XXII D, figs. 4, 4a (complete description of a Kansas specimen);
Yarrow, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, 1882, p. 40; Davis and Rice, 111. State Lab.
Nat. Hist. Bull., No. 5, 1883, p. 47; Davis and Rice, Bull. Chicago Acad. Sci., I,
No. 3, 1883, p. 31 ("central and southern Illinois"); Boulenger, Cat, Liz. British
Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 374; Cope, Bull. U.S.N.M., No. 32, 1887, p. 46 ("City of
Chihuahua"); Cope, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1892, p. 334: Cockerell, Amer.
Nat., XXX, 1896, p. 326; Van Denburgh, Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci., (2), VI, 1896, pp.
338-349; Cope, Rept, U. S. Nat. Mus., 1898, (1900), pp. 646-649, fig. 128 (detailed
description and distributional data); Brown, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1903, p.
548; Stone and Rehn, Proc. Acad. Nat, Sci. Phila., 1903, pp. 16, 34; Baihy, North
Amer. Fauna, No. 25, 1905, pp. 35, 45; Strecker, Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XXI, 1908,
p. 73; Strecker, Baylor U. Bull., XII, No. 1, Jan., 1909, pp. 0, 14; Strecker, Baylor
U. Bull., XIII. Nos. 4 and 5, 1910, pp. 13, 14; Stone, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Ph:la..
1911, p. 231; Ellis and Henderson, Univ. Colo. Studies, X, No. 2, 1913, pp. 79, 80,
pi. Ill, figs. 15, 16; Van Denburgh and Slevin, Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci., (4), III, 1913,
P. 393; and idem (4), V, 1915, p. 106; Strecker, Bull. Baylor Uni., XVIII, No. 4,
1915, p. 26; Ditmars, Reptile Book, 1915, p. 198; Jordan, A Manual Vert. Anim.
U. S., 1916, p. 201; Anon., Okla. Geol. Survey Circular 6, 1917, p. 35; Ste'neger
and Barbour, Check List N. Amer. Amph. Rept., 2d Ed., 1923, p. 76; Van Denburgh,
Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci., (4), XIII, No. 12, 1924, p. 214 (New Mexico records);
Ortenburger, Copeia, No. 155, 1926, p. 138 (Oklahoma); Ortenburger, Univ. Okla.
Bull., Proc. Oklahoma Acad. Sci., IV, pt, 1, 1926, p. 95 (Oklahoma); Strecker and
Williams, Cont. Baylor U. Mus., No. 12, Dec, 1927, p. 14 (Texas reports); Orten-
burger, Copeia, No. 163, 1927, p. 47 (Oklahoma record); Burt, Occ. Papers Mus.
Zool. U. Mich., No. 189, 1927, p. 4; Burt, Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis, XXVI, No. 1,
1928, pp. 58-63 (Unites obsoletus and guttidatus; habits and distribution in Kansas);
Burt, Jour. Kansas Ent. Soc, I, No. 3, 1928, pp. 62, 63; Burt, Occ. Papers Mus.
Zool., Uni. Mich., No. 201, June 17, 1929, pp. 1-12, pis. 1-3 (monographic treatment);
Gloyd, Trans. Kan. Acad. Sci., XXXI, 1929, p. 120 (breeding habits); Burt and
Burt, Jour. Wash. Acad. Sci., XIX, No. 20, 1929, p. 455 (Kansas); Burt and Burt,
Amer. Mus. Nov., No. 381, 1929, p. 10 (Kansas); Strecker, Baylor Uni. Contr. to
Folklore, No. 3, 1929, p. 6 (aquatic and hibernation habits); Force, Copeia, No. 12,
1930, p. 29 (Oklahoma); Ortenberger and Freeman. Pub. Uni. Okla., XI, Biol.
Survey, No. 4, 1930, p. 181 (Oklahoma); Strecker, Cont. Baylor U. Mus., No. 23.
1930, p. 11: Mosauer, Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. U. of Mich., No. 246, 1932, p. 10
Guadalupe Mts.); Stejneger and Barbour, Check List N. A. Amph. Rept., 3d Ed.,
1933, p. 82.
1875. Eumeces guttulatus Cope. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, 1875, p. 45; Yarrow, Rept.
Geog. and Geol. Explr. and Surveys, West 100th Mer., Wheeler, Vol. 5, Zool., Chap.
IV, p. 556; Coues, Rept. Geog. and Geol. Explr. Surv., West 100th Mer., Wheeler,
Vol. 5, 1878, p. 604; Cragin, Trans. Kan. Acad. Sci., VII, 1879-'80 (1880), p. 115
(reprint, 1906); Yarrow, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, 1882, p. 41; Boulenger, Cat.
Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 369; Cope, Rept. U. S. Nat. Mus. for 1898, (1900),
pp. 645, 646, fig. 127; Bailey, N. Amer. Faun., No. 25, 1905, pp. 35, 45; Strecker,
Baylor Uni. Bull., XIII, Nos. 4 and 5, 1910, p. 13 ; Ellis and Henderson, Univ. Colo.
Studies, X, No. 2, 1913, pp. 78-80, figs. 15, 16; Strecker, Baylor Bull., XVIII, No. 4,
1915, p. 26; Ditmars, The Reptile Book, 1915, p. 198; Jordan, A Manual of Vert.
Anim. U. S., 1916, p. 201; Stejneger and Barbour, Check List of N. Amer. Amph.
Rept., 2d Ed., 1923, p. 75; Grant, Copeia, No. 164, 1927, pp. 67-09 (habits); Burt,
Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. U. Mich., No. 189, 1927, p. 14 (regarded as "probably"
obsoletus); Burt, Jour. Kansas Ent, Soc, 1, No. 3, 1928, p. 62; Ortenburger, Copeia,
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 307
No. 173, 1930, p. 94; Ortenburger and Freeman, Pub. Univ. Okla., Vol. II, Biol.
Surv., No. 4, 1930, p. 181.
1929. Eumeces fasciatus Burt (non Linne). Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich., No. 201,
June 17, 1929, p. 6.
History. This large and conspicuous member of the genus enjoys
the distinction of having been described twice the same year, and in
the same journal,* under different names and in different genera.
The older name. Plestiodon obsoletum, appearing on page 129
(loc. cit.). was applied by Spencer Baird and Charles Girard to an
adult specimen (No. 3133 U.S.N.M.) collected by John H. Clark
(under Col. J. D. Graham), of the Mexican Boundary Commis-
sion, in the Valley of the Rio San Pedro (at present Devil's river),
Texas. The second name. Lamprosaurus guttulatus (appearing on
page 206), was applied by Edward Hallowell to a very young,
mutilated specimen, collected by Doctor Hammond below the
Jornada del Muerte, Fort Fillmore, N. Mex.
The following year Hallowell (1853) redescribed the adult speci-
men from, presumably, Baird and Girard's type specimen (different
total length given) ; he likewise published a detailed description of
the type of Lamprosaurus guttulatus in the same work. This type
is now in the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences Collection.
Three years later (Hallowell, 1856) Plestiodon obsoletus was re-
ported from Kansas on the basis of five specimens sent to the
Philadelphia Academy.
In the next year, Hallowell (1857), having obtained two Kansas
specimens of the young, referred them to Plestiodon guttulatus,
relegating his Lamprosaurus to synonymy. Of the type he says,
''The original specimen from Xew Mexico was in such a condition
as to render it extremely difficult to determine its true characters."
Two years later (Baird. 1859), f both species were figured.
From this time on, to 1917, the two forms were considered distinct.
Stejneger and Barbour (1917, page 69), in a footnote to Plestiodon
guttulatus, state, '"Possibly the young of obsoletus? ," but in 1923
the names are maintained as distinct species. Since that time, cer-
tain authors have synonymized the forms, and, in the most recent
checklist I Stejneger and Barbour, 1933), they are considered as a
single species.
In published works Eumeces obsoletus has only on rare occasions
been confused with other species. Van Denburgh (1922) referred
* Proceedings of the Academy Nat. Sci., Philadelphia, 1852.
f Baird, U. S. and Mexican Boundary Survey, Rept. of the Boundary, 1859, pp. 1-35,
plate XXV, figs. 9-16 (obsoletus) and plate XXVI, figs. 20-28 (guttulatus) the latter from
San Elizario, Tex.
308 The University Science Bulletin
specimens of Eumeces callicephalus from the Huachuca Mts., Ari-
zona, to this species as the young. Cope, at an earlier date (1900),
confuses a young callicephalus with this form (U.S.N.M. 9231), a
specimen which Burt (1929) erroneously refers to as "a young and
mutilated specimen of fasciatus." In this same work Burt refers to a
specimen of obsoletus (U.S.N.M. 3151, Matamoros, Mex.) as "Prob-
ably fasciatus."
In certain museums the species has been confused with multivir-
gatus, and numerous specimens were found so labeled.
With the exception of Eumeces fasciatus (including laticeps and
inexpectatus as treated by recent authors), this is the best known
American form, due to numerous, and in some cases extensive,
accounts of it that have appeared.
With regard to the relationship of this species I have been some-
what in doubt. I believe that it should be considered in a section
apart and may represent one of the older species of the group. The
absence of any typical, white, dorsolateral or lateral lines, and the
intense, uniform, black coloration of the young with the cream or
yellow light spots on the head, show a lack of near relationship
with any of the other species in its own group. It agrees with
Eum.eces longirostris in having (usually) the lateral scales arranged
diagonally, but in all other pertinent characters they differ widely.
In the scale pattern of the head, the character of the preanal
plates, the terminal scales of the digits, the scales about the insertion
of the limbs, the character and relationship of trie postgenial, this
form differs but little from the Skiltonianus and Fasciatus groups
and may be an aberrant form derived from the common ancestral
stock of these groups.
The type specimen (No. 3133 U.S.N.M.) is still in good condi-
tion save that many of the dorsal scales have slipped.
Diagnosis. A large species lacking typical, median, dorsolateral
and lateral white lines; young black, with white spots on upper and
lower labials, and on other head scales except loreals and temporals;
pitting on scales dim in young, but still evident in adults; outer
preanal scales overlapping inner; subcaudals widened; postgenial
large, bordered by a scale longer than wide; one or no postnasal;
two postmentals (rarely one); nuchals small; lateral scale rows
usually diagonal; usually 26 or 28 scale rows about the middle of
body.
Description of species (from No. 4804, Taylor-Smith collection.
Rio Grande City, Tex., September, 1932; adult male). Portion of
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
309
the rostral visible from above about equal to the area of the
frontonasal; supranasals relatively large, forming a median suture;
frontonasal generally lozenge-shaped, in contact laterally with the
anterior loreal, widely separated from the frontal by prefrontals;
latter large, each nearly equal to area of the frontonasal; their
broadest suture with the frontonasal; sutures likewise formed with
the frontal, second loreals, first loreals, first superciliaries, and first
supraoculars, the length of sutures diminishing in the order named;
frontal not especially large, somewhat shorter than its distance from
tip of snout or from the posterior part of interparietal, more than
one and one half times wider anteriorly than posteriorly, the sides
Fig. 47. Eumeces obsoletus (Baird and Girard). K.U. No. 7775, Cam-
eron Co., Texas. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 16.5 mm.; width, 14 mm.
generally straight, or very slightly concave; frontoparietals large,
forming a long median suture, widely separating interparietal and
frontal; interparietal narrow, elongate, less than once and a half
times as wide anteriorly as posteriorly, not enclosed by the parie-
tals; parietals relatively short and wide; a single pair of small,
differentiated nuchals.
Nasal scale somewhat smaller than supranasal, the scale divided
by a suture from nostril to upper edge, and another from the nostril
to the lower edge of the scale; the anterior portion equal to or
somewhat smaller than posterior part, including nostril; anterior
loreal narrow, higher than posterior; latter large, the anterior part
of upper edge not or slightly higher than the posterior, highest in
the middle, lower edge on a level with that of the anterior; two
310 The University Science Bulletin
presuboculars, the anterior large, the second small, slender, dis-
tinctly elongate, not forming a notch between fourth labial and sub-
ocular labial, but lying with the greater part of its length above
the subocular; four supraoculars, three touching frontal, the last
short and wide, but much larger than first ; eight superciliaries, the
anterior largest, nearly equal to the first supraocular, at least four
times the area of the second superciliary, and about twice as large
as the last, vertical superciliary ; four postsuboculars, the most
posterior much longer than others, about half the size, and of same
general shape as, the primary temporal; latter longer than wide,
diagonally placed, about one fourth or one fifth the size of the
upper secondary temporal, forming a suture with the lower second-
ary, thus separating the seventh labial and the upper secondary
temporal; lower secondary temporal irregularly triangular, the apex
pointing down; tertiary temporal slender, elongate, bordering the
lower secondary, widely separated from the ear opening by two
postlabial scales; seven upper labials, the last largest; the four
anterior with approximately the same identical elevation, the third
or fourth larger than the two anterior ; seventh labial separated from
the auricular opening by a pair of enlarged postlabials, which are
succeeded (usually) by two pairs of smaller scales; the auricular
lobules are thick, flattened against the edge of ear opening rather
than extending out from edge; six lower labials, last much elongated;
mental large, the length of the labial border not or but slightly
larger than that of rostral; three pairs of chinshields, the anterior
pair smallest, separated (usually in contact) ; postgenial large,
elongate, bordered on the anterior internal edge by a scale longer
than wide. No postnasal on left side; a small postnasal present on
the right side; four median upper palpebral scales touching the
superciliaries; lower eyelid with a series of vertically elongate,
opaque scales (transparent in life) on lower lid, separated from the
subocular by three or four rows of small granular scales, the lower-
most row somewhat large, frequently pigmented and suggesting a
continuous row involving presuboculars and postsuboculars.
Scales about body are arranged in six or seven parallel rows on
the dorsal surface of the back, while those on the sides are arranged
in diagonal rows from shoulder to groin ; the ventral rows are again
parallel; the scales of the two median dorsal rows widest; all dorsal
rows larger than laterals or ventrals. Thirty-seven scale rows about
the anterior part of neck behind ear; 32 about constricted portion of
neck; 40 rows behind insertion of arm; 25 rows about middle of
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 311
body; 19 rows about base of tail (at first widened subcaudal). In
a dorsal row from parietal to above anus. 59 scales; 99 widened
subcaudals, their transverse length about three and one half to four
times their longitudinal length; preanal region bordered by six
scales, the two median large, the outer scales overlapping the inner;
about 22 scales around the ear opening.
Limbs well-developed, overlapping the width of eight lateral
scales when adpressed; 22 scales about insertion of the hind limb;
17 -tales about insertion of forelimb; lamellar formula for fingers:
7; 10; 13; 13; 7. A heavy thickened scale on outer side of wrist;
palm covered with several much enlarged, flattened, tubercular
-tales, intermingled with others of varying sizes; lamellar formula
tor toes: 7; 10; 15; 17; 11. Heel bordered by six large padlike
scales, the three outer the larger, the most distal at the base of the
tilth and first toes; sole with two, much-enlarged tubercles sur-
rounded by numerous scales of varying size; the intercalated series
of scales on the fourth toe on outer side reaches to base of ante-
penultimate phalanx; terminal lamellae not tightly bound about
daw base; a group of small granular scales in axilla; none behind
the insertion of the hind limb.
The pitting on the scales is evident on sides of neck, axillary
region, along side of body and at side of the base of the tail, on
scales of dorsal and posterior parts of upper arm, and on posterior
and dorsal surface of the femoral region. However, the pits are
small and few in number on each scale and are discerned with
difficulty.
( "lor. Above, the general color of the dorsal region may be de-
fined as a brownish to olive-gray, generally olive-brown on head;
a lighter gray to bluish-gray on sides; undersurface generally
creamy white; the ground color of the tail is light brownish or putty
color. All the scales of the dorsal surface and the upper lateral
region edged with dark brownish-black to black, the color some-
what more intense on lateral side of scales, thus forming indefinite
parallel lines on back and irregular diagonal lines on the dorso-
lateral region.
Dorsal head scales clouded with darker, while lateral head scales
are frequently spotted or edged with dark brown; upper labial scales
with light cream >pot> distinctly discernible; lower labials light, like
ventral surface; beginning in the vicinity of the auricular opening,
there i- a -eries of indefinite brick-red spots, which continue to
groin; part of the blotches are in the more heavily pigmented dorso-
312
The University Science Bulletin
lateral region; others are lateral, on the more uniform grayish
lateral ground color; upper parts of limbs with markings like those
on dorsolateral region of body; below white; dorsal lamellae on toes
light, edged with deep brown posteriorly.
Measurements of Eumeces obsoletus (Baird and Girard)
Museum
Number*
K.U.
7305
yg-
O.U.
233
cT
K.U.
7265
9
K.U.
7 2 58
K.U.
7701
0"
U.S.N.M.
3133
?
K.U.
7696
cf
Field
6838
Sex
d>
Total length
129
62
280
116
Snout to vent
55
73
82
93
110
125
Snout to foreleg
20
22
27
28
30
31
36
Tail .
67
10
164
19
Width of head
10
11
15
15
18
23 •
Length of head
10
10.5
11
14 5
16
19.4
16
22
6
6
7
9
13
15
18
Foreleg
14
17
18
22
24.6
22
28
31
19
22
23.5
30
26
33
35
45
Longest toe
7
S
8.5
10
10
10
12
13
Axilla to groin
29
32
39
45
49.5
55
64
65
*No. 7305, Morton Co., Kansas; 7265, 7258, Hyatt, Anderson Co., Kansas; 7701,
7696, Douglas Co., Kansas; 233, Franklin Co., Kansas; 6838, Brownsville, Cameron Co.,
Texas; 3133, type, Valley of Rio San Pedro, Rio Grande del Norte, Texas.
Color variation. Cope (1900, p. 648) mentions some unusually
marked specimens from Kansas, forwarded by Professor Snow, and,
presumably, from the vicinity of Lawrence, Kansas. Adults of
some Kansas and Oklahoma specimens develop a rather elaborate
distribution of the dark pigment so that a secondary pattern is
developed. The deep blue-black coloration of the young gives place
to a lightening of the color on the centers of the scales so that at
about the third year many approximate the color pattern of in-
dividuals from the southern and western part of the range. Then as
they become older there is a tendency for the segregation of more
pigment at the outer edges of the scales of the first and second rows,
thus defining two dark lines, with a wide (width of two scales)
stripe of nearly uniform olive ground color, usually without black
pigment, though sometimes with the edges of scales dark; the
diagonal rows on the sides likewise shift the bulk of the pigment
to the lateral edges of the scales, making series of diagonal dark
lines. In many old males the regularity of the lines is obliterated
and the pattern appears as scattered flecks over the dorsal and
dorsolateral parts of the body.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 313
The lined type of coloration is more or less evidenl in most adult
Kansas specimens (save occasional specimens in the extreme west),
in most a»lult Oklahoma specimens, and occasionally in those of
northern Texas. Those from the southern part of Texas, New Mex-
ico, and Arizona have the pigment more evenly distributed and the
lineation is usually not at all or only dimly discernible. The amount
of pigment on the tail is very decidedly less in southern specimens,
and in the young adults the tail may assume a pale yellow-green
color without any dark pigment, and in the older ones the tail is
very much lighter than the ground color of the back. However, it
appears that this character is developed gradually, and progres-
sively more dark pigment is in evidence the farther north the species
is traced.
The color of the young is much the same throughout the range.
This, at hatching, is a deep black over much of the body, with the
tail a vivid blue. The head scales, at least most of them, have each
a creamy white spot varying in size in different scales. These dots
on the top of the head are arranged so as to suggest a typical pat-
tern of dorsolateral white lines and "bifurcating lines" in the mesial
region. A similar series of larger ocellated whitish cream dots are
in evidence on each upper labial and each lower, and invariably
present are two larger auricular spots, one preceding, the other pos-
terior to, the auricular opening. Occasionally, a young specimen
shows a dim, more or less continuous, white line from the nuchal
scale along the neck to a point near the shoulder, and in such cases
there is likewise a light lateral line running from ear to a point near
to or above the insertion of the foreleg. However, this has been
discerned in specimens from widely separated localities both in the
north and south, and may appear in a single specimen of a brood
where, in all the other specimens, these lines are lacking. In the
northern specimens, the white dots on the dorsal surface of the head
border the sides of the frontal and may extend to near the nuchals;
in more southern and particularly southwestern specimens, from
southeastern Arizona, the dots do not usually follow the sides of the
frontal. Occasionally there is a white dot in the mesial region of
the anterior part of the frontal, which sometimes assumes a V-shape.
This general coloration of the young is retained through the second
year, and the deep color is usually replaced by lighter areas on the
centers of the scales. Postmentals and chinshields frequently have
white spots less distinct than those on the labials.
In adult males, some reddish coloration may develop on the tern-
314 The University Science Bulletin
poral region. In old males the temporal region is somewhat bulged
out. It never reaches such dimensions as occur in hiticcps.
Scale variation (approximately 260 specimens). Like other mem-
bers of the genus, many scale characters are decidedly unstable, al-
though in the number of scale rows about the body and in the
number of scales in a row from parietals to above vent the range of
variation is less than in most other species.
No specimens have been seen with parietals enclosing the inter-
parietal; the nuchals are normally one pair; two pairs have been
found only four times, while an added scale on one side has been
found ten times.
The divided postmental shows only three exceptions; one each
from Riley and Anderson counties, Kansas, and one from Cochise
Co., Arizona, in which there is a single scale.
The postnasal scale is very unstable and is absent sporadically in
southern specimens, but generally present, while in specimens from
Kansas it is generally absent. The percentages are as follows:
Southern Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona specimens 97 percent
present; Oklahoma, 40 percent; Kansas (counting two specimens as
one where scale is present on one side) , 22 percent. In groups of
specimens from certain counties in eastern Kansas the percentage
is sometimes less than 4 percent present.
In Kansas specimens there is a strong tendency for the anterior
loreal to segment transversely, and this anomaly may be present
on one or both sides in as many as 36 percent of the specimens.
There is no apparent variation in the subcaudals, chinshields, upper
labials (the lower labials, however, are frequently reduced to five),
preanals and supraoculars. The size of the frontoparietal and its
relation to the loreals is very unstable in northern forms and it may
fail to touch the anterior loreal in 39 percent of the specimens. The
frontoparietal very rarely is in contact with the frontal, and like-
wise rarely touches the rostral. Five specimens show it contacting
the rostral while only two show it in contact with the frontal, with
the consequent separation of the prefrontals.
The frontal varies in length and as a consequence the number of
the supraoculars touching it. It appears that the posterior part only
is affected, and when the frontal is shortened, the frontoparietals are
distinctly larger; the prefrontals are enlarged at the expense of
frontonasal and not of the frontal.
The superciliaries vary from seven to ten, the numbers eight and
nine occurring most frequently; the general relationship of size, of
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 315
the first, second, and last, remains fairly stable. The number of
supraoculars is invariably four, but either two or three scales touch
the frontal, two being the more frequent number in the northern
specimens (Oklahoma, Kansas), while three is decidedly the more
frequent number in southern (southern Texas. New Mexico, Ari-
zona). The temporal scales and the two last labials vary a consid-
erable amount in size, but bear the same general relationship. The
primary temporal increases in size usually at the expense of the
upper secondary. It thus varies from one fourth or one fifth to
nearly half the size of the latter scale, and often approximates the
lower secondary temporal in size. The tertiary is always present,
showing small variation. In by far the greater number of specimens
the sixth and seventh labials are equal in area; and in certain local-
ities, especially in specimens from the Guadelupe Mountains, New
Mexico and Texas, it is the usual condition. The number of post-
labials is five or six, the scales arranged in superimposed pairs;
rarely are the pairs united, forming larger scales; the preauricular
lobules are flattened, thickened scales, two or three usually in evi-
dence; presuboculars are two, normally, with one occurring several
times due to the union of the two scales; a few cases show the
presence of three scales, due to a segmentation of the posterior loreal.
Four is the expected number of postsuboculars, but five occurs fre-
quently ; occasionally the lower row of granular eyelid scales are en-
larged somewhat and pigmented, suggesting a continuous post- and
presubocular series under the eye.
The number of scale rows varies from twenty-five to thirty. How-
ever, the counting is difficult due to the diagonal lines; the higher
numbers, 27-28, are most frequent in northern forms; 26-27 more
frequent in southern forms; the number of axillary rows is fewer in
southwestern specimens than elsewhere. The lateral rows tend in
these specimens to approach a parallel with the dorsal rows. The
median dorsals are always larger than other dorsals, and all dorsals
are usually larger than the lateral series.
The limbs tend to touch or overlap generally in both young and
adults, but in some specimens, especially adult females, the legs
may fail to touch, and be separated by one or a few scales.
The character of scales on the feet and the arrangement of la-
mellae differ little or not at all. between the northern and southern
forms; the lamellae under the fourth toe range from fourteen to
seventeen, the higher number being rare, the lower numbers oc-
curring most frequently.
316 The University Science Bulletin
From the above discussion of the variations in different popula-
tions it is evident that subspecific designations could not be reason-
ably applied to the variants without difficulty. Were the color
characters constant, particularly as regards the dark markings of
the dorsal and lateral surface, one might separate a subspecies based
on the presence of the longitudinal dark dorsal lines and diagonal
dark lines. Unfortunately, this character may be absent in young
and certain very old specimens. Southern specimens have less dark
pigment on the tail, and in southwestern specimens the tail may be
almost without marking; but the presence of lines on the back and
an intermediate condition of pigment on the tail obtains in certain
specimens.
As regards the scale variation we find again a lack of constancy.
There is, to be sure, a great tendency to eliminate the postnasal
scute in the lined specimens, a tendency which increases to a very
great percent as one approaches the northeastern limit of distribu-
tion, but the increase from north to south is gradual, as already
stated.
As to the direction of the lateral scale rows, one discovers that
there is a tendency toward the reduction of interpolated scale rows
following the axilla in going south, so that the diagonal tends more
toward the horizontal than the vertical; in the southwest this tend-
ency is carried to such a point that in many individuals the lateral
rows are distinctly parallel to the dorsal. This is true in perhaps 20
percent of the specimens from Arizona, particularly those from the
Huachuca and the Santa Catalina Mountains.
It is obvious that we have to do with subspecies or species in the
making, but separable lines have as yet to be strengthened before
subspecific forms can be defined clearly enough to avoid confusion.
At least, such is my opinion.
Distribution. Eumeces obsoletus occurs throughout most of the
central western states and into northern Mexico. Nebraska appears
to be the northernmost limit, while in the south, Santa Caterina,
Nuevo Leon, is the most southerly locality record. The eastern
records for "central and southern Illinois" (Davis and Rice, 1883),
I believe, should be questioned until further evidence of its presence
there is noted. I believe the form has not been reported from
Missouri, but it most likely occurs along the western border, having
been captured in adjoining counties in Kansas. The record for
Arkansas (Baird, 1859, p. 39) may be regarded as doubtful, al-
though it may occur along the western part. The name "Arkansas"
Taylor: The Gknis Kimeces
317
may refer to the river. In the west it occurs certainly in Arizona
and Colorado, but the single record for Utah (Yarrow, 1882) has
been questioned. Woodbury tllWh does not include it in the state
fauna. It seems quite likely that this is a correct record. The
specimen (No. 8180 U.S.N.M.) was apparently collected by Yarrow
himself, but no definite locality is indicated.
I have found the species everywhere either rare or very difficult
to find and collect, with the exception of eastern Kansas. Here it is
not difficult to obtain, for I have collected two or three dozen in-
dividuals of this species in one day — a number which I have scarcely
totaled in nearly a half-year's collecting in the southwestern part
of its range. It is possible that different habits and habitat make
them more difficult to capture there.
Fig. 48. Distribution of Eumeces obsoletus (Baird and Girard), in
Central United States.
318 The University Science Bulletin
Locality records:
Arizona :
Cochise Co.: Huachuca Mts. (Mich. U. 9) (M.C.Z. 2) (C.A.S. 5);
Moctezuma Canon, Huachuca Mts. (Mich. U. 1) (M.C.Z. 1)
(A.M.N.H. 1); Ash Creek (? Canon, Huachuca Mts.) (U.S.N.M. 1);
Can- Canon, Huachuca Mts. (A.M.N.H. 1) (A.N.S.P. 3); Ramsey
Canon, Huachuca Mts. (L.M.K. 1) (M.C.Z. 1) (S.D.S.N.H. 2);
Pinny Canon floor, Chiricahua Mts. (U. of Cal. 1) ; Cave Creek (U.
of Cal. 1).
Pima Co.: Sabino Canon, Santa Catalina Mts. (K.U. 1); Tucson
(U.S.N.M. 1).
Graham Co.: Fort Grant (Stanford 1).
Yavapai Co.: Prescott (U.S.N.M. 1); Fort Whipple (Coues, 1875).
Indeterminate localities: Cave spring (Yarrow, 1875); Arizona (U.S.
N.M. 4).
New Mexico:
Dona Ana Co.: One mile west Las Cruces (M.C.Z. 1); Fort Fillmore
(A.N.S.P. 1).
Socorro Co.: Fort Craig (M.C.Z. 1).
Valencia Co.: Grants (U.S.N.M. 1).
Bernalillo Co.: Albuquerque (U.S.N.M. 1).
Eddy Co.: Guadalupe Mts. (Mich. U. 7) ; Carlsbad (K.U. 1).
Taos Co.: Taos (K.U. 1).
Catron Co.: Near Glenwood (K.U. 2).
Unidentified locality: Bero Springs (Coues, 1875).
Utah: Only record from "Utah"; collected by Yarrow (U.S.N.M. 1).
Nebraska: Only record "Platte river" (U.S.N.M. 1).
Arkansas: Upper Arkansas (U.S.N.M. 1) ; Coal Creek, Arkansas (U.S.N.M. 1).
(These localities may refer to the Arkansas river.)
Colorado :
Larimer Co.: Four miles east of Wellington (Ellis and Henderson, 1913).
Weld Co.: Near Greeley (Ellis and Henderson, 1913); Greasewood
Lake, S. E. Osgood (Ellis and Henderson, 1913).
Las Animas Co.: Corrizo Creek (Ellis and Henderson, 1913).
(These Colorado localities have not been verified.)
Kansas :
Leavenworth Co.: North of Lawrence (K.U. 15) (Cornell 5).
Jefferson Co.: North of Lawrence (K.U. 8).
Douglas Co.: (A.N.S.P. 2) ; near McLouth (K.U. 30) (Mich. U. 1).
Franklin Co.: Near Ottawa (Mich. U. 5) (Ottawa U. 19).
Anderson Co.: North of Garnett (K.U. 45) ; Hyatt (K.U. 18).
Bourbon Co.: (Mich. U. 5).
Johnson Co.: (Carnegie 3).
Miami Co.: (Carnegie 1) ; Haverhill (Carnegie 1).
Allen Co.: (K.U. 3).
Montgomery Co.: Independence (K.U. 2).
Woodson Co.: (K.U. 2).
Shawnee Co.: Topeka (U.S.N.M. 1).
Taylor: The Genus Eumei - 319
WUsonCo.: (K.U.4); Neodesha i A. MX. II. 1).
Osage Co.: (K.U. 8) (U.S.N.M. 1); Burlingame (U.S.N.M. 1).
Elk Co.: (K.U. 2).
ood Co.: Near Toronto (K.U. ID.
Wab Co.: Wabaunsee (U.S.N.M. I); Maplehill (U.S.N.M. 2).
Pottawatomie Co.: (K.U. 5) (Mich. U. 13) ; Rocky Ford Power Planl
(U.S.N.M. 1).
Marshall Co.: Waterville (A.M.N.H. 1) (Field 1) (Mich. U. 1); Irving
(Mich. U. 2).
Washington Co.: (Mich. 3) ; Barnes (Field 1).
Riley Co.: (K.U. 18) (Mich. U. 17) (Ottawa U. 14) (A.M.N.H. 5)
(Cornell 1).
Geary Co.: (K.U. 1); Fori Riley (A.N.S.P. 7); Junction City (K.U. 4)
(U.S.N.M. 1).
Chas< Co.: Cottonwood Falls (M.C.Z. 1) (U.S.N.M. 12) (Mich.U.l);
Strong City (U.S.N.M. 1).
Dickinson Co.: Carrelton (K.U. 8).
Marion Co.: (K.U. 4); Florence (K.U. 4); 7 miles .south of Marion
(A.M.N.H. 1) ; Marion (U.S.N.M. 1).
Butler Co.: (Carnegie 1); Chelsea (U.S.N.M. 1); Havenhill (A.M.
N.H. 1).
Cowley Co.: Winfield (Field 1) (M.C.Z. 1) (U.S.N.M. 14); Arkansas
City (K.U. 5).
Sumner Co.: (Burt. 1928).
McPherson Co.: (Burt, 1928).
Saline Co.: (K.U. 1).
Ottawa Co.: (K.U. 8) (Mich. U. 1); Minneapolis (A.M.N.H. 1).
Republic Co.: (Ottawa U. 1).
Ellsworth Co.: (M.C.Z. 1).
Barber Co.: (K.U. 1).
Russell Co.: (K.U. 1).
Ellis Co.: Hays (K.U. 4).
Cloud Co.: South of Miltonville (K.U. 14).
Clark Co.: Ashland (A.M.N.H. 1).
Clay Co.: Clay Center (K.U. 1).
Morton Co.: Walsh's Ranch (K.U. 1).
Hamilton Co.: (Burt, 1928).
Morris Co.: Council Grove (U.S.N.M. 1).
Jewell Co.: Mankato (U. S. N. M. 1).
Oklahoma:
Woods Co.: Alva (K.U. 1) (M.C.Z. 2).
Comanche Co.: (Okla. U. 7) (Mich. U. 1).
Tulsa Co.: (Okla. U. 7) (Mich. U. 2).
Alfalfa Co.: (Okla. U. 2).
Murray Co.: (Okla. U. 2) (K. U. 1. with eggs).
Custer Co.: (Okla. U. 1).
Cimarron Co.: 8 miles SW Boise City (Okla. U. 3) ; near Kenton
(Denver Mus. 1).
Kay Co.: (Okla. U. 3) ; Newkirk (U.S.N.M. 1).
Harper Co.: (Okla. U. 1).
320 The University Science Bulletin
Pawnee Co.: Quay (Ortenburger, 1930).
Osage Co.: Avant (U.S.N.M. 1).
Stevens Co.: Alma (U.S.N.M. 5).
Texas :
Brewster Co.: (Mich. U. 1) ; Chisos Mts. (Mich. U. 1) (Taylor 1).
Jeff Davis Co.: Cherry Canon, Jeff Davis Mts. (Mich. U. 1); Davis
Mts. (Mich. U. 1) (Baylor 1); 20 miles SE Toyahival, 5,000 ft. elev.
(Bailey, 1905).
Culberson Co.: Guadalupe Mts., 6,800 ft. (Bailey, 1915); near Frijoles,
Guadalupe Mts. (Mich. U. 4).
Cameron Co.: Brownsville (Field 1) (K.U. 5).
Starr Co.: Rio Grande City (Taylor-Smith 1).
McLennan Co.: McGregor (Strecker, 1908); Tonkaway Creek (Baylor
4); Bluff Creek (Baylor 1).
Burnett Co.: Atkinson Ranch, near mouth of Spring Creek (Baylor 1).
Mitchell Co.: Colorado (Baylor 1).
Wilbarger Co.: Harrold (Baylor 1); Vernon (Baylor 1).
Travis Co.: (Strecker, 1930).
Potter Co.: Near Amarillo (Mich. U. 2).
Duvall Co.: San Diego (Phila. 7) (Taylor-Smith 7) (Brit. Mus. many);
near Hebronville (Mich. U. 3).
Valverde Co.: Valley Rio San Pedro (U.S.N.M. 1; type).
Bexar Co.: Helotes (Phila. 1) (Baylor 5).
Reeve Co.: Pecos (Phila. 5).
El Paso Co.: El Paso (Field 1) (Senckenberg 3) ; San Elizario
(U.S.N.M. 1).
Eastland Co.: Eastland (K.U. 1).
Howard Co.: Big Springs (Cope, 1892).
Hidalgo Co.: Edinburg (Cornell 2).
Mexico :
Tamaidipas: (U.S.N.M. 1); Matamoros (U.S.N.M. 2).
Nuevo Leon: Santa Caterina (U.S.N.M. 1).
Chihuahua: City of Chihuahua (U.S.N.M. 1).
Eumeces chinensis chinensis (Gray)
(Plate 25, Fig-*. 2, 3; Figs. 40, 50)
SYNONYMY
1838. Tiliqua chinensis Gray. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., II, 1838, p. 289 (brief type descrip-
tion; type locality, "China").
1839. Plestiodon sinense Dumeril and Bibron. Erp. Gen., V, 1839, p. 704 (description;
Canton; Tiliqua chinensis is given as a synonym); Hallowell, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci.
Phil., 1856, p. 154 (Ningpo); and Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc, XI, New Series, 1860,
pp. 81, 82 (practically identical to the preceding paper).
1845. Plestiodon chinensis Gray. Cat. Spec. Liz. Coll. Brit. Mus., 1845, p. 92 (China,
Reeves Coll.).
1864. Mabouia chinensis Giinther. Rept. Brit. India, 1864, p. 83 (part.); Swinhoe, Proc.
Zool. Soc. London, 1870, p. 239 (Hainan, China, south of the Yangtsze, Formosa and
Pescadores) (part.); and idem, p. 410 (Pescadores); Boettger, Offenb. Ver. fur
Naturk, pp. 24, 25. 1882-1884, pp. 119, 144 (Canton, Chekiang, Formosa).
?1866. Plestiodon quinquelincatum. Theobald. Cat. Rept. Mus. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 1866
(extra number CXLVI), p. 25.
1879. Eumeces sinensis Bocourt, Miss. Sci. Mex., Rept., Liv. 6, 1879, p. 423.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 321
Eumeces chinensis Miiller. Ver. Naturf. Ges. Basel, VI, pp. 659-709; Blanford, Proc.
Z06I. Soc London, L881, pp. 216, 217 (specimen ol doubtful locality); Boulenger, Cat.
Liz. Brit. Mus., III. 1.887, p. 375 (Ningpo, Chusan, Si Kiang, Canton, Hongkong);
Boettger, Cat. Rept.-Samm. Mus Senckenb. Natur. Gesell., Teil I, 1893, p. ill
hai, Hongkong, Da-lan-shan bei Ningpo, Canton); Boettger, I nckenb.
Natur. Ges. Frankfort, L894, pp. 132, 143, 146; Flower, Proc. Zool. Soc. London,
L896, p B76 m!. ink- Blanford' 1881 len is from China); Stejneger, Jour. Sci.
('nil.. Tokyo, XII, pi. :;. 1898, p. 220 (Taipa, Formosa); Werner, Abh. K Bayei Stat.
Ucad. Wi^.. II. Kl. XXII, Bd., II Abh., 1903, p. 262 (Kiangsi, Chekiang, Kuangtung,
Kwangsi); Stejneger, Bull. U. S. Mat, Mus., No. 58, L907, p. 208, fig. 185 (descrip-
tion); Van Denburgh, Proc Cal. Acad. Sci., (4), III. Dec. L6, 1912, pp. 225, 226
(Shanghai); Vogt, Sits. Ber. Ges. Naturf. Freunde, Berlin, 1914, p. 100 (Canton);
Vogt, \r,h. Naturg., BS .lain.. 10 Heft, Un. V. Dec, L922, pp. 135-146; Smith,
Jour. Nat. II - Siam, VI, No. 2. Oct. 31, 1923, p. 20 (Hainan); Vogt, Zool. Anz.,
60, 1024, p. 33S ("Oberes Mintal, Man Tschow," Canton); Sun. Cent. Biol. Lab. Sci.
Sue. Chma. II. No. 2, 1926, pp. 6, 7 ("Amoy up to Nanking"); Stejneger, I' I'. S.
Nat. Mus.. 66, Art. 25, 1926, p. 47 (Fukien, Shanghai); Schmidt. Bull. Amer. Mus.
Nat. Hist., r»4. Art. 4. 1027. p. 503 (Futsing, Fukien; Yen]. inn. Fukien; Yenchingkan,
Wahnsien, Szechwan); Tchang, Bull. Fan Mem. Inst.. II, No. 14, Dec-., 1931, p. 277
(Nanking; southern Chma): Fan, Bull. Dept. Coll. Sci., Sun Vat Sen Univ., May,
1931, p. 38 (description, noting variation; Loshiang and Kutchen, Yaoshan, Kwangsi);
Pope. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 58, Sept. 7. 1929, pp. 384-387, fig. 2; Gee, Bull.
Dep. Biol. Yenching Univ., T. 1929-1930, (Jan., 1930), pp. 53-84 (list, with records
from literature): Ahl, Sitzb. Ges. Natur. Freunde. Berlin, 1030, pp. 326-331 (Kwangsi);
Boring, First Ann. Kept. M.B.A.C, 1932, p. 112 (Fukien records); ?Pavlov, Pub.
Mus. Hoangho Pai ho, No. 12. 1932, p. 8 ("Song Chow tchoeize, Mongolie Or le.").
1012. Eumeces chinensis formosensis Van Denburgh. -Adv. Diag. New Rept. Amph. Loo
Choo Is. Formosa, private printing Aug. 7, 1012. p. 1 (type description): and Proc.
Calif. Aead. Sci., (4), III, 1912, pp. 226, 227 (type locality San Shi Ka, Formosa;
ether localities, Taipeh and Keelung).
History. From the literature of this species I am unable to learn
the history of the type. Gray's (1838) record, ''China, British
Museum'' is all that appears to be known, unless his notice in the
Catalogue (1845) refers to the same specimen. This hardly seems
likely, due to the fact that the latter Chinese specimen is colored
differently. This specimen is credited to J. Reeves (Boulenger's
Catalogue, 1887).
Gray bestowed the name, Tiliqua chinensis. The following year
Dumeril and Bibron (1838) use the name Plestiodon sinense, recog-
nizing in the synonymy, Tiliqua sinensis Gray (Illus. Ind. Zoolog.
Hardwick, and Cat. 1838), and EupreyAs d' Hardwick Cocteau
(Tabl. Synop. Seine.) (I have not seen the first and last mentioned
papers). They list three specimens from China, presented by the
French consul, M. Gernaert, at Canton. Cantor (1842) described
a Chinese skink under the name Tiliqiui rufo-guttata. This speci-
men is listed by Boulenger (1887) as specimen "C, Adult, Chusan,
Dr. Cantor, Type of Tiliqua rufo-guttata." Schmidt (1927) offers
the opinion that this should properly be regarded as a synonym of
E. pulcher.
The Chinese skink long remained a rarity in collections, but in
recent years a large number of specimens have been collected, the
21—1123
322 The University Science Bulletin
largest series being that accumulated in Fukien by Clifford Pope
(Pope, 1929), a series which numbered 147 specimens.
The exact relationship between this form and pulcher is still un-
certain. The northern form pulcher appears to be confined to the
provinces that border the Yangtze river, while the typical chinensis
occupies the provinces to the south. Whether there is a territory
between these two areas where the forms are indistinguishable from
each other, is not definitely known; but the probability that such
is the case seems quite likely.
Diagnosis. A large-sized skink having a somewhat typical five-
lined coloration, the median light line apparently not bifurcating
on the head ; the dorsolateral line is continuous, arising on the supra-
oculars; the lateral line is broken up into spots, with other scattered
light spots both above and below it.
Normally no postnasal; two pairs of nuchals, and two post-
mentals; the lower secondary temporal is large, more or less fan-
shaped; subcaudals widened. Limbs elongate, usually overlapping
when adpressed. Scale rows normally 24, rarely 22 or 26; seven
upper labials (rarely 6). Frontal normally shorter than its dis-
tance from the end of the snout, in contact normally with only two
supraoculars.
Description of the species. Rostral large, the part appearing
above usually a little smaller than the frontonasal (rarely larger) ;
supranasals relatively small, only very little longer than wide,
in contact medially; frontonasal normally separated from frontal
(rarely in contact), in contact usually with the anterior loreals
(rarely separated) ; prefrontals normally much larger than supra-
nasals, forming a median suture; frontal relatively short, normally
shorter than its distance from the end of the snout, normally in
contact with only two supraoculars (occasionally with three) ; fron-
toparietals usually larger than the prefrontals, forming a long me-
dian suture; interparietal typical, usually of smaller area than the
frontoparietals, in contact with the nuchal, separating the parietals;
latter scales typical, longer than wide. Normally two pairs of
nuchals (frequently one or occasionally three).
Nasal rather small, apparently completely divided by a suture;
normally lacking a postnasal (one rarely present) ; anterior loreal
higher than wide, only slightly higher than the posterior; latter a
little longer than high, usually touching three labials; two presub-
oculars; four postsuboculars (rarely five) ; one small preocular, fol-
lowed by a diminishing series of minute scales; two small postocu-
Taylor: The Gkxi s Ki-mkcks
323
lars, the lower larger; four supraoculars, the second proportionally
very large, the first and second in contact with frontal (rarely also
the third) ; normally eight superciliaries, the anterior about 2 to 2?
times as large as last; upper median palpebral scales in contact with
the superciliaries; lower eyelid with several enlarged plates, sepa-
rated from the subocular by two granular scale rows. Primary
temporal relatively small; upper secondary temporal elongate, some-
what wider posteriorly than anteriorly; lower secondary nearly or
equally as large as upper, the upper end widened more than pos-
terior, touching the primary temporal; tertiary temporal narrow,
elongated, sometimes broken into two parts, occasionally entering
ear.
Fig. 49. Eumcces chim nsis chinensis (Gray). K.U. No. 9095; Foochow,
Fukien, China. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, 21 mm.; width, 21 mm.
The scales following the upper secondary temporals lacking the
uniform differentiation of these scales in the elegans group; seven
upper labials normally (frequently six), the last of the series largest.
The first is distinctly larger and higher than the three following
(when only six. it may be slightly smaller than the one following) ;
usually two postlabials, equal, or lower largest; two or three incon-
spicuous auricular lobules; usually six lower labials; mental mod-
erate, with a labial border only slightly longer than that of the
rostral; two postmentals, the anterior narrow; three pairs of chin-
shields; a large postgenial, the scales bordering inner edge much
longer than wide; ear rather small, surrounded by 18-20 scales.
Scales around the neck behind ear, 32-34; around narrow part of
324 The University Science Bulletin
neck, 26-29, 28 appearing most frequently; scales around body,
22-26, normally 24. Subcaudals widened, about 90 from vent to
tip of tail; eight preanal scales, the medians enlarged, the laterals
diminishing in size, the outer overlapping inner; the lateral postanal
not or but slightly differentiated, lacking all trace of a keel.
Limbs large, well-developed, overlapping a few millimeters when
adpressed; thirteen or fourteen scales about the insertion of fore-
arm; a pair of well differentiated wrist tubercles; a group of at least
six padlike palmar tubercles, the posterior largest; lamellar formula
for fingers; 5; 9; 12; 11; 6. About 18 scales around insertion of
hind limb; no trace of a patch of enlarged, differentiated scales on
posterior part of the femoral region ; two pairs of large padlike heel
plates, the posterior of each pair largest, sometimes separated; the
enlarged tubercles tend to arrange themselves longitudinally in two
rows passing toward the base of the fourth finger. Lamellar formula
for the toes: 5; 9; 12; 17; 9; intercalated row of scales on fourth
toe only on basal phalanx; terminal lamellae not tightly bound
about claws; a group of small axillary scales, these usually imbri-
cate; no small scales behind the insertion of hind leg.
Color (in alcohol). Young (snout to vent, 45 mm.), dark blackish
with a median cream or white line from posterior part of the inter-
parietal. Dorsolateral line begins on the last supraocular, and fol-
lows the edges of the second and third scale rows onto the tail,
continuous (or very rarely broken) ; anteriorly the edges of the first
and second scale rows with lighter edges, not appearing as a line;
upper and lower labials with cream dark-edged spots, also one on
the tertiary temporal; on top of head each scale with a brown area,
these areas bordered with black; sides with three rows of cream or
white spots extending to the ear, each spot covering one or two
scales. Tail bluish; chinshields light, edged with slightly darker
color; throat, breast, and undersurface of limbs light; belly grayish.
In older specimens there is a diminution in the distinctness of the
light lines until, in the male specimens, the color becomes olive,
brown-olive, or brown, and all trace of the juvenile pattern is ob-
literated. In these older specimens the head tends to become a
uniform yellow-brown (reddish in life). There is usually a darker
lateral stripe that may be more or less continuous, but which grows
less distinct as older age is reached, until practically no trace is
left, or it may form disconnected, irregular, dark spots; in this
darker area, traces of the lateral light spots may persist for many
years and in males many of the scales become reddish, especially
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
325
in the neck region. In females the lines are retained a little longer,
and in old age, when the lines are lost, often the scales on the back
retain darker edges.
Measurements of Eumeces chiru nsis chinensis (Graj
M C.Z.
29001
cf
M.C.Z.
29007
cf
M.C.Z.
29005
cf
M.C.Z.
29008
9
M.C.Z.
29003
cf
M.C.Z.
290' 14
cf
M.C.Z
29002
cf
M.C.Z.
Number
29006
S.^x
yg-
Snout (o vent
119
108
His
10)
105
96
74
45
Tail
Snout to foreleg. . . .
39
34
36
33
32
31
23
16
Snout to eye
9.5
0
9
8
8 :•
7
.5
11 to ear
'_'.->
22
22 5
18.6
IS. 2
18
11
9.5
\x'lla to groin
62
56
53
53
55
53
41
23
Width of head
19
18
18
15
IS
15
11
8
Length of head ....
21
18 5
19
16.2
20
15
18
9
Width of body
21
22
19
21
20
19
16
9
Foreleg
28
20
2.5
26
26
25
20
12
Hind leg
41
13
36
12
33
11
34
12
36
11
33
11
26
10
17
Longest toe
5
All specimens from Fung-li, Chekiang, China.
Variation. As is expected, Eumeces chinensis varies considerably
in the details of squamation, but the percentages are such that the
norm of a character is easily discerned. One difficulty has obtruded
itself, and that is the lack of certainty in the determinations of
forms reported in literature. Fortunately Mr. Pope's large series
was available for study and it was possible to arrive at a rather
accurate estimate of variation obtaining in Fukien Province. Little
that is new is added to the already published data of Schmidt (1927)
and Pope (1929) on this series.
Scale counts are available on 201 specimens. Of these, 182 have
21 rows about the middle of the body; 2 have 23; 5 have 25; and
15 have 26. Malcolm Smith (1923) notes 22 rows on a specimen
from Hainan. The variation in the scales in middorsal rows from
parietals to above the vent is from 50 to 55, the numbers 51-53
occurring with greatest frequency. In about 200 specimens ex-
amined, a postnasal occurs on one or both sides only 12 times, and
the postmental is single in only 8 cases. The second postmental
in 10 cases was abnormal, either vertically split, or united to one
or the other of the chinshields. The nuchals were normally 2-2 in
about 77 percent of the cases, the remainder had the nuchals 2-1
826 The University Science Bulletin
or 1-1. The constancy of the prefrontal suture (separating fron-
tonasal and frontal) is greater than in all other species of which
large series are available, except Eumeces laticeps. The number of
supraoculars touching the frontal shows great instability; two touch
the frontal more frequently than three, the percentage being ap-
proximately 64 and 36, respectively. Detailed counts of subdigital
lamellae of the fourth toe were not made on all of the specimens,
but in some fifty specimens the number 16 occurred in 72 percent
and 17 in about 18 percent. The limbs touch or overlap when ad-
pressed in practically all specimens. However, if the specimen is
stiffened or shrunken, they may fail slightly to touch. The limbs
are longer in the young in proportion to the axilla to groin distance.
A few other scales showed an occasional tendency to split. In
four specimens one or both prefrontals were broken. The tertiary
temporal was segmented in several cases. On the whole the tem-
porals were very constant, as was the presence of the single pair of
postlabials. The superciliaries were usually eight or nine, eight
predominating.
Fan (1931) reports on 21 specimens from Yaoshan (Loshiang
and Kutchen) in which nine have a postnasal on both, three on
one side. His statement "usually 5-5 supraoculars" is probably
an error due to counting the last superciliary.
Re?narks. In the collection of the Academy of Natural Sciences,
Philadelphia, is a specimen purporting to be from Java. The speci-
men is old and accurate measurements could not be made. There
were but 48 scales from parietals to above vent, and but 22 scale
rows about the body. In other characters discerned it appeared to
be typical. The locality I believe is erroneous.
The absence of large series from the more western provinces
makes it difficult to estimate the true relationship of this form with
Eumeces chinensis pulcher. In Chekiang both forms occur. Those
in the northern part along Hangchow bay appear to have the typical
adult coloration of pulcher, while those in the central and southern
parts are typically chinensis. One specimen from Kangpu or
Wusung, Hangchow Bay (U.S.N.M. 72916, Sowerby Coll.) has
limbs which overlap the length of two scales; while in other typical
pulcher the limbs are relatively shorter and fail to overlap save in
the very young.
The status of Cantor's Tiliqua rufo-guttata is likewise in doubt.
It comes from an island in the Chusan archipelago lying off the
Chekiang coast, and might be either chinensis or pulcher.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
327
Mr. Clifford Pope, who is personally familiar with the habitats
of the two forms, suggests thai ch/inensis is a typical mountain
form, while pulcher is a plains, open field, or river valley form.
However, Sun (1926) reports specimens from near Nanking (pre-
sumably pulcher) from the slopes of Purple Mountain. Schmidt
11927 1 suggests that future investigations may prove the two
worthy of only subspecifie rank.
Distribution. In general this form is confined to the southeastern
third of China. There are, so far as I know, not any records of the
Fig. 50. Distribution of the species of the Obsoletus group, in
Eastern Asia.
species in Kweichow or Yunnan, nor authentic records in provinces
lying to the north of those provinces in the valley of the Yangtze
river. Many literature records are omitted here, due to the un-
certainty of identification.
Locality records:
China: (Brit. Mus. 2).
Kwangsi: (Ahl, 1930) (Werner, 1903, 17 spec.) ; Yaoshan (Fan, 1931, 21
spec).
Kwangtung : (Werner, 1903, 10 spec); Hongkong (Boettger, 1893) (Brit.
Mus. 3); Lilong (Boettger, 1882); Sikiang (Brit. Mus. 1); Canton
(Vogt, 1924) (Mell, 1922) (Boettger, 1894) (Brit, Mus. 1); Hainan
(Boettger, 1894) ; Hainan, The Hummocks. 25 km. from Hoi-hao
(Smith, 1923, 1 spec).
328 The University Science Bulletin
? Szechwan: Yenchingkau, Wahnsien (A.M.N.H. 1); "Man Tschow"
upper valley of Mm river (Vogt, 1924, 2 spec).
Kiangsi: (M.C.Z. 1, Gordon Coll.).
Fukien: (A.M.N.H. 5) (Field 1); Futsing Hsien (A.M.N.H. 38) (U.S.
N.M. 3); Yenping (A.M.N.H. 90) ; Yenping fu (U.S.N.M. 25) (M.C.Z.
9) ; Ch'ungan Hsien (A.M.N.H. 6) ; Hokow (A.M.N.H. 13) ; Yoochow
(U.S.N.M. 2) (K.U. 4); Kuliang (U.S.N.M. 1); Fuelling Dist.
(U.S.N.M. 3); Amoy (Field 1); Kuatun (Field 1).
Chekiang: Ningpo (Boettger, 1894) (Brit. Mus. 2); Chusan (Brit. Mus.;
type Tiliqua rufo-guttata) (A.N.S.P. 2) ; Da-lanshan near Ningpo
(Boettger, 1893); Tung li (Mich. 1) (U.S.N.M. 9) (M.C.Z. 8); near
Mo Kan Shan (Mich. 1).
Pescadores Islands: ?(S\vinhoe, 1870). (I am unable to identify Pav-
lov's [1932] locality "Songchow Tchoeize, Mongolie Or le.")
Formosa: San shi Ka (type locality of jormosensis) (C.A.S. 1) ; Keelung
(C.A.S. 2); Taipeh (C.A.S. 1).
Eumeces chinensis pulcher (Dumeril and Bibron)
(Plate 25, Fig. 1; Figs. 50, 51)
SYNONYMY
1839. Plestiodon pulchrum Dumeril and Bibron.* Erp. Gen., V, 1839, pp. 710, 711 (type
description; type locality "China"); Gray, Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., 1845, p. 92 (China;
J. Reeves Coll.).
1842. " Tiliqua rufo-guttata Cantor. Ann. Mug. Hist., IX, 1842, p. 482 (assignment here
not certain; type not examined).
1879. Eumeces pulchra Bocourt. Miss. Sci. Mex., Liv. 6, 1879, p. 423.
1927. Eumeces pulcher Schmidt. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., LIV, Art. 4, Oct. 11, 1927,
pp. 503-505 (rehabilitation of the name pulcher for the northern Chinese form, with a
comparison of this form with typical chinensis); Gee, Bull. Dept. Biol. Yenching Univ.,
I, 1929-'30 (Jan., 1930), p. 63 (Hunan, Anhwei).
History. The specimen described by Dumeril and Bibron was
obtained from the British Museum ("L'echantillon dont il est ici
question provient du Musee Britannique ; il nous a ete donne comme
originaire de Chine") and may very probably have been one of the
series collected by J. Reeves, which likewise bears only the locality
record "China."
The original description states:
"Le Beau Plestiodonte. Plestiodon pulchrum. Nobis.
"Caracteres. Pas de plaques f reno-nasales ; oreilles vertico-ovalaires, grandes,
sans lobules a leur bord anterieur; parties superieures noires; trois lignes
dorsales blanches."
Description:
"Formes: C'est avec doute, nous l'avouons, que nous inscrivons ici cette
espeoe sous un autre nom que celui que porte le Plestiodontet decrit dans
* Both Dumeril and Gray refer to the synonymy Tiliqua pulchra Gray, Mus. Britain,
(non Illus. Ind. Zool.), a reference I have not traced. It presumably antedates Dumeril and
Bibron's name, but whether a nomem nudum I do not know. They also place in synonymy
Tiliqua de Gray Coct. (Synopt. Seine).
f Plestiodon quinquelineatum.
Taylor: The Genus Et meces 329
['article precedent; car elle n'en differe que par I'absence de plaques freno-
nasales et de lobules ou de petites ecailles flottantes de long du bord anterieur
de son orifice auriculaire.
"Coloration: Quant a son mode de coloration, il serail le meme sans deux
raies blanches laterales de moins. L'individu que nous avons maintenanf sous
les yeux, et qui est en tons points semblable a.un second que nous avons
observe dans le museum royal d'Histoire naturelle de Londres, a le bout du
museau blanc et les plaques qui le revetent en dessus et lateralement, ainsi
que les sus-oculaires de la meme couleur, mais bordees de noir. La ligne
blanche de son dos ne depasse pas 1'occiput. C'est certainmenl un jeune sujet.
En voici les principales dimensions."
'■Dimensions: Longueur totale, 8" V" \ Tete, long., 8"'; Cou, long., 5"';
Tronc, long.. 2"; Memb. anter., long., 1"; raenib. poster., long.. 1"4"'; queue,
Ions., 4"S"\"
'-■•
That the authors compared the species with " quinquelineatum"
rather than with their Plestiodon sinensis is due to the fact that the
type of P. pulchrum is a young individual with juvenile coloration-
while the available specimens of their Plestiodon Sinense (three
from China) all appear to have been adults and lacking juvenile
markings.
Four years later Cantor (1842) described a skink from the island
of Chusan as Tiliqua rujo- guttata as follows: '"Bronze-colored
above, with four black zigzag lines; the sides pale yellow, with
numerous red spots. Beneath pale yellow."
Bocourt (Mission Sci., Liv. 6, 1879, p. 423) accepts the two species,
separating them in his Tableau synoptique (p. 423) on the basis of
a single postmental scale in pulchra and a double postmental scale
in sinensis; and on the differences in coloration.
Boulenger (1887) placed rufo-guttata, pulchrum and chinensis
in the single species, Eumeces chinensis (Gray).
Schmidt (1927) on the basis of a series of seven specimens col-
lected in China by Clifford Pope, reestablishes the name pulcher
for the large skink occurring in the provinces of Hunan and Anhwei.
He shows that, save for the color differences, the basis of separation
is average scale differences. He states, "This series differs from the
Fukien chinensis in a number of characters, each insufficient if taken
alone, to warrant the distinction of a species (or a subspecies) but
amounting to conclusive evidence when taken together."
Besides the series studied by Schmidt, I have had available for
study four specimens in the United States National Museum:
Nos. 31720 Shanghai, 67034 Suchow, Kiangsi, 73187, twenty miles
west of Shanghai, and 72916 Kangpu or Wusung, Hang Chow Bay.
From my study I feel that the more northern form of Eumeces
330
The University Science Bulletin
chinensis is worthy of recognition, but believe it wiser to assign it
subspecific, rather than specific, rank. Schmidt (1927, p. 505)
himself regarded this as a probable relationship.
Diagnosis. Closely related to Eumeces chinensis chinensis (Gray) ,
having practically the same growth pattern and adult size, but
having three as the normal number of supraoculars touching frontal
(rarely two) ; the number of upper labials normally six (seven
occurring occasionally). The adult females retain to a large ex-
tent the juvenile color pattern (less distinct and occasionally partly
obliterated in males).
Fig. 51. Eumeces chinensis pulcher (Dumeril and Bibron). C.A.S. No.
14662, Shanghai. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length, approximately 11 mm.; width, about 10 mm.
Description of species (drawn from Field M. Nos. 7185 $ and
7186 5 , Ningkwo, Anhwei, China). Portion of rostral visible above
half the size of the frontonasal; supranasals relatively short and
wide, forming a median suture; frontonasal broader than long, in
contact with the anterior loreal; prefrontals moderately large, form-
ing a strong median suture; frontal only slightly narrower poste-
riorly than anteriorly, touching three supraoculars (abnormal in
7186, where the supraoculars are fused and broken on the right side
while the third supraocular on the left side is minutely separated
from frontal); frontal as long as its distance from end of snout;
frontoparietals about same size as prefrontals, forming a median
suture; parietals moderate in size, not enclosing the interparietal;
nuchals two pairs (in the male there are three on left side).
Nasal at least partially divided by a suture, the anterior part
smaller than posterior part (including nostril); no postnasal; an-
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces 331
terior loreal higher than wide, higher than second, broadly in con-
tact with first and second labials; posterior loreal moderate, its
greatest height usually less than its length, touching two (rarely
three) labials; two presuboculars ; tour postsuboculars ; a small pre-
ocular. followed by three granules diminishing in size; seven super-
ciliaries, the anterior largest, often as large as first supraocular;
last of the series about half as large as first; two small postoculars,
the lower largest; upper median palpebral scales in contact with
the superciliaries ; four enlarged plates on the lower lid, separated
by about three rows of granules from the subocular, the lower row
relatively much enlarged; four supraoculars, three normally touch-
ing the frontal; primary temporal moderate, longer than wide;
upper secondary large, the main axis of the scale diagonal; lower
secondary triangular; tertiary small; six (or less frequently seven)
upper labials, three (or four) preceding the subocular; first dis-
tinctly higher than other scales preceding the suboculars; last labial
largest, usually much longer than high, separated from ear by a
rather large postlabial, upon which is superimposed one (rarely
two) smaller scales; five lower labials; mental with a slightly larger
labial border than rostral ; two postmentals (the second scale broken
in the female) ; three pairs of chinshields, the first pair in contact;
a well-developed postgenial, bordered on its inner edge by a scale
longer than wide.
Scales on body in parallel rows except in axilla; the median pair
on back usually a little larger than adjoining row; 31 scales about
neck behind ear; narrow part of neck, 27; around body at axilla, 31;
around middle of body, 23-24 rows; 17 scales about base of tail.
Pits on scales distinct, numerous behind ear, sides of neck, on arm
and about arm insertion and axilla, on upper and posterior side of
femur and behind insertion of hind leg; 16 scales around insertion
of arm: two well-developed wrist tubercles; palm with six or eight
enlarged padlike granules; lamellar formula for fingers: 5; 9; 11;
10; 7. Eighteen scales around insertion of hind limb; four padlike
heel tubercles with two small conical tubercles on sole; lamellar
formula for toes: 6; 9; 12; 16; 10; no granular scales behind inser-
tion of the hind leg; an intercalated row of scales on digits extend-
ing nearly half the length of toes on outer side, elsewhere seldom ex-
tending beyond basal phalanx; toes strongly compressed; eight
preanal scales, the median much enlarged, diminishing in size on
sides, the outer scales overlapping inner; ear rather small, sur-
rounded bv about 20 scales.
332
The University Science Bulletin
«
3
kq
io a
>r
c
u:
■H C
oc
«
I-
■OiO
c
tt
CN
CN
i-
c
■H
isS't
) ^
Et~
X
• co
Z°
CO
o
CN
■n c
-1>
rt
■*
CN1 <T-
CO ^H
»— . <-H
<SCO
«i
Z°
^1 (No
o
CO
•* CO c
C-l
2
CO
p
CO i-h
*^H »~H
<5C«3
•<
• lO
Z°
00
-p
-t
N O N
o
i-H
CO
i-H CM C
■-H
<5CO
«i
u:
.-
IT
»— 1
^2o
oi to
t>
c
CO
ir
CO
^H
o
co **o
■H 0) 00 iH
cog
p
-*
c\
^hOO
t^
oc
CO l-O
ifi
co
o o
©
co >r.
r-
^H c
CO ^h
y 'H
02 to
p
fcrH
1*5 f£|
CO to
r-
CN
CO
(X
ce
1C
i-H ^H
oa
co
>r.
I-
—<
o:
I-H
£St
)
a?K
P
ic
co
D
a0
t- l~.
a
CJ C
IG
-f
-*
CN
IH
Oi
o
T.
I—
o
«
■-H
£r~0
h
ajw
P
z
t
ir
i-O
e» ec
to
.—
t
CN
u:
OJ o:
T5 to
co
co
I—
"300 o
h
pC(t»
In
Z10
>o
tc
o
i-
>c
CNI
00
o
c
CN
rH
k— . CO
<<CS
<
CN
■ to
^"* CM ^
_|
OJ
a
t".
0
r-
t^
■■0
0
^"rt >
.
d CO
<j
b
1
)
ce
X
a.
>
1
1
4
a
0)
!>
a.
a.
&i
J >„
o
8 -
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
b
' n
4i
-t-
43
s»
] 4.
to
«-
+3
*j
-t-
«
j=
.£
a>
-
5
5
5
—
a
i ~
"a
■t
CO
3 -> x
c
0
C
c
.—
c
t-
C
a
S2
a
V
c
a:
c
c
3
1
c
s
,3
J3
g
2
o
~ c
" o c^
>hK
.«
SQ - -
f ^ I
.— o
>>a_
a 3 -
>.t~" s
-t3=o -
"° s
t-. ■ Oi
OOm
gZt-
.. o
S. o Z
a> 5
i- -* .'-"
m c bfl
ajZ a
s
'3 o
w
B^l
ggm
|0S
is50
ai0' —
~ « C
a!
Sco' —
ogco
^m -
■^to -
S CO «
lis
~ 0 ^
S;Z ^
o
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 333
Color. Male dark olive above, cadi scale showing a lighter,
bronzy, posterior edge; sides with numerous deep Mack spots, each
less than half a scale in size, frequently contiguous; sides, below
dark region, bluish-gray, with lighter scales intermixed which ap-
pear to have been reddish in life; snout and sides of head generally
amber color; limbs generally like body, with small black and light
flecks, especially on proximal portion. Ventral surface generally
light, some of the scales of abdomen showing darker on anterior
edges of scales.
Female with three dim light stripes on back, olive in color, each
edged by rows of black dots; lateral line represented by a few dis-
connected light spots; scales on side of head edged more or less
with brown; dark stripes on side more distinct than in male. Tail
colored like dorsal surface of body.
Variation. The number of scales around the middle of body
varies from 24 to 26 rows; 24 occurring eight times; 25, once; 26,
twice. The scales around the neck vary from 26 to 28; 26, four
times; 27, twice; and 28, five times. The upper labials are six or
-even. Counting both sides, six occurs fifteen times while seven
occurs seven times; the nuchals are normally 2-2, three occurring
on one side in two cases. Supraoculars are three or four; counting
both sides: three occurs four times; four occurs 18 times. In-
variably two postmentals are present; a postnasal occurs on one
side in one specimen. The frontonasal is either broader than long
or equally as broad as long. The frontonasal is in contact with
frontal in a single case. Supraoculars touching frontal are either
two or three; three occurring fifteen times, two occurring seven
times.
In color the variation has to do chiefly with age, the younger the
specimen, the more closely is juvenile coloration approached. A
young specimen of pulcher, when compared with the young of
typical chinensis, shows the following differences: The dorsolateral
line is broken throughout its length instead of being continuous; the
rounded labial spots are nearly surrounded by dark color; much
less so in chinensis. Pits on scales are smaller and spread over a
wider area on edge of scale; in chinensis fewer, and more segre-
gated; light spots present on frontoparietal. The granular scale
rows on the lower eyelid distinctly larger than in chinensis. In life
the red lateral coloration is probably more pronounced in pulcher
than in chinensis.
Remarks. The exact type locality of neither of the two forms is
334 The University Science Bulletin
known, but it is highly probable that the typical specimens of
chinensis were collected on the coast near Hong Kong in the vicinity
of Canton ; while that of pulcher may have come from Shanghai.
Distribution. It is uncertain just how sharp the line of de-
marcation is between the northern and southern forms of this
Chinese species. The northern specimens of chinensis pulcher all
appear to have been taken in the lowland regions of the valley of
the Yangtze river. It seems probable that certain literature rec-
ords of Eumeces chinensis chinensis actually belong to the northern
form. (See fig. 50 for distributional map. )
Locality records:
China: (type, N.H.M.P. 1).
Kiangsu: Shanghai (C.A.S. 1) (U.S.N.M. 1); 20 miles west of Shanghai
(U.S.N.M. 1); Kangpu or Wusung on Hangchow Bay (U.S.N.M. 1).
Kiangsi: Suchow (U.S.N.M. 1).
Hunan: Huping College, Yochow (A.M.N.H. 1).
Anhwei: Ningkwo (Field 2) (A.M.N.H. 4).
Eumeces kishinouyei Stejneger
(Plate 26; Figs. 52, 53, 50)
SYNONYMY
1901. Eumeces kishinouyei Stejneger. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XIV, pp. 190, 191 (type
description; type No. 22, Science College Museum, from Islands of Yayeyama Group,
Riu Kiu Archipelago); and Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., 58, 1907, pp. 210-213, figs. 186-
189 (top, ventral, and lateral view of the head, and underside of foot) (gives type
locality as Miyakoshima, Sakishima group; Tashiro, collector); Barbour, Proc. New
Eng. Zool. Club, IV, 1909, p. 64 ("Ishigakishima") ; Van Denburgh, Proc. Cal. Acad.
Sci., (4), 1908-'13 (1912), pp. 227, 228 (Miyakoshima and Ishigakishima).
History. From material loaned by the Science College Museum,
Tokyo, Stejneger in 1901 described this form briefly, naming it
for Dr. K. Kishinouye of the Imperial Fisheries Bureau, Tokyo.
The type locality is Miyakojima, of the southern Yayeyama group
of the Riu Kiu (Loo Choo) chain which lies close to the large
island of Formosa. The type is No. 22, Science College Museum,
Tokyo, Japan.
Stejneger later (1907, p. 210, figs. 186-189) described the species
more fully, giving a detailed study of a series of specimens from
the Yayeyama group, discussing its relationship with other related
forms and publishing line drawings of the head. Van Denburgh
(1912, pp. 227-228) reported on seven specimens from the same
group: five from the type locality; two from the near-by island
Ishigakijima, from which place Stejneger had already listed speci-
mens.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
:;::.-»
The form is one of the largest species of the genus and, as pointed
out by Stejneger, is closely related to Eumeces chinensis.
Diagnosis. Characterized by a seven-lined pattern; head with a
pair of dim lines which join on the frontoparietal; a continuous
dorsolateral line from the anterior supraocular, a lateral line, broken
into dots on labials and neck, continuous on the side, and a sub-
lateral line broken into separate spots anteriorly. The pattern is
retained by females until old age; it is less distinct or obsolete in
old males. No differentiated postfemoral scutes; no well-differen-
tiated lateral postanal scute; normally a postnasal and two post-
Fig. 52. Eumeces kishinouyei Stejneger. After Stejneger (1907, figs. 186,
187). Sci. Coll. Mus. Tokyo, No. 22; Miyakoshima, Sakishima group, Riu
Kiu Islands, Japan. A. lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Ac-
tual head width, 24 mm.
mentals; 24-26 scale rows; two or three pairs of nuchals; outer
preanals overlap inner; subcaudals widened; intercalated lateral
lamellae on fourth toe not extending to the three distal joints; limbs
overlapping, when adpressed, nearly the length of the fourth toe.
Description of species (drawn largely from topotypes) . The por-
tion of the rostral visible above equal to one half to two thirds the
area of the frontonasal; supranasals forming a median suture, their
greatest width about two thirds their greatest length, touching
the postnasal laterally; frontonasal very variable in size, usually
broader than long, in contact with the first loreal laterally; pre-
frontals moderate, forming a median suture, usually separating the
frontonasal from frontal, forming a wider suture with the second
336
The University Science Bulletin
loreal than with the first, the suture with first supraocular not much
greater than that with the first superciliary; frontal somewhat wider
anteriorly than posteriorly, as long as or very slightly longer than
its distance from the end of the snout, not or ven~ slightly con-
stricted medially, usually touching three supraoculars (rarely only
two) ; frontoparietals usually elongated, large, exceeding the inter-
parietal in area, forming a median suture usually more than half
their length; parietals large, typical, narrowly separated posteriorly;
interparietal narrowly pointed behind, its length exceeding its width.
Fig. 53. Eumeces kishinouyei Stejneger. C.A.S. No. 21724, Ishigaki-
jima, Riu Kiu Islands, Japan. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of
head. Actual head length, 15 mm.; width, 12 mm.
Nasal moderate, very distinctly divided, the anterior part large
and triangular, posterior part small, narrow; the nostril large, the
greater part anterior to a vertical line drawn from the labial end
of the suture between rostral and first labial; postnasal usually
present; first loreal much higher than second; second much longer
than high, sometimes approaching once and two thirds as long as
high; two presuboculars; one preocular, slightly above corner of
eyelids, followed by a second smaller scale; posterior corner of eye-
lids terminating between the two small postoculars; median upper
palpebral scales in contact with superciliaries; four (rarely five)
postsuboculars ; usually five enlarged, opaque plates on lower eye-
lid, separated from subocular by three rows of small scutes; seven
upper labials, the last largest, four preceding the subocular, the
first highest and of an area equal to, or only slightly less than, that
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 337
of any ol the other three; sixth no larger in area than fifth (sub-
ocular); primary temporal elongate, sometimes nearly one and one
half times as long as wide, touching both secondary temporals;
upper secondary only slightly widened posteriorly; lower secondary
larger in area: tertiary small, scarcely differentiated from the supra-
auricular scales, separated from ear by a postlabial reaching to the
i dge of ear, separated from ear lobules by a very small preauricular
scute, forming equal sutures with seventh labial and lower secondary
temporal; second postlabial superimposed above the posterior end
of lower postlabial, separating the lower secondary temporal from
the ear; four supraoculars, usually three touching frontal; seven
superciliaries, the anterior three times the size of second ; lasl . second
in size; two or usually three pairs of nuchals.
Mental normal, its labial extent slightly greater than that of
rostral; two postmentals; three pairs of chinshields, the third pair
widest transversely; third pair followed by a greatly elongated post-
genial, bordered on its inner side anteriorly by a small elongate
scale.
Eighteen to twenty-two scales about ear opening; median dorsal
series of scales widened, somewhat larger than lateral scales; dorsal
and lateral scales of adults usually show five very dim striae which
follow on the surface of the scale above the longitudinal canals in
the scales; scale rows immediately behind ear, 28-30; narrow part
of neck. 2b' ; 32 rows, five mm. behind insertion of arm ; 24 rows about
middle of belly; some of the lower, intercalated axillary scale rows
extend back to near middle of body; about 17 rows about base of
tail; 47 scales in a row from parietals to above anus; subcaudal
-erics strongly widened transversely; lateral postanal not or scarcely
differentiated; six preanals, the median greatly enlarged, the two
outer pairs differentiated; the outer scales overlapping inner; head
normal or somewhat widened (old male) ; limbs long, the adpressed
hind limb reaching elbow of the adpressed forelimb; toes relatively
short; two strongly differentiated wrist tubercles and twelve large
palmar pads more or less contiguous; lamellar formula for finger-:
5; 8; 10; 10; 7; usually two pairs of padlike scutes on heel, separated
medially by small granules; lamellar formula for toes: 6; 8; 13; 17;
11: a. series of enlarged padlike subimbricate or conical scales from
heel to base of fourth toe, and a similar row to third toe; the inter-
calated -erics of scales between dorsal and ventral lamellae of the
fourth toe. on basal joint only; a small group of granular axillary
scale-; sometimes a single row of granules behind insertion of hind
leu.
22—1123
338
The University Science Bulletin
Color: Young (84 mm.). Dorsal coloration olive-brown, the
scales showing some darker areas where they adjoin white (or
cream) lines. A median light line from first nuchals to some distance
on tail. This seems to divide and dimly connect with two dimly
defined lines which follow the lateral frontal sutures and join on
the frontoparietal; dorsolateral light line begins on the anterior
superciliary, follows the third scale row, occupying a half of the
area (sometimes encroaching on the outer edge of the second scale
row ) , continuing on tail for two thirds or more of its length. A
series of irregular cream spots on labials back of ear to above arm,
where they now form a continuous lateral series which extends
along the fifth or edges of the fifth and sixth scale rows; a deep
brown lateral stripe between the dorsolateral and lateral lines,
darker on the outer edges; a sublateral brown stripe, bordered by a
series of cream spots or a continuous line, is usually evident; ventral
surfaces dull cream.
In adult females the color is more olive, the darker areas on the
scales tending to form distinct lines. In the larger males the lines
become almost obsolete, the brown lateral stripe represented by a
few, darker, scattered spots.
Variation. Twelve specimens of this species have been available
and a study of them confirms the fact that, while certain differences
exist between specimens from different islands, the number of speci-
Measurements of Eumeces kishinouyei Stejneger
Museum
Number
Sex
U.S.N.M.
34080
cT
U.S.N.M.
34081
&
C.A.S.
21722
9
C.A.S.
21720
9
C.A.S.
21726
9
A.M.N.H.
21226
d"
C.A.S.
21719
cT
C.A.S.
21721
cT
C.A.S.
21724
9
Snout to vent. . .
164
140
134
131
125
116
96.2
S2
80
Tail
198
102
12
133
10.2
104
11
7.7
131
7
9.5
9
7
Snout to ear ....
39
30
25.2
24
25
26.2
18
17
16.2
Snout to foreleg. .
55
45
3S
35
39
37
31
27
27
Axilla to groin.. .
78
73
73
67
65
63
45.5
43
36
Width of head . .
34
28
18
20
20
24
14
11
13
Length of head. .
31
26
23
22
21.5
22
17
15.5
15
Width of body . .
30
27
23
99
15
15
16
45
40
35
34
33
34
25.5
22
22
Hind leg
61
53
50
50.5
47
45
37
34
31
Longest toe
21
18
15.2
15.2
16
19
14
11
11.5
Nos. 34080, 34081, 21724, 21726 are from Ishigakijima; No. 21226 is from Yonakunijima;
Nos. 21719, 21720, 21721, 21722 are from Miyakojima.
Taylor: The Gi ntus El mkces 339
mens is so small, and the differences of such a character, that no
subspecific separations seem warranted.
A specimen from Yonakunijima (A.M.N.H. 21226, snout to vent
measurement 116 mm.) has the head width exceeding the length by
two millimeters, a condition that appears only in very old males.
That this specimen i- senile is evidenced by the shrivelled condi-
tion of the testes. A male from Ishigakijima (132 mm.) shows the
head slightly wider than long, but in an older male from the same
island (164mm.) the head width exceeds the length by four milli-
meters.
It would appear that the Yonakunijima specimens never attain
the size of specimens on Ishigakijima or Miyakojima. Of five speci-
mens from Miyakojima, three lack the postnasal, although one of
the three has a part of the posterior nasal partially separated. In
all other specimens the postnasal is normally present. The number
of nuchals is either two or three, the numbers 3-3 occurring three
times. 2-2 three times and 3-2 six times. There are two postmentals.
However, in two specimens from Miyakojima the second postmental
is vertically split, and in one of the two specimens, fused on one side
with the first pair of chinshields. The superciliaries vary between
seven and nine, the numbers 7-7 occurring twice, 7-8 twice, 8-8 five
times, 7-9 once, and 8-9 once. In three specimens the frontonasal
is in contact with the frontal. The usual number of supraoculars
touching the frontal is three, the numbers 3-3 occurring nine times;
2-2 twice; 3-2 once.
The number of subdigital lamellae on fourth toe varies between 15
and 18, the numbers 15 occurring once, 16 nine times, 17 twelve
times and 18 once.
Very little variation occurs in the character of the temporals. In
one specimen the upper secondary is considerably enlarged and the
tertiary broken into two scales.
Remarks. My reasons for recognizing this form as a species dis-
tinct from Eumeces chinensis are based on the fact that the species
i- much larger ( largest specimen in 198 Eumeces chinensis, 127 mm.;
largest kishinouyei 164 mm.); the dorsal scales tend to develop
striations in the adults; the pitting on the lateral scales is very much
more strongly pronounced; the limbs are distinctly longer, over-
lapping, usually, nearly the length of the fourth finger; the presence
of a seven-lined color pattern in the young, with a pair of curving
lines on the head, more or less continuous with the median line, and
the retention of this pattern throughout the greater part of the
340 The University Science Bulletin
individual's life; and the presence normally of a postnasal scute.
However, kishinouyei is allied more closely to chinensis than to any
other known species.
Distribution. The species as here defined appears to be confined
to the Yayeyama and Miyaka groups of the Riu Kiu Islands, these
the southernmost islands of the chain, lying close to Formosa.
Specimens are known from the larger islands. (See Fig. 50 for
distributional map.)
Locality records:*
Miyakojima: (Science College Tokyo 2. including type) (C.A.S. 5).
Ishigakijima: (C.A.S. 2) (U.S.N.M. 2) (M.C.Z. 1).
Iriomotejima : (Science College Tokyo 3).
Yonakunijima: (A.M.N.H. 2).
MULTIVIRGATUS GROUP
To this group I assign five small species extending from Nebraska
southwest to Nayarit, Mexico, including Sinaloa, Sonora, Arizona,
Colorado, New Mexico and Chihuahua.
The color pattern in the group is very variable, ranging from a
most elaborately marked species, multivirgatus, to the uniformly
olive-colored humilis; in a third a median line is wanting and the
dorsolateral and lateral light lines are well defined (gaigei).
That none of these forms are color varieties or subspecies may be
affirmed since their ranges overlap and three may occur in the same
general area (humilis, multivirgatus, and gaigei from Guadelupe
Mts.).
With the exceptions of multivirgatus, all are quite rare in collec-
tions, each being known from one or only a few specimens.
The group may be characterized as small or medium-sized mem-
bers of the genus, of variable coloration and marking; parietals
usually not enclosing interparietal (enclosed in parvulvs) ; one (or
no) postnasal; postgenial bordered by a scale longer than wide on
the inner margin; the limbs, barely touching in the young, are widely
separated in adults; postmental single or double.
Key to the Species of the MuLTrviRGATUs Group
A. Postmental single.
B. No postnasal present: young with at least short dorsolateral and lateral linps;
palpebrals and superciliaries in contact generally: the primary temporal large,
approaching size of the upper secondary temporal.
C. Parietals enclose interparietal; 24 scale rows; scales bordering ear do
not overlap it; max. size, 51 mm. (Western Mexico).
Eumeces parvulus Taylor, page 363
* The spelling of these names is the same as that in Okada, The Tailless Batrachians of
the Japanese Empire, 1931.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 341
CC. Parietals not enclosing interparietal; scales bordering car overlap it;
20 scale rows; max. size known, 47mm. (probably grows lari
(Sonora, Mexico) Eumeces pa Taylor, pagi
BB. A small postnasal usually present; young lacking all trace of dorsolateral and
lateral lines; seal.'-, parietals to above anus, 61-63; palpebral and supen
separated throughout (or practically so) by a series of intercalated granules;
primary temporal large; a brown lateral band; 24-26 scale rows; olive with
blue tail in young; bronze or olive bronze in adult. (New Mexico, Texas and
Western Mexico) Eumeces humilis Boulenger, page 358
AA. Two postmentals normally; postnasal present or absent; anterioi temporal variable;
scales under tail more widened; median line present or absent; dorsolateral lit
present; the lateral line present "i absent; dorsal color variable; the palpebral
scales always separated partially from superciliaries
B. No distinct median line or traces "t bifurcating lines on head in young or
adults; postnasal present or absent; 24 scale rows; 16 scales around tail at
base; snout to vent, 66 mm.; distinct dorsolateral and lateral lines, with a lat-
eral brown stripe. (New Mexico and western Texas.)
Eumeces gaigei Taylor, page 353
BB. A rather dim, broad, secondary median line develops with age, or may be
dimly evident in young: dorsolateral line strongly denned, narrow: primary
lateral line to forearm or to hind leg; if not, a secondary line develops on
side with age; ground color produces brown lines bordering the light lines
and as a result secondary light lines (usually quite light in color) appear be-
tween the other darker lines ; postnasal normally present (occasionally absent) ;
scale rows, 24-26; max. size, 73 mm. (Nebraska and Wyoming south through
Colorado and New Mexico) Eumeces multivirgatus (Hallowell), page 341
Eumeces multivirgatus (Hallowell)
(Plates 27, 28; Figs. 54, 55, 56)
SYNONYMY
1857. Plestiodon multivirgatum Hallowell. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1857, p. 215 (type
description; type locality "Posa creek, 460 miles west of Fort Riley. Kansas" [prob-
ably Cow creek, Larimer Co., Colo.]; Hammond Coll.); Garman, Bull. Essex Institute,
XYI, Jan. 9, 1884. pp. 14-15 (placed with Eumeces); Stejneger and Barbour, Check
List N. Amer. Amph. Rept,, 1917, p. 70; Pratt, Yert. Anim. U. S., 1923, p. 207.
1858. Plestiodon leytogrammus Baird. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1858, p. 256 (type
description; type locality Platte River Yalley [Nebraska?] Lt. Warren, Dr. Hayden
Colls.); Garman, Bull. Essex Inst., XYI, Jan. 9, 1884, pp. 14-15 (placed under
Eumeces).
1858. Plestiodon inornatus Baird. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1858, p. 256 (type descrip-
tion; type locality Sand Hills of Platte river [Nebraska]: Lt. Warren and Dr.
Hayden Colls.); Garman, Bull. Essex Inst,, XVI, Jan. 9, 1884, pp. 14, 15 (placed
under Eumeces).
1875. Eumeces multivirgatus Cope. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, 1875, p. 45; Cragin,
Kansas Acad. Sci., VII, 1879-'80 (1880), p. 120; Yarrow, Bull. U. S. Nat, Mus.,
No. 24, 1882, p. 4 ( ? Rio Pecos, Texas); Cragin, Kansas Acad. Sir, IX, 1883-'84
(1885), p. 138 (? Neosho Falls, Kansas); and Bull. Washburn Col. Lab., I, 1885,
Mar. -Apr., No. 3, p. 102 (same data as in preceding paper); Boulenger, Cat. Liz.
Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 365 (footnote); Cope, Ann. Rept. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1898
(1900), pp. 653-655, fig. 181; Brown, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1903, p. 553;
Ellis and Henderson. Univ. Colorado Studies, X, No. 2. 1913, pp. 80, 81 (near
Greeley, Colo.); ? Strecker, Baylor Bull., XVIII, No. 4, Aug., 1916, p. 26 (error
regarding type of Plestiodon inornatus due to mechanical error in printing [Cope,
1900, p. 655], the 1 .racket should not include the Texas spec. No. 3122); Dit:
Rept. Book, 1915, p. 196; Stejneger and Harbour, Cluck List X. Amer. Amph. Rept.,
2d Ed., 1923, p. 76; Van Denburgh, Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci., (4), XIII, No. 12, Mar.
18, 1924 (Xew M( ' -kerell, Zool. Colorado, 1927. p. 106 (New Mexico
records, not Colorado [part,]); Burt, Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis, XXVI, No. 1, Aug.
1928, pp. 56-58 (Kansas records given are questionable); Mosauer, Occ. Papers Mus.
Zool. Univ. Michigan, No. 246, June 9, 1932 (part.); Stejneger and Barbour, Check
List N. Amer. Amph. Rept., 3d Ed., 1933, p. 81.
342 The University Science Bulletin
1875. Eumeces leptogrammus Cope. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, 1875, p. 45; Cragin,
Kansas Acad. Sci., VII (1879-'80), 1880, p. 120; Yarrow, Bull. U. S. Nat, Mus.,'
No. 24, 1882, p. 40 ("100 mi. east of Fort Laramie, Wyo."); Boulenger, Cat. Liz.'
British Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 378 (regards epipleurotis as being the adult of leptogram-
mus); Cope, Ann. Rept. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1898 (1900), p. 651, fig. 130; Ellis and
Henderson, Univ. Colorado Studies, X, No. 2, 1913, pp. 80, 81; Strecker, Baylor
Bull., XVIII, No. 4, 1916, p. 26; Ditmars, Reptile Book, 1915, pp. 197, 198.
1875. Eumeces inornatus Cope. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, 1875, p. 45; Cragin, Kansas
Acad. Sci., VII, (1879-'80), 1880, p. 120.
1880. Eumeces epipleurotis Cope. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 17, 1880, pp. 40, 41 (type
description; type locality "Northern Boundary of Texas," and "Nebraska at Ft.
Kearney"); Cragin, Kansas Acad. Sci., VII (1879-'80), 1880, p. 120.
History. This species, one of the most distinctive of all that are
found within the borders of the United States, considered on the
basis of coloration and markings, was described as Plestiodon mul-
tivirgatum in 1857 by Hallowell, from a single specimen collected,
presumably, in northeastern Colorado by Doctor Hammond, U.
S. A., at Cow creek, "450 miles west of Fort Riley" (Kansas).
The following year Baird again described the species under two
separate names, Plestiodon leptogrammus and Plestiodon inornatus,
from material presumably collected in western Nebraska by Lieu-
tenant Warren and Dr. F. V. Hayden, the type locality being "Platte
River Valley" for leptogrammus, and for inornatus "Sand Hills of
Platte." These were separated on the basis of a variation in the
character of the postnasals, and on color differences. It would ap-
pear that Baird was unaware of the previous description by Hallo-
well of multivirgatus.
In 1880 Cope again described the form under the name Eumeces
epipleurotis from the "northern boundary of Texas" and from "Ne-
braska at Fort Kearney." Later the second specimen was listed
under multivirgatus (Cope, 1900 ».
Boulenger (1887) makes epipleurotis a synonym of leptogrammus
but fails to allocate inornatus and multivirgatus, and merely lists
them in a footnote (p. 365) without further comment, Cope (1900)
failed to agree with Boulenger's disposition of the forms and main-
tained three of them as distinct, but placed inornatus as a synonym
of multivirgatus.
The four-lined pattern (with a dim secondary median line and a
suggestion of secondary bifurcating lines on the head), is usually
largely obscured by the secondary pattern of dark and light lines.
The brown pigment of the ground color forms a series of dark lines
leaving a ground color of secondary light lines. It seems to present
something of the 'desert coloration' of many mammals and reptiles.
Unfortunately I have not examined any live or freshly preserved
young material and am not aware whether the tail of the young is
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 343
blue or not; the young in the preserved materia] examined have
tails with only a suggestion of blue, but they are probably dark blue
in life.
The types of inornatus (No. 3110, Q. S. Nat. Mus., 2 specimens)
arc puzzling. They are in excellent condition and still have the
chief color characteristics described by Cope (1900). The type
description does not mention color, but the name suggests the lack
of markings. These specimens are pea green ( Ridge way 's ) , uni-
formly colored over the dorsal surface of head and body to the tail
(the regenerated tail approaching buff), while the ventral surface is
generally a much lighter shade of pea green, the chin and throat
cream. There arc no lines or markings discernible save a doubtful
suggestion of the dorsolateral light line. As these specimens are of
medium size, both 53 millimeters from snout to vent, the loss of
markings cannot be construed as a change brought about by old age.
The measurements, given elsewhere, show no variations from the
typical.
The types of Eumeces epipleurotis are in the U. S. National
Museum iXos. 9219, Fort Kearney. Nebraska, one specimen [for-
merly two?], and 5263, Northern Boundary of Texas). The second
of these two specimens is in a very bad state, lacking all trace of
color pattern, and cannot be identified with certainty. The other
specimen, 9219, is in good condition. This specimen I designate as
the lectotype of Eumeces epipleurotis, since it appears to be the
specimen from which the type description was drawn. (Cope, 1900,
p. 651. was under the wrong impression — that No. 5263 was in ex-
istence.) This lectotype is a very typical specimen of Eumeces
multivirgatus. The other specimen cannot be certainly identified,
but quite probably it is a specimen of multivirgatus.
The types of Eumeces leptogrammus apparently are lost; at least
they are no longer to be found in the National Museum collections
so designated. Cope (1900) lists the type number given by Baird
i No. 3119) with the following notation: "10 specimens, Running
Water. Nebraska, Lieut. Warren," but docs not designate them as
the types. Judging by the type descriptions and that given by
Cope (1900). leptogrammus is an absolute synonym of multivir-
gatus.
The type of multivirgatus is No. 9371, Academy Natural Sciences
of Philadelphia. It is in excellent condition, save that a few scales
are missing on the sides and abdomen. Hallowell stated that the
type locality was Posa creek, 460 miles west of Fort Riley, Kan.
344 The University Science Bulletin
Fortunately, the original tag is present and reads "Cow creek."
The "Posa" is either a typographical error or an error of Hallowell
in reading the label. It most probably refers to Cow creek, Lari-
mer Co., Colorado, which is roughly this distance, though some-
what north of direct west.
It seems certain that leptogrammus and epipleurotis should be
thrown into synonymy. I am less certain in regard to inornatus,
since the total absence of the elaborate color pattern (provided it
has not been brought about by preservation) suggests change in the
species that, were it a prevalent condition, should receive nomen-
clatorial recognition. In June, 1932, I made a journey into Ne-
braska to study multivirgatus in the field, hoping that new collec-
tions might throw some light on the matter. Five days spent in
intensive search resulted in my finding not a single individual, al-
though a large variety of possible habitats were examined, and
this in more than thirty localities between Ogallala and Scott
City, Neb. In this work I am reluctantly placing inornatus in the
synonymy of multivirgatus.
Diagnosis. A dim secondary median line extending length of
body, apparently bifurcating on the interparietal; the dorsolateral
light lines distinct ; the laterals present to arm ; additional secondary
dark and light lines formed by ground color also present, growing
more distinct with age.
A variable postnasal (occasionally absent or greatly reduced),
small or large, separating, or not, the anterior loreal from the
labials; normally two postmentals (rarely one) ; 24-26 scale rows
around body and 61-65 scales in row from occiput to above anus;
generally light gray to grayish-white above with, usually, ten brown
longitudinal lines of unequal width, several extending to near tip
of tail.
Description of species ( drawn largely from specimens from north-
eastern Colorado). Portion of the rostral visible from above some-
what less than extent of the frontonasal, from which it is separated
by the length of the supranasal suture; supranasals not greatly
longer than wide, in contact or not with the postnasal; frontonasal
broader than long, usually separated from the frontal, touching the
anterior loreal laterally; prefrontals pentagonal, the inner sides
usually smallest (quadrangular when frontonasal and frontal are
in contact) ; frontal much wider anteriorly than posteriorly, slightly
constricted at a point about one fourth of its length from the pos-
terior end, and in contact with three supraoculars (the third rarely
Taylor: The Genus \'a meces
345
excluded); frontoparietals moderate, forming a median suture one
third of their length; parietals moderate, not enclosing the inter-
parietal; latter, small, not greatly attenuated; normally two nuchals,
the anterior widest, but posterior pair may be broken up into four
-cales almost identical with the dorsal neck scales; nasal small,
divided, the anterior part larger than posterior but not greatly
wider; the nostril is pierced entirely posterior to the suture of first
labial and rostral, and is directed downward and forward; post-
nasal variable, from size of pin point to a scale as large as the re-
duced upper loreal, and may or may not separate the anterior
Fig. 54. Eumeces multivirgalus (Hallowell). E.H.T. Coll.; Weld Co.,
Colorado; Barry, collector. A. lateral view of head; B. dorsal view of
head. Actual head length, about 9 mm.: width, about 8 mm.
loreal from the labials, occasionally in contact with the supra-
nasals, rarely absent; posterior loreal large, not reaching as high as
anterior, its shortest side forming a suture with the prefrontal; four
supraoculars, the first and last of nearly equal area, the three an-
terior touching the frontal; the superciliaries vary from five to
seven, the usual number being six; three or four median palpebral
scale- form direct sutures with the superciliaries; others separated
by a series of small granules; two or three I usually three) enlarged
opai pie plates on lower eyelid, separated from subocular by two
rows of granules; two presuboculars and four or five postsuboculars ;
seven upper labials, the last largest, the fifth and sixth not differing
greatly in area; of the anterior four, the fourth is smallest, and the
first or third largest; one or two anterior labials touch the post-
nasal; one, two or none touches the first loreal; and numbers two and
346 The University Science Bulletin
three touch the second loreal; last labial followed by a postlabial,
which is separated from ear by one or two small preauricular
scales; edge of ear with one or two small lobules; the primary tem-
poral small, generally rectangular; upper secondary much the larg-
est, much elongated; lower secondary somewhat fan-shaped, touch-
ing the primary temporal, separating seventh labial from the upper
secondary temporal; the tertiary temporal is small, usually not
strongly differentiated from the neck scales, separated from ear by
one or two scales; mental with a much wider labial border than the
rostral; two postmentals; normally six lower labials; chinshields
typical, varying somewhat in relative length and width, the third
pair followed by an elongate scale bordering lower labials, and
another scale bordering the former, of same shape but very much
smaller.
Ear opening moderately small, 17 to 19 scales surrounding the
opening; the line separating postauricular series from the lateral
neck scales nearly vertical; that separating the lateral neck scales
from the suprabrachials is slightly anterior to and above insertion
of forearm; the scales on side of body parallel save in the supra-
brachial and the axillary region, where they are strongly diagonal.
Scales about neck behind ear, 30-33; on neck, 27-30; behind arm,
31-33; about middle of body, 24-26; about base of tail (postanal),
19-20; in a row from occiput to above anus, 61-63; one or more of
the intercalated axillary scale rows may continue a distance greater
than the length of forearm, behind the axilla; the scales of the
dorsal median rows somewhat larger than the adjacent scales;
subcaudal scales, 93-95, distinctly widened; median preanal scales
largest, overlapped by the adjoining scales, which are in turn over-
lapped by the much smaller outermost pair.
Limbs small, relatively weak, overlapping when adpressed in
small, young specimens, but separated the length of hand (or more)
in older and adult specimens; 12 scales about insertion of hind
limb; lamellar formula for fingers: 5; 8; 13; 10; 6; for toes: 6; 9;
11; 13; 9; no enlarged tubercular scales on sole save on border of
heel ; those about base of fourth toe enlarged and flattened.
Color and markings. Above generally a putty-colored gray of
varying shades, with series of dark-brown lines; the dorsolateral
lines are distinctly lighter, the median less so, and the lateral
scarcely can be differentiated from the light lines of the ground
color; the median line broad, covering two half rows of scales,
growing less distinct on the occiput, forking and running forward
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
347
to rostral as dim shadowy light lines on the olive-brown of the
head: this bordered laterally by two deep brown lines which cover
the outer half of the median row and inner third of the second;
outer two thirds of the second row light ground color, forming a
distinct stripe; inner fourth of the third row brown, forming a
brown line oi untie or less continuous, small, triangular spots; the
median half of the third row traversed by the dorsolateral light
line, which arises on the posterior superciliaries and continues to
the tail; outer fourth of the third row brown, forming a line of
brown triangular spots more or less continuous; inner half of
fourth row light ground color, outer half of the same dark brown,
extending over onto the fifth row; this bordered by another light
line which is the little-differentiated lateral light line which ap-
pears to begin near or on the rostral; below this the color becomes
the more or less uniform greenish-white to cream color of the en-
tire under surface; the chin, underside of the arms, preanal region,
and a stripe under the tail can be discerned as lighter; the tail
above is somewhat lighter than the ground color of the body and
the dark and light stripes of the body can be followed sometimes to
the tip of the tail.
Variation. As has been already suggested, the postnasal may be
entirely wanting; 5 specimens, three from Gehenes Mt., N. M.;
Measurements
of E
imeces mull
ivirgatus (Hallowell)
Museum
D.M.
8
D.M.
6
D.M.
7
D.M.
5
D.M.
2
D.M.
3
D.M.
4
D.M.
1
U.S.N.M.
3110
U.S.N.M.
3110
Snout to vent
63
62
62.5
60
58
57
56
55
53
53
Tail
106
19.5
95
17. S
94
19
18.2
91
16.5
Snout to foreleg
19
19
18.5
16.2
16
Snout to ear
10
10.5
10
10 1
9.7
9.6
9.5
9
9 .'
9
Snout to eye
4.3
4.2
4 2
4.3
4
4
4.2
3.3
3.2
3.4
Axilla to groin
37
35
36.5
36
33.5
33
33
34
30
30
Width of head
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
8
7.8
7
Length of head
9
9.3
9
9
9.2
9
9
9
8.2
8
Postanal tail width. .
7
6
7
6
5.S
5.2
6
6
6.2
Foreleg
14
18
13.5
18.5
14
18
15
18
13.5
16
13.2
17.5
12.2
15
13.5
16.2
12
it;
13
15
Adpressed limbs sep-
6
6
5 2
5
6.6
8
."> 5
5
.-, 3
7
:, 5
5
5
10
5.2
* Museum of
Weld Co., Colo.;
Natural Histr.rv. Denver, Colo.: Nos. 1-6 and 8 are from Milton reservoir,
No. 7 from Roggin, Weld Co.; No. 3110 U.S.N.M. types of inornatus.
348 The University Science Bulletin
one from the Guadalupe Mountains, Texas, and one from Greeley,
Colorado, show this condition on both sides, while several Nebraska
specimens show the scale absent on one side or the other; speci-
mens having a large postnasal in contact with a second loreal and
the supranasal occur in the same locality as those with very small
ones, in contact with neither scale. The number of postmentals is
very constantly two; in 43 specimens examined three only show a
single large undivided postmental. Two of these are from Ne-
braska (Sioux Co., and Sand Hills of the Platte river) ; one is from
Pecos, San Miguel, N. Mex. The lamellae under the fourth toe
vary from 11 to 15; the highest numbers, 14 and 15, are from the
southern part of the range in New Mexico, while the numbers 12
and 13 are most common in the northern part of the range. The
number of upper and lower labials is seven and six, respectively.
A single specimen, Weld Co., Colo., has six upper labials, the third
and fourth being completely fused, while a single specimen from
near Walsenberg, Colo., has eight upper labials on one side, seven
on the other; twelve specimens from several widely separated
localities have the frontonasal touching the frontal.
The temporals show but little variation, but the character of the
preauricular scales and the postlabials varies considerably. Usually
there are four of these scales, but sometimes there are but two, three,
or very rarely one enlarged scute.
I am unable to distinguish the sexes by color alone. The lateral
postanal scute is but slightly differentiated on the males.
The species does not attain a very large size. The maximum
size seen is, snout to vent measurement, 73 mm. (tail partly regen-
erated)— that of a specimen from Estancia, N. M., collected by
Hobart Smith. Specimens next in size are 64 mm., one from Sioux
county, Nebraska, one from southern and one from northeastern
Colorado.
Eight specimens, ranging in length from 40-60 mm., having com-
plete tails, show the average relation of tail length to total length
to be approximately .68; of the snout to forearm length, in body
length, .32; foreleg to body length, .23; hind leg to body length, .30;
axilla to groin distance in body length, .59. In very young speci-
mens these proportions vary considerably from those of the adult ;
the tail is .56 percent total length; snout to foreleg in body length,
.32; foreleg to body length, .27; hind leg to body length, .34. Thus
it appears obvious that the limbs are proportionally longer in the
young than in the adult. In the young the legs overlap or touch
when adpressed.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 349
The following arc characters of the two types of inornatus, U.S.
X..M. 3110 5 : 3110 ■' . Scale rows, 25-25; postsuboculars, 1-1. 4-4;
nuchal-. 2-3, 2-2; lamellae under 1th toe, 13-13, 13-14; preanals, 6-6,
median enlarged; loreal divided, with 1-0 postnasals, luteal divided,
no postnasals present (measurements given in the tablet.
The markings on very young (U.S.N.M., No. 3180, 1- specimens
from 100 miles east of Laramie, in Nebraska, classified by Cope as
leptogrammus) are as follows: In these the typical lines are ex-
tremely dim, instead of being strongly pronounced as in the young
of most species that are striped. The median line appears as a very
dim series of transversely widened light areas on the posterior
edges of the median scale rows, and no more distinct than a similar
-cries on the second scale row: the median line at the nuchal gr
off two very dim branches which go forward to the interparietals,
where they stop — then again begin on the sides of the frontal, grad-
ually growing more definite, and forming a widened -pot on the
outer edge of the prefrontal and continuing forward to the rostral.
There is no such intensity of light color as obtains in the dorso-
lateral or lateral lines.
The dorsolateral line is. however, relatively distinct : arising on
the first superciliary it continues back distinctly, showing on the
head, becoming less distinct on the neck, but continuing to the tail
as a series of transversely widened whitish dots along the third scale
row; the labial region is white and the line, very distinct, passes
through ear and continues well-defined to foreleg, and on the side
of the body is represented by dim light dots on the lateral scales.
The tail was probably bluish in life.
The specimens are somewhat discolored by alcohol, but, while
the original colors are in doubt, the markings presumably remain
as in life. Specimens preserved in formalin lose their coloration
and the marking can scarcely be discerned.
R( marks. Mr. Lewis V. Barry of the Denver Museum has found
the species to be common and easily collected in Weld county and in
Denver county, occurring in vacant lots in Denver City. He lias
furnished me with numerous splendidly preserved specimens, and
numerous note-. He states:
"May 13. 1931, on a trip for rattlesnake> near Milton reservoir in Weld
county, we found the first -kink. Later the same day four more were collected.
These were all found under cow dung in a prairie-dog town, feeding on ant
larvae.
"Another specimen was taken near Grover in Weld county by Donald Wat-
son, who was collecting birds in the region. He shot a Deserl Sparrow Hawk,
and the bird had one of these reptiles in his claws."
350
The University Science Bulletin-
The species is oviparous; an American Museum specimen (A.M.
\ 11. 32382, Sioux Co., Neb.) has five white eggs, measuring ap-
proximately 13 xS millimeters, greatest length and width.
Distribution. The present known distribution oi Eumeces multi-
virgatus include- western South Dakota, western Nebraska, eastern
Wyoming, eastern Colorado, northwestern Texas, northern New
Mexico, and northern Arizona. It lias, apparently, not yet been
taken in Oklahoma or Kansas. The eastern Kansas records (Burt,
L928) must be considered as extremely doubtful. Burt, quoting
Stejneger in letter. Sept. 9, 1926, states:
"In 1915 and 1916 Mr Y. H. Householder sent me some Kansas skinks for
identification. One from Labetti Co., I identified as /•.'. epipleurotis, which I
now consider identical with E. multivirgatus. Another from Anderson county
I identified as K. leptogrammus. This I also consider a synonym of E. multi-
'atus."
Cragin (1881) lists a specimen from Neosho Falls. Woodson
county. None of the specimens are present in the collections of
Kansas University or Washburn College, where one presumes they
would be. Were they correctly identified one might presume they
were from other localities. It i- quite likely that the form will
eventually be found in western Oklahoma and western Kansas.
Unless the Kansas specimens, so identified, can be resurrected and
Fig. 55. Distribution of Eumeces multivirgatus (Hallowell) and Eumeces
gaigei Taylor, in Southwestern United States.
Taylor: The Ge: 351
their locality :fied tx
to a.
I. ■ a !
Neb
M.X.H :
g F - ' I -
Indeterminate locality- 3and 1 ~ ; 100 :.
Fort L | :
M.X.H. 2); Pol
: -•
- .~h Dakota: Only :■ -TA~ Dakota (M.CJZ. 2. Garman I
Wyo.Mi:
Laramie (M.C.Z. 1. Bierstadt Coll.).
Unidentified locality: Br. _ - M. 1. W. 8. Wood Coll.
[pei ]).
Colorado :
Huerfano I - mth of Walsenburg Mich. U. I
De : 26th and Ivanh Priv. Coll. D
Garrett and Bob DeCamp .5 ; Municipal A. E. H. Tay.
David Garrett Coll.).
,.: Milton Res ,ir (Colo. M - '".M.
1 : near Greete - te Teach. CoU. M I B . State
Teach. Coll. M lo. 1).
Indeterminate: C k (not Posa), 460 m:. Fort E
- - probab! I creek. Larimer Co. A.X..S.P. 1; type
mvltivirgaius, Hammond Coll.).
New Mexico:
T". 1 . .
• lor 1. H. Smith Coll.).
McKh Fort '■" a U£ I A .
lEddy Co.: Guadalu.
Uni i local:- benes Mr. 'A.M.X.H. 1. B.T.B. H all.);
New Mexico, a short distal the Texas
Xew M - X.M. 1. Hurter Coll.).
Arizona: A sing! - tmen, L'.S.X.M. 11459. Ca - ings, A
Arizona. Henshaw Coll.. is in such bad state th nnot be cer-
tainly identified.
' o.: Near Elder Mt. 'Klauber 1).
°K'.' >ubtful records:
Woodson Co.: 'Cragir. ■■
Labette Co.: (Burt. lf-_'-
Anderson Co.: Burt. 1928
Texas: Two records, northern boundary of Texas, one of the types of
epipleurotus (T/.S.X.M. 1); and Rio Pecos, Tex - ecimen formerly in
the U. 8. National Museum (No. 3122) but now lost, constitute the only
records for Texas. The type . ate that it cannot certainly
be identified.
352 The University Science Bulletin
Addenda
Since the above was written I have examined a series of speci-
mens from Arizona. First, I received a very young specimen from
Mr. Edwin D. McGee, park naturalist for the Grand Canon Na-
tional Park, in which locality the specimen was collected. This
specimen shows three well-developed light dorsal lines (a dorso-
lateral line and a median which bifurcates on the nuchal, the
branches reuniting on the rostral). The lateral line is quite distinct
on the labials and is continued as far as the foreleg, after which it
narrows and continues as a scarcely discernible line as far as the
hind leg. The tail is blue. There are no secondary lines evident.
Some time later five other specimens were sent me: One from
L. M. Klauber, collected in Arizona; and four sent by Chas. M.
Bogert, collected near Mt. Elden, 7% miles east of Flagstaff, Ariz.
Three of these are in a poor state of preservation; the fourth, how-
ever, is well-preserved, showing the color and markings fairly well.
It agrees with the younger specimen save that, being older, two
secondary light lines have developed between the median and the
two dorsolateral lines; and two secondary lines have likewise de-
veloped on each side in the lateral region between the dorsolateral
and lateral lines. The same characters are dimly evident in the
three much larger specimens which apparently wrere originally pre-
served in formalin. This color pattern shows a much closer rela-
tionship to that of multivirgatus than I had believed possible when
examining the young specimen. These specimens differ from the
typical multivirgatus in having usually a distinctly smaller fronto-
nasal, somewhat larger nasals and prefrontals; a smaller inter-
parietal enclosed (or nearly so) in the five specimens. The fronto-
parietals are distinctly larger.
The color of the one specimen (No. 200, Bogert Coll.) shows the
median line interrupted a short distance back of the nuchals; the
median line and dorsolateral are bordered by deep black lines in-
stead of the brown lines, and the median line is narrower.
In the United States National Museum there are two problem-
atical specimens, both old and much faded. One (U.S.N.M. No.
30833) shows the primary light lines dimly, but show's no trace of
the secondary pattern of dark and light lines; the lines on the head
are obsolete. The frontoparietals are abnormal, one being com-
pletely fused with the frontal or parietal, and the other one is much
smaller than a prefrontal. The postnasal is lacking. There are two
postmentals, the second, (perhaps abnormally) separated from the
labials. (See Fig. 56.)
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
353
The second specimen. U.S.N.M. No. 25437 (Ruidoso creek,
Lincoln Co., X. Mex.i. likewise has the secondary pattern wanting,
but this may he due to lading. It agrees more closely with multi-
virgatus than the other specimen.
At first I regarded these specimens as worthy of a nomenclatorial
designation; hut with the added material from Arizona, I recognize
the wisdom of awaiting more material from this critical region
before such a step is taken.
Fig. 56. Eumeces multivirgatus (Hallowell). U.S.X.M. No. 30833, Chi-
huahua, Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Ac-
tual head length, 10.2 mm.; width. 9.5 mm.
The following locality records are added:
Arizona: Coconino Co.: Grand Canon Nat. Park (Grand Canon Nat. Park
Coll. 1); Flagstaff (Bogert Coll. 1); Mt. Elden. 7% mi. east of Flagstaff
(Bogert Coll. 3) (L. M. Klauber 1).
New Mexico: Lincoln Co.: Forks of the Ruidoso creek (U.S.X.M. 1).
Chihuahua: Chihuahua (U.S.N.M. 1).
Eumeces gaigci Taylor
(Figs. 57, 55)
SYNONYMY
1932. Eumeces humilis? Kingman. Bull. Univ. Kan., XXXIII. May. 1932 (Oct. 1, 1932),
pp. 273-293. pi. XXIII, figs. 1 and 2 (Skull, paratyi>e of gaigei).
1935. Eumeces f/aigei Taylor. Uni. Kan. Sci. Bull., Vol. XXII, Apr. 15, 1935, pp. 219-223,
fig. 1.
Diagnosis. A medium-sized species, characterized by the absence
of a median line with forking lines on the head; the presence of
typical dorsolateral lines following the middle of the third scale
row. and separated by four whole and two one third scale rows.
23—1123
354
The University Science Bulletin
The lateral line extends back farther than ear. Brown lateral
stripe very narrow; limbs short, not meeting when adpressed; sub-
caudals widened; postnasal present or absent; two postmentals; in-
terparietal not enclosed by parietals; seven upper labials; 24 scale
rows about the body.
Description of type. No. 7300; collected near Taos, N. Mex.,
June 13, 1929, by E. H. Taylor. Portion of rostral visible above less
than half the size of the frontonasal; supranasals large, forming a
median suture; frontonasal large, touching anterior loreals, sepa-
rated from frontal; prefrontals rather large, medially in contact,
Fig. 57. Eumeces gaigei Taylor. Mich. U. No. 70517, Culberson Co.,
Texas. A, lateral view of head; B. dorsal view of head. Actual head
length, 9.2 mm.; width, 7.8 mm.
forming sutures with frontonasal, frontal, posterior loreal, first
supraocular, anterior loreal, and superciliary, their lengths in the
order named; frontal large, a little longer than its distance from
the tip of the snout, slightly constricted laterally, in contact with
three supraoculars; frontoparietals in contact; interparietal with
sides converging posteriorly, not curving; parietals short and broad,
not in contact behind interparietal; two pairs of nuchals, of about
the same size.
Nasal typical, divided by a suture, the anterior part largest;
postnasal present; anterior loreal distinctly higher than wide, higher
han the posterior; latter longer than high, touching two or three
labials; presuboculars two (one on right side) ; six (right) or seven
(left) superciliaries; four supraoculars; four postsuboculars; median
upper palpebrals directly in contact with superciliaries; two rather
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 355
large plates cm lower eyelid, separated from subocular by two rows
of granules; primary temporal large, practically of same size as the
lower secondary temporal, with which it forms a suture; upper
secondary temporal slightly wider posteriorly than anteriorly; ter-
tiary temporal high, -lender, separated from ear by two scales.
Seven upper labials, the first usually the smallest, the seventh
(last) largest; the subocular larger than usual, approaching or
equaling size of >ixth labial; seventh labial separated from ear by
two pair- I superimposed I of scales; one minute ear lobule; mental
large, with a larger labial border than rostral; two post mentals;
three pairs of chinshields, the first in contact ; postgenial large
(broken abnormally into two scales), bordered on inner side by a
scale longer than wide; six or seven lower labials.
Scales in parallel rows, about equal in size around the body;
-cales around neck behind ear. 32: about narrow part of neck, 26;
in axillary region, 32; about middle of body, 24; 16 about base of
tail at first widened subcaudal; subcaudals nearly double width of
adjoining scale row; six preanals, the median pair much enlarged,
the outer scales overlapping inner.
Limbs short; the area of granular axillary scales greatly reduced,
only one or two rows; none behind insertion of hind limb; wrist
tubercle not strongly differentiated; the scales on wrist and posterior
part of palm equal in size, all rather large; lamellar formula for
fingers: 5; 8; 10; 11; 6. Heel with two large scales in contact, these
each preceded by a single large scale; scales on sole subequal and
for the most part imbricating; lamellar formula for toes: 5; 9; 11;
12; 8. Terminal scales not tightly bound about claw. Ear small,
surrounded by about 16 scales; scales on side of neck with, usually,
two pits; these obsolete on sides of body; pits occasionally three or
more in axillary and postfemoral region.
Color (the type is somewhat discolored by formalin). Above
brownish, the scales showing an anterior and a posterior darker
area; no evidence of a median line or bifurcating lines on head; a
dorsolateral line begins on the anterior supraocular and continues
back, following the middle of the third scale row, as a series of light
dots onto the tail. The lateral line begins on the rostral but cannot
now be traced quite to ear; chin, anterior part of throat and anal
scales light; underside of regenerated tail, light.
R( marks. The two type specimens from near Taos, N. Mex., in
the Kansas University Museum were collected in barren hills along
a stream about a mile from the large Indian village through which
356
The University Science Bulletin
Measurements of Eitmeces gaigei Taylor
Museum.
Number .
Sex
Snout to vent . . .
Snout to eye
Snout to ear
Snout to foreleg .
Axilla to groin. .
Width of head . .
Length of head .
Width of body . .
Foreleg
Hind leg
Longest toe. . . .
K.U.
7300
9
K.U.
7301
9
66
62.7
5
5
11.8
11
22
18
40
39.4
8.7
8.2
10
10
12
11.9
14
13.8
19
18.7
12
12
Mich.
70517
9
59
4
10
16
35.5
7.8
9.2
10
13
18
11
the stream flows. They were found under small, flat rocks on a
steep hillside, and appeared to be making burrows, as the earth was
freshly disturbed; they took refuge in the burrows, which extended
three inches below the surface.
I made journeys to Taos in 1930 and 1934, hoping to discover
more specimens, but without result.
The Michigan specimen, which I have been permitted to examine
through the kindness of Mrs. Gaige, was collected in the Guadalupe
Mountains by Dr. Walter Mosauer, for whom I examined the speci-
men. I at first believed it to be an aberrant, discolored multivir-
gatus.
A fourth specimen, badly dried but still showing well the original
coloration, is in the American Museum of Natural History. Through
the kindness of Dr. G. K. Noble, I was permitted to examine it.
The color characters are practically identical with those of the
Michigan specimen, and differs strikingly from young multivirgatus
from the same locality.
Variation. The specimen in the University of Michigan Museum
>liows the color markings very distinctly. These are as follows:
Above, olive-brown, the outer edges of the scales of the first and
second rows with darker brown coloration, which forms a dim line
following edges of first and second row, and second and third; the
dorsolateral white line begins on supraocular or anterior edge of
parietal, passes back along the middle of the third scale row, the
upper and outer edges of which are dark brown; the light line ap-
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 357
pears as a series of dots, since the posterior edge of each scale is also
somewhat darker; a broad, dark-brown line begins behind eye,
passes above shoulder and becomes reduced to a narrow lateral line
which passes above edges of tlie fourth and fifth scale rows; this
is bordered above and below by dotted lines of ground color, slightly
lighter than that on back; a light labial line from second labial
passes above ear and stop-; a lateral line begins at middle of ear
and passes back to above arm and becomes lost; chin and throat
light; belly bluish-gray; undersides of legs and anal region light;
anterior part of head dark brown, no bifurcating lines visible.
The young specimen in the American Museum, also from the
Guadalupe Mountains, has the brown ground color with the dotted
dorsolateral lines cream yellow; along the median part of the body
are a few lighter flecks on the scales, but in no sense a median line.
This specimen differs from a young multivirgatus taken in the same
locality.
The scale variation in these specimens is negligible save that in
the Michigan specimen a typical postnasal is absent. On one side,
however, is a small scale partially fused to for separated from) the
upper posterior part of the first labial.
R( mark*. Despite the scale relationship of this form with E.
multivirgatus, I do not regard it as a subspecies, since the two forms
occur together from northern New Mexico (Taos) to Texas (Guada-
lupe Mountains). Much herpetological collecting remains to be
done in New Mexico and Arizona before a clear picture of these
forms and their relationship can be known.
Whether the specimen in the United States National Museum
i No. 5263), from the northern boundary of Texas, one of the types
of epiplewotis, belongs to this form cannot now be stated, since
the specimen is in such a condition that it cannot be identified with
any degree of certainty. I propose to designate U.S.N.M. No. 9219,
Fort Kearney, Neb., as the lectotype of epiplewotis, since it appears
that the description was drawn from this specimen. It is un-
doubtedly a specimen of E. multivirgatus and is still in a good state
of preservation.
The specie> is named for Mrs. Helen Gaige, curator of Herpetol-
ogy, University of Michigan. Museum of Zoology, to whom I am
deeply indebted for assistance.
Distribution. The species is known only from the states of New
Mexico and Texas, and from the following localities (see Fig. 55
for distributional map) :
358 The University Science Bulletin
New Mexico:
Taos Co.: Near Taos (K.U. 2; types).
Eddy Co.: Guadalupe Mountains (A.M.N.H. 1).
Texas: Culberson Co.? : Near Frijoles (Mich. 1).
Eumeces humilis Boulenger
(Plate 30 ; Figs. 58, 59)
SYNONYMY
1885. Eumeces Bocourtii Boulenger. Ann. & Mag. Xat. Hist., (5), 11, 1883. p. 342 (non
Brocchi) (type description; type locality, Presidio (near Mazatlan, Sinaloa), (Forrer
Coll.); Gunther, Biol. Cent. Amer., Rept. Batr., 1885, p. 32, pi. XXII, fig. C (full-
size drawing of one of the types) ; Cope, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 32, p. 90.
1887. Eumeces humilis Boulenger. Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 377 (new name;
redescription of types) ; Mosauer, Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. Univ. Michigan, No. 246,
June 3. 1932, pp. 10-12, pi. I, fig. 3 (Guadalupe Mts., Texas; first record for United
States).
History. Herr Alphonso Forrer collected the two type speci-
mens of this rare species at Presidio, Mexico. This locality is pre-
sumably a small village about fifty miles south of Mazatlan
(Kellogg, Bull. U.S.N.M. 160, p. 13), where Forrer collected many
specimens. It may merely refer to a fort or prison of Mazatlan.
In the state of Durango, however, where Forrer also collected, are
three villages bearing the name Presidio, but whether any of these
are referred to, cannot be ascertained at present.
The specimens were described by G. A. Boulenger in 1883 under
the name Eumeces Bocourtii. Gunther (1885) gave a figure, life size,
showing the markings. Boulenger (1887) again published a descrip-
tion, changing the name to humilis, bocourtii being preoccupied by
Eumeces bocourtii Brocchi for a New Caledonian skink.
No further specimens were obtained until 1930, when Walter
Mosauer discovered it in the Texan part of the Guadalupe moun-
tains, and collected two specimens, an adult female and a very
young one, thus adding a new form to the known fauna of the
United States. In 1931 I was fortunate in obtaining a single young
specimen at a point two miles south of the entrance of Carlsbad
Cavern in New Mexico.
This species differs from other known species of American skinks
of this genus in lacking all white stripes or dots in the young. The
adults may develop an indistinct secondary dorsolateral lighter
line (much as occurs in some obsoletus) if one may judge by a
photograph of the cotypes and Giinther's figure of the older speci-
men. The latter has a ''faint yellowish" dorsolateral line, while
the younger specimen has no trace of white or yellowish lines. The
lateral brown stripe is distinct in young and adults. The specimens
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
359
obtained by Mosauer, and that collected by me, likewise show no
trace of dorsolateral or lateral light lines, but the lateral brown
-tripe is distinct. It the above assumption regarding the secondary
development of a light dorsolateral line is incorrect it is due to
the fact that in reality two forms are represented by the two type
specimens, a question that cannot at the moment be determined due
to the dearth of specimens available for study.
Diagnosis. A moderate-sized species reaching a known maximum
length of 73 millimeters snout to vent measurement; young gener-
ally gray-olive above, lacking trace of light lines; a lateral brown
Fig. 58. Eumeces humilis Boulenper. K.U. No. 13161; Eddy Co., Nov
Mexico. A. lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head
length, 7.5 mm.; width, 6.0 mm.
band. Adults with or without trace of a faint dorsolateral line, with
a darker, usually bronze, dorsal coloration. Upper labials seven;
postmental single; small postnasal usually present; scales under tail
small; limits short; interparietal not enclosed by parietals; 24 scale
rows about the middle of the body.
Description of species (from No. 70510 Museum of Zoology, Uni-
versity of Michigan. Collected Guadalupe Mts., Texas, by Dr.
Walter Mosauer). Rostral prominently visible above; supranasals
elongate, forming a narrow suture with postnasal, their common
suture lather narrow; frontonasal broader than long, touching both
loreals, but separated from the frontal by the prefrontals, which
form a moderately wide median suture; frontal (.'{.."> millimeters I
distinctly longer than its distance from the end of snout, bordered
360 The University Science Bulletin
by three supraoculars, the suture with last being very small ; fronto-
parietals larger than prefrontals, forming a broad median suture; in-
terparietal (2.5 millimeters) much shorter than frontal, not enclosed
by parietals, but their separation is narrow; two well-differentiated
pairs of nuchals; the nasal with its labial suture less than that with
rostral; a small postnasal present, touching first two labials; an-
terior loreal much higher than and about half the width of second,
which touches the second and third labials; two rather large pre-
suboculars, with a small preocular scale above at anterior corner of
eye; seven superciliaries, the anterior greatly larger than second;
two tiny postoculars; three postsuboculars, the upper largest, touch-
ing the upper secondary temporal; four supraoculars, the second
much the largest and widest; a large, well-developed, nearly rec-
tangular primary temporal; two secondary temporals, the upper
twice as long as wide, rounded behind, the lower nearly triangular,
the posterior border, however, forming a very obtuse angle, touch-
ing the primary temporal; tertiary temporal small, narrow; two
postlabials, the lower much smaller than upper, these separated from
the auricular opening by a pair of very small, similarly shaped
scales; two distinct auricular lobules, the upper flat, with a rounded
edge directed backward; auricular opening surrounded by about 15
scales; first and fourth labials distinctly smaller than second and
third; subocular labial well elevated, as high as its width on labial
edge; sixth labial smaller than seventh, both of which are widely
separated from the upper secondary temporal; three large semi-
transparent scales on eyelid, separated from the subocular by two
rows of granular scales ; a few small scales on lid anteriorly and pos-
teriorly; a practically complete series of granular scales between
palpebral scales and superciliaries; eight lower and nine upper pal-
pebral scales; six lower labials, last greatly elongated; mental wide,
deep, with a much wider labial border than rostral; a single post-
mental ; first pair chinshields broadly in contact ; second pair much
the widest of series; third pair separated by three scales; last chin-
shield followed by an elongated postgenial, which is bordered on
inner anterior edge by a scale longer than wide ; lateral and ventral
scales about same size ; the two median dorsal rows slightly widened ;
24 longitudinal scale rows about middle of body ; median scale rows
following nuchals much wider than the second rows; 28 scale rows
around narrow part of neck; 32 behind ear; 30 following arm; all
extra rows dropped out at a distance from axilla not greater than
the length of the arm; 17 scales about base of tail one centimeter
back of anus; a pocket of small granular scales in axilla; scales on
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 361
sides parallel; 63 scales in a series from parietals to above anus; 103
subcaudal scales, very slightly widened; six preanal scales, the me-
dian enlarged, the outer overlapping inner; the line dividing the
lateral neck scales from the postauricular scales curving sharply
forward; the line from the lateral nuchal scale- and suprabrachial
scales nearly vertical from anterior line of insertion of arm; twelve
scales about insertion of arm; fourteen about insertion of hind limb;
palm with about fifteen rather flat granules, with some smaller gran-
ule- between these and bases of fingers; lamellar formula of fingers:
5; 8; 10; 12; 9: & 5; S; 12; 12; 9. Heel with three or four larger
scales, those on sole not conspicuously enlarged, but the rows di-
rected to the base of the fourth toe somewhat larger than others.
Lamellar formula of toes: 6; 8; 11; 13; 8; & 6; 9; 12; 13; 8. The
specimen is a female containing small eggs in the ovaries.
Color. Above a definite bronzy-olive to bronze-brown, the color
extending to but becoming slightly darker on the tail; head of about
the same color; a lateral brownish streak, more pronounced anteri-
orly, begins back of eye and continues along neck and on the side,
but cannot be traced onto the tail. Careful scrutiny of the dorsal
surface shows the first and second scale rows slightly browner, the
third and part of fourth rows slightly lighter; upper labials light
brown above, growing lighter on lower edges; nearly white on sixth
and seventh labials; the light color surrounds ear save at upper pos-
terior corner; chin and throat whitish; a dim light spot above ear;
abdomen ashy-gray; lower side of tail light blue, each scale show-
ing a darker portion; limbs darker above than back, lighter below
than abdomen; preanal scales light; a faint suggestion of a median
lighter line under tail.
Variation. The table of measurements shows clearly the varia-
tion in measurement.
Variation in squamation: Scales from occiput to above anus,
61-63, the first number appearing in two specimens. Scale rows on
neck, 28-30; about middle of body, 24-26; supraoculars, upper and
lower labials, postmentals, postnasals, subcaudals, loreals, super-
ciliaries, frontonasal show no variation in number or appreciable
variation in size and relationships. One specimen has the two
postlabials fused into a single large scale. The subdigital lamellae
under fourth toe, 12-14. the first number being most frequent.
Postsuboculars, 3-3 or 4-4, the former number most frequent. Little
or no variation is discernible in the general size and relationships
of the temporals. Young specimens have blue tails. Variation in
color and markings is discussed elsewhere.
362
The University Science Bulletin
Measurements of Eumeces humilis Boulenger
Museum.
Number*.
Sex
Mich.U.
70516
9
Mich.U.
70103
yg.
K.U.
13161
yg-
Brit, M.
Type
Total length
Tail
Snout to vent
Snout to eye
Snout to ear
Snout to foreleg
Foreleg
Axilla to groin
Postanal width
Hind leg
Longest toe
Adpressed limbs separated.
Head length
Head width
Bodv width
1S5
120
65
4.5
10 5
17 5
112
40
7.5
17.5
6.3
12.0
10
8
13
26
125
78
47
131
58t
73
6
10.2
8
2.3
10.3
4
3
2.6
2.5
15
10.5
27
4
13
5
1
7.5
6
6
17
22
12
10
* Nos. 70103, 70516, Guadalupe Mts. ; 13161, Near Mouth Carlsbad Cavern, N.
British Mus. No. 83, 4, 5, 33, 34, Presidio, Sinaloa, Mexico.
t Regenerated.
M. ;
Remarks. The specimen described was collected by Walter
Mosauer near Frijoles, Tex., where "it was found slipping through
moist vegetation at the margin of the miniature pond formed by
the spring." His second specimen came from Dark Canon. Both
localities are in the Guadalupe mountains. Both localities are
high, the first approximately 6,000 feet, the second 5,500 feet.
The single specimen collected by myself was found in a pile of
drift at the edge of Black river, which flows partly above and partly
below ground in the Carlsbad region.
The species appears to be related to Eumeces multivirgatus, and
the scale formulae and patterns, as well as the general body con-
tours, are approximated by that species. That the ranges of the
two forms overlap, each maintaining its identity, should preclude
the possibility of these forms being regarded as subspecies. The
very striking differences in markings' and color should assure their
proper identification.
Distribution. The known records (assuming that the type local-
ity is indeed Mazatlan rather than Durango) show the range to
extend from southern New Mexico, south through Texas, to Sinaloa,
Taylor: The Gkxis Ki mf.cfs
363
presumably including territory in Chihuahua and Durango; not
improbably is it also present in Sonora. Since Presidio, Mazatlan,
is near sea level, the vertical distribution is from this point to about
6,000 feet.
•J h^
Fig. 59. Distribution of Eumeces humilis Boulenger. E. parviilus Tay-
lor and E. parviauricuhitus Taylor, in Southern United States and
Mexico.
Locality records:
New Mexico: Eddy Co.: Black river. 2 miles east of entrance of Carlsbad
Caverns (K.U. 1).
Tex\< Culberson Co.: Near Frijoles, Guadalupe Mts., 6,000 ft. (Mich. 1);
Dark Canon. 5.500 ft., Guadalupe Mts. (Mich. 1).
Sinaloa: Presidio (type locality) (Brit, Mus. [83, 4, 5. 33, 34] 2, Forrer Coll.).
Eumeces parvulus Taylor
(Plate 31, Figs. 3, 4; Figs. 59, 60)
SYNONYMV
1933. Eumcrcs parvulus Taylor. Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington. XLVII, Oct. 26, 1933, pp.
175-178, fig. 1 (type description; type locality, Tepic, Nayarit, Mexico).
History. The complete history of the type is not known to me.
It was received at the U. S. National Museum from the collection of
Julius Hurter, of St. Louis, and purports to come from Tepic (the
name presumably referring to the city rather than to the old terri-
364 The University Science Bulletin
tory of that name), Nayarit. The date of collection is April 10,
1910. The specimen was tentatively identified as Eumeces lynxe
Wiegmann. The U. S. National Museum Catalogue number of the
type is 56903.
A second specimen, collected by J. C. Thompson, is likewise in
the U. S. National Museum (No. 51395), from Miniman, Nayarit.
This was originally identified as Eumeces brevirostris Giinther,
since it is a young specimen and superficially resembles that species.
A third, and, apparently, a very anomalous, specimen has been
tentatively assigned to this species. It was collected by Dr. E. W.
Nelson and E. A. Goldman at "Plumosas*," Sinaloa. Only future
collections can verify whether the supposed anomalies are such, or
characters of a distinct species. My judgment has been based on
the fact that the fusion of the prefrontal and frontonasal scales as
obtains in this specimen has been noted in individuals of certain
other species.
Diagnosis. A small species, having a dorsolateral line beginning
on rostral, passing back on side of head and neck, and disappearing
about the middle of the back; a lateral light line from rostral to
ear, following the lower edge of labials; no median light line or
"bifurcating lines" on head; four supraoculars; no postnasal; one
postmental; parietals enclose interparietal; frontonasal touches
frontal; a relatively very large primary temporal, larger than lower
secondary temporal, and in contact with it. Twenty-four scale rows
about the middle of the body; postgenial large, bordered on inner
edge by a scale wider than long. Adults tend to lose all markings.
Description of type. Part of rostral, appearing on anterior tip of
snout, small, separated from frontonasal by the paired supranasals;
frontonasal broader than long, angular anteriorly, rounded posteri-
orly, forming a considerable suture with the frontal, and in contact
laterally with the anterior loreal; frontal more than a third longer
than its distance from tip of snout, truncate anteriorly, rounded
behind, constricted at a point about one third of its length from the
posterior edge, broadly in contact with the three anterior supra-
oculars; frontoparietals distinctly rectangular, making a median
suture less than one third of their length ; interparietal rather small,
broadly enclosed by the parietals; first pair of nuchals very large,
nearly twice the depth of the second pair; nasal small, distinctly
divided; first loreal distinctly higher, but narrower than the second,
* This is Plomosas, a mining town of the municipality of Rosario, near the southern
boundary of Sinaloa.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
365
in contact with second and third labials; two presuboculars; six
superciliaries, the first nearly twice the area of second; four supra-
oculars, the third widest, first touching the prefrontal; three post-
suboculars; the single primary temporal almost as large as the upper
secondary temporal, and of much the same shape; the lower sec-
ondary temporal somewhat fan-shaped, smaller than the primary
temporal; tertiary temporal elongate.
Seven upper labials, four preceding the subocular, the first higher
than the three following and equally as high as subocular; the
seventh upper labial largest, followed by a pair of postlabial scales,
Fig. 60. Eumeces -parvulus Taylor. U.S.N.M. No. 56903, type; Tepic,
Nayarit, Mexico. A. lateral view of head; B. dorsal view of head. Ac-
tual head length. 9 mm.; width, 7 mm.
of which the lower is narrow, longer than the upper; these are
separated from the minute ear lobules by two or three very small
scales; seventh labial largest, not in contact with the upper sec-
ondary temporal and separated from ear by a distance less than its
length; six lower labials; mental large, forming a longer labial
border than rostral ; a postmental and three pairs of chinshields, the
last pair followed by an elongate postgenial scale which is bordered
on its anterior inner edge by a scale much broader than long;
diameter of eye about equal to distance from nostril, but distinctly
shorter than distance to ear; the median palpebral scales in direct
contact with the superciliaries; lower eyelid with a series of four
enlarged opaque or semitransparent scales separated from the sub-
ocular by two or three scale rows, the lowermost largest. Ear
366
The University Science Bulletin
moderate, surrounded by about 14 to 15 scales; the line separating
the postauricular series from the lateral nuchal series vertical and
separated from ear by five scale rows; scale rows around neck
behind ear, 27; about constricted part of neck, 24; about body in
axillary region, 31; about middle of body, 24; the axillary series are
all dropped at a distance from axilla a little greater than length of
the foreleg. The scales on back are rather small, rounded behind;
the median rows not larger than other dorsals, but dorsals are all
larger than laterals or ventrals. Limbs short but rather stout;
palm, bearing a few enlarged, rounded scales, with several smaller
granules; foot without distinctive scales save about heel; the
lamellar formula of fingers: 4; 6; 9; 10; 5; of toes: 3; 7; 9; 13; 5.
The two median preanal scales somewhat enlarged; three small
lateral preanal scales on each side, the outer of which overlap the
inner; subcaudal scales slightly wider than adjoining scales; 63
scales in row from parietals to above anus.
Color (in alcohol). Above brownish-olive; dorsolateral light line
beginning on snout passes back along head and follows, first the
third, then the fourth scale rows; it disappears about middle of
body; the dorsal ground color is eight rows wide on middle of body:
a brown lateral stripe from the rostral passes back along the side
of head and body, where it shows dimly, covering two scale rows ;
a lateral line begins on the rostral, but terminates at the ear after
passing along the lower edges of the labials; chin and lower labials
cream; the remainder of the lower surfaces grayish; preanals and
Measurements of the type and paratypes of Eumeces parvulus Taylor
Museum .
Number .
Snout to vent*
Snout to foreleg. . . .
Snout to ear
Snout to eye
Head greatest width
Head length
Axilla to groin
Postanal tail width . .
Foreleg
Hind leg
Longest toe
U.S.N. M.
56903
U.S.N.M.
51395
U.S.N.M.
17667
51
37
28.5
14
13
9
8.3
8
6.3
3.2
3
2.2
7
5
4.5
9
7
4.6
32
20
15
5
3.6
2.7
9
8
6.3
14
12
8
6
3.6
2.2
* Tail either broken or incomplete in all specimens. No. 51395 measures 50 mm., with the
latter part missing, but regeneration begun.
Taylor: The Genus Eume< es 367
the under side of limbs liuhter; the grayish color of holly borders
the brown lateral stripe1.
Variation. Two additional specimens, Xo. 51395 U.S.N.M., from
Minimau, Xayarit, Mexico (Coll. J. C. Thompson I and a second,
No. 47667 U.S.N.M., collected at Plomosas, Sinaloa (Coll. Nelson
and Goldman), are ;it hand for comparison.
The first of the two -hows the following variations in scalation:
(.2 in-' cad of 63 scales from head to above vent; about 15 scales
around ear; there are 14 instead of 13 lamellae under longest toe;
the adpressed limbs are very narrowly separated when adpressed,
while in the larger specimen they are separated by eight millimeters.
The color of this specimen is darker, appearing brownish above with
the dorsolateral lines cream color and well differentiated to about
midway on body. The lateral stripe is difficult to differentiate from
body color; chin and throat cream; the color of the abdomen ap-
pears somewhat in darker and lighter lines, a character also visible
but dim in the type; under side of tail lighter than abdomen, the
median scale row with a lighter streak; regenerated tip of tail, cream.
Xo. 47667 U.S.N.M. from Plomosas, Sinaloa, Mexico, shows a
number of abnormal peculiarities. The frontonasal and prefrontals
are fused into a single scale and this separated from the frontal
by a partly obliterated suture; the posterior constriction of the
frontal is very slight; the enclosed interparietal is as broad as long;
the anterior temporal is as large as upper posterior, but both are
slenderer in type; the head appears to be proportionally wider; there
appears to be only 22 scale rows (the specimen has been injured,
and it is difficult to make an accurate count at middle of body i ;
other scales and markings are similar, generally, to type. The color
above is grayish-brown, the lateral brown line very distinct.
If the character of the fused frontonasal and prefrontals were not
abnormal, it would be necessary to recognize this as a distinct
species. However, I strongly suspect it is abnormal and, for the
time being, it will be placed under this species. Similar anomalies
have been observed in specimens of several other specie-.
Remarks. The relationship of the species is not clear. It appears
to -how more characters in common with Eumeces parviauriculatus,
a- I have suggested tinder that species, than with any other member
Oi the genus.
Distribution. The known distribution includes localities in south-
ern Sinaloa and Nayarit. (See Fig. 59 for distributional map.)
Sinaloa: Plomosas (U.S.N.M. 1).
Nayarit: Tepic (type, U.S.N.M. 1); Miniman (U.S.N.M. 1).
368 The University Science Bulletin
Eumeces parviauriculatus Taylor
(Plate 31, Fig. 5; Figs. 59, 61)
SYNONYMY
1933. Eumeces parviauriculatus Taylor. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XLVI, Oct. 26, 1933, pp.
178-181, fig. 2.
History. The type specimen, United States National Museum No.
47536, was collected by Mr. Edward A. Goldman at Alamos, Sonora,
January 5, 1899, when en route to California from the Sierra Madre
in western Chihuahua. Probably due to the poor state of preserva-
tion the specimen was tentatively identified at the museum as E.
brevirostris, to which species it bears a superficial resemblance. In
1933 privilege of describing the species was granted me by Dr.
Leonhard Stejneger.
The species is tentatively assigned a place in the Multivirgatus
group, but is not closely related to other members of it. It is ap-
parently a diminutive form, although absence of the viscera pre-
cluded an examination of the sex organs to determine the age of the
type. It does not, however, appear to be a young specimen. In the
character of the scales overlapping the auricular opening the species
resembles egregius.
Diagnosis. A small, slender species, with a distinct dorsolateral
line beginning on rostral, and continuing posteriorly on sides, losing
itself on the back; a lateral line begins on rostral and continues
across labials and ear to forearm, where it is lost; one postmental;
no postnasal; parietals not enclosing interparietal; four supraoculars,
three touching frontal; seventh labial largest of series, but rela-
tively small, scarcely larger than sixth, and separated from the
extremely small auricular opening by a distance greater than its
length ; primary temporal large, in contact with the very large
lower secondary temporal; postlabial scales overlap edge of auric-
ular opening; 20 scale rows around body; subcaudals somewhat en-
larged; two pairs of nuchals; small tubercular scales behind and
above the insertion of forearm.
Description of type. The part of the rostral appearing above,
very small, separated from the frontonasal by the pair of supra-
nasals which form a median suture; frontonasal much broader than
long, pointed anteriorly, rounded posteriorly, touching anterior
loreal; prefrontals small, widely separated, their sutures with frontal
equal to that with the frontonasal, also forming sutures with the
two loreals, the first superciliary and first supraocular; frontal broad
and elongate, much longer than its distance from end of the snout,
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 369
and distinctly constricted at a point about one third the distance
from the posterior end; frontoparietals very much larger, at lea-t
double the size of the prefrontals, and forming a moderately long
median suture; interparietal wide and* short, not enclosed by the
parietal-: a pair of well-developed nuchals followed by a second
pair (scales broken on left side); nasal small, the nostril directed
strongly forward and downward; two loreals, the anterior high,
touching first and second labials, somewhat rectangular; posterior
loreal somewhat rectangular, touching the second and third labials;
four supraoculars, the anterior nearly triangular, forming a small
suture with prefrontal, the third widest, forming an angular wedge
between the frontal and frontoparietal (on right side, due apparently
to an injury, the two first supraoculars are partly fused and these
fused with the first superciliary) ; five superciliaries, the first not
greatly larger than second; two presuboculars; three postsubocular>;
primary temporal large, larger on left side than right side, larger
than seventh labial, broadly in contact with the lower secondary
temporal: the upper secondary temporal largest, smaller on left than
right side; the lower secondary temporal nearly square, forming an
elongate suture below with a very narrow elongate postlabial; sec-
ond postlabial separates the two scales from the auricular opening,
and overlaps its edge; the tertiary temporal small, separated from
auricular opening by second postlabial; seven labials, last largest,
but not greatly larger than sixth; the subocular very low, distinctly
lower than first labial; the first labial much higher than three suc-
ceeding; six lower labials; postmental large, single; three pairs of
chinshields. the first pair broadly in contact, second separated by a
single scale, last pair followed by an elongate postgenial bordered
internally by an enlarged scale much wider than long.
The larger scales in front of and above auricular opening over-
hang it; no lobules can be observed; about ten minute scales about
border of ear; eye small, as long as, or slightly longer than, its dis-
tance from nostril, much less than its distance from ear; the line
dividing the postauricular scale series from the lateral nuchal series
curves strongly forward; the scales of the median row following
nuchals much widened; on body the median rows of scales are some-
what wider than adjoining series, the posterior edge of scales not
curved, but practically parallel with the anterior edge.
Scale rows behind ear. 25; on constricted portion of neck, 23;
behind arm. 2(i; around middle of body. 20: about base of tail, 15;
there are 63 scale- in a row from parietals to above anus; the scales
24—1123
370
The University Science Bulletin
on sides and abdomen are smaller than the median dorsals; the
intercalated axillary rows are dropped at a point less than one and
one half the length of foreleg from axilla; behind arm and continu-
ing above arm to point of anterior insertion are several rows of
small, granular, flattened, nonimbricating scales; anus bordered by
a median pair of scales, much enlarged, and two lateral scales on
each side, the outer of which overlap the inner; lateral postanal
scale elongate, but not otherwise differentiated; subcaudal scales
widened, at least two to two and one half times as wide as deep,
Fig. 61. Eumeccs parviauriculatus Taylor. U.S.N. M. No. 47536, type.
Alamos, Sonora. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Ac-
tual head length, 7 mm.; width. 6 mm.
more than a half wider than adjoining scale rows; limbs slender,
delicate, very widely separated when adpressed; a few rounded, en-
larged tubercles on palm, separated from the series at base of digits
by several small granular tubercles; a few enlarged granules on
sole near enlarged scutes bordering heel; other scales on sole small;
the lamellar formula for fingers: 3; 7; 7; 8; 5; for the toes: 4; 7;
10; 11; 7.
Color (in alcohol, probably much discolored). Above, dark slaty-
brown, the scales appearing darker on their sutures, forming in-
distinct dotted darker lines; a distinct light-colored dorsolateral
line from rostral back along sides on the third scale row, which is
lost on the posterior part of back; a lateral line beginning on labials
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 371
continues back to forearm, involving car; chin, lower labials, and
breast cream; belly dark. A darker lateral band, which passes from
the side of head, through eyes, along the side, is difficult to dis-
tinguish, but on tail is more distinct, the scales showing large central
brown areas with lighter edges.
Measurements of the type of Eumeces parviauriculatus Taylor
Snour ,0 Yent 47 Greatest body width. 6
onout to foreleg 14 Axilla to groin '28
bnouttoear 7.9 Postanal tail width .. . 4 3
onout to eye 3 Foreleg 7'3
Head width greatest 6 Hind leg"..'.'.'.*.'.'.' io'6
Head length from nuchals, 7 Longest toe 4'
R( mark*. Only a single specimen, the type, has been examined.
It is in poor condition; many of the scales have slipped, and the
abdomen is somewhat softened. The viscera have been removed.
The tail is present, but is broken into two pieces; the tip is re-
generated; the forefeet have been dried. Despite all this, none of
the essential characters are obscured.
The relationship of the species is not clear. It is probably a
degenerate (specialized) form and may be distantly related to
parvulus. It is probably totally unrelated to the recently described
dicei Ruthven and Gaige, which, judging by the character of the
temporals, belongs to another group to which I have assigned it.
The known Eumeces fauna of Sonora is indeed meager, this type
specimen being the only specimen I am aware of collected in this
large state. Eumeces callicephalus and humilis Boulenger may be
expected to occur. It is not closely related to either humilis or
callicephalus.
The type locality name, Alamos, refers apparently to the city
(Municipalidad) in the district of Alamos in the southern part of
the state. There are, however, two other places named Alamos, one
a pueblo in the district of Ures, and a rancho, of the Municipalidad
of Cumuripa, district of Guaymas.
Distribution. The probabilities are that the species, now known
only from the type specimen, is confined to the western slope of the
Sierra Madre. in Mexico. Alamos is situated in low mountains,
bordering the low. narrow coastal plain, about fifty miles from
Santa Barbara bay on the Gulf of California, in the state of Sonora.
Locality records. Only the type locality known. (See Fig. hi)
for distributional map.)
372 The University Science Bulletin
ANTHRACINUS GROUP
Four forms are included in this group: the two subspecies of
Eumeces septentrionalis (Baird) , Eumeces anthracinus (Baird) and
Eumeces copei Taylor.
It seems probable that this group is most closely related to the
multivirgatus group, perhaps through septentrionalis and multivir-
gatus. Eumeces copei is the least typical of the group.
The group may be characterized as one of medium-sized skinks
having four well-defined light lines, a dorsolateral arising on the
last supraocular (on snout in copei) and continuing on the tail; a
lateral line from snout (sometimes broken on labials) to the hind
leg. A broad lateral brown stripe. The dark dorsal ground color
of the young becomes olive, with secondary rows of black dots.
Often a secondary (dim) light median line, but no "bifurcating"
lines on head; one or two postmentals; no postnasal; limbs not or
but slightly overlapping; seven upper labials; postgenial bordered
by a scale longer than wide (except in copei).
Key to the Species of the Anthracinus Group
A. Four dorsal rows of scales widened; the postgenial bordered by a scale broader than
long, on its inner edge; dorsolateral line originates on the snout; sixth and seventh
labials very large; primary temporal larger than lower secondary; interparietal
proportionately very large; 22-24 scale rows; no median light line; usually dotted
dark lines on scale rows of back. Maximum size, 76 mm. ; limbs widely separated
in adults (15 mm.). (States of Morelos and Mexico, and Distrito Federal, in
Mexico> Eumeces copei Taylor, page 387
AA. Dorsal scale rows not noticeably widened; postgenial bordered by a scale longer
than wide; labials not enlarged more than normal for genus; the primary temporal
much smaller than lower secondary; interparietal not larger than usual.
B. One postmental; limbs well-developed, overlapping or touching in all save
old females distended with eggs; lateral lin^ passes through ear; 24-28 scale
rows, 26 or 28 being most usual, usually two pairs of nuchals. Maximum size,
70 mm. (Eastern United States to Kansas and Oklahoma.)
Eumeces anthracinus (Baird), page 373
BB. Two postmentals ; frontonasal variable, in contact or not with the anterior
loreal ; limbs short, never overlapping save in young ; lateral line passes above
ear ; usually 28 scale rows.
C. Frontonasal small (occasionally fused), frequently in contact with rostral,
normally not in contact with the anterior loreal ; average of 60 scales
from parietals to above anus. Maximum size, 75 mm. ; usually & dim
median light line to parietal. (Central U. S. from Canada to southern
Kansas) Eumeces septentrionalis septentrionalis (Baird), page 394
CC. Frontonasal normal in size, in contact normally with the anterior loreal;
dim median line frequently absent, usually not reaching head when
present ; scales from parietal to above, anus average 57. (Oklahoma and
Texas) Eumeces septentrionalis obtusirostrit (Bocourt), page 405
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 373
Eumeces anthracinus (Baird)
(Plate 32; Figs. 62, 63)
SYNONYMY
1850. Plestiodon antr Baird. Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., (2), 1. 1847-1850, p. 294
type description; type locality, North Mountain, neai Carlisle, Pennsylvania; Baird
Coll.): Garman, >.. Bull. Essex Inst., XVI, Jan. 9, L884, p. LS (Pennsylvania;
Mississippi); Burtei and Strecker, Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis, XVIII, L908-1909
(1909), p. 23 (records foi Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas); Hurter, Trans. Acad. Sci.
St. Louis, XX. 1911, pp. 142, L43 (Warren, Franklin and Jefferson counties, Missouri);
and Barbour, Check Lis1 X. Amer. Amph. Rept., L917, p. 69; Bishop,
Copeia, No. 54, Feb. 17. 1918, pp. 35, 36 (New York records); \\ : ght, Copeia, No.
66, 1919, p. 8 (New York records); Pratt, Vert. Anim. U. S., 1923, p. 206 (Key);
Strecker, Baylor Univ. Bull., XXVII, No. 3, pt. 3, pp. 38-42 (detailed notes on
occurrence in At i. ibits, food, etc.).
1875. Eumeces anthrat nus Cope. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, 1875, p. 45 (Pennsylvai
to Texas, in mountains); Davis and Rice, 111. State Lab. Nat. Hist., Bull. 5, 1883,
pp. 46, 47; Boulenger, Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 376; Garman, II., Bull.
Essex la-'.. XXVI, 1894, p. 62; Cope, Ann. Rept. Q. S. Nat. Mus., 1898, (1900),
]>. 662, fig. 135 (description and discussion); Morse, Proc. Ohio state Acad. Sci., IV.
pt. 3, 1904, special papei No. 9, p. 125; Surface, Zool. Bull. Penn. Dept. Agri., V,
No 8, 1907, p. 251; Ditmars, Reptile Book, 1915, p. 199; Jordan, Man. Vert. Anim.
U. S., 12th Ed., I'M';, p. 201; Stejn:ger and Barbour, Check last X. Amer. Amph.
Rept.. 2d Ed., 1923. p. 74: Strecker, Cont. Baylor Univ. Mus.. No. 5, Maj 15, 1926,
p. 6 (Louisiana); Ortenburger, Copeia, X... 155, June 24, 1926, p. 138 (Comanche
(.'.,.. Okla.); and I'ni. Okla. Bull., Proc. Okla. Acad. Sci., VI, pt. 1. 1926, p. 95
(Oklahoma records); Brimley, Journ. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc, XI. II. Nos. 1 and 2.
Oc1 . 1920. p. 83 (Key); Gloyd, Trans. Kan. Acad. Sci., XXXI. 1928, p. 120 (Kansas
record); Burt, Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis, XXVI. No. 1, 1928, pp. 49-51 (distribution
in Kansas); Buddy, Rept. Lancastei Cm.. Pa., 1928, pi-. 48, 50; Netting, Ann.
Carnegie Mus.. XIX. X... 3. 1930, pp. 170, 171; Force, Copeia, No. 2. June 30, 1930,
p. 29; Stejneger and Barbour, Check List X. A. Amph- Rept., 3d Ed., 1933. p. SO
1878. / mthracinus var. Cope. Amer. Philos. Soc, XVII, June, 1877, to June, 1878
(1878), p. 64.
1880. Eumeces pluvialis Cope. Bull. U.S.N.M., No. 17, 1880 (footnote, p. 19; type de-
tion; type locality, near Mobile, Alabama; Dr. Joseph Corson, U. S. A., Coll.):
Boulenger, Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus.. III. 1887, p. 376; Cope, Ann. Rept. U. S. Xat.
Mus.. 1898 (1900), pp. 663-664, tig. 136; Ditmars, Reptile Book, 1915, p. 200;
- egei and Barbour, Check List X. A. Amph. Rept., 2d Ed., 1923, p. 77; Haltom,
Mi;-. Papei X.i. 11, Alabama Mus. Natural History, Univ. Alabama, 1931, p. 119,
lig. 57 (after Cope).
1917. Plestiodon pluvialis Stejneger and Barbour. Check List N. Amer. Amph. Rept., 1917,
p. 71: Loding, Prelim. Cat. Alabama Amph. Rept., Mus. Paper No. 5 (Geol. Surv.
Alabama), Sept., 1929, p. 25.
History. Spencer F. Baird described this species in 1850 from
-■ vera! specimens (five cotypes still present in the collection of the
United States National Museum) collected by himself on the North
mountain, near Carlisle, Pa. Cope (187.") i, in his check list, records
the range of the species from "Pennsylvania to Texas in Mountains,"
i he latter state record seemingly based on specimens collected by
Shumard on the Brazos river. Texas. Garman (1884) adds Mis-
sissippi to the list of localities. Hurter and Strecker (190!)) report
the species from Missouri and Oklahoma. Since that time several
-'■Me it ports have been published and its range generally established,
('ope (1878) mentions a variety of the species from Mobile, Ala.,
374 The University Science Bulletin
collected by Dr. Jos. Corson, and two years later (Cope, 1880)
described this specimen as the type of a new species, Eumeces
pluvialis. No further specimens were identified as belonging to this
until a specimen, collected near Mobile by H. P. Loding, was so
classified in the U. S. National Museum.
Cope separated pluvialis from anthraeinus, because there were
26 scale rows, and seven instead of six labials. His statement that
it has five supraoculars (and so repeated by Boulenger, 3 887) is
apparently a lapsus. The green lateral and dorsolateral lines of
pluvialis are typical of young anthraeinus and, at least often, the
color is greenish to greenish-white in many live or recently preserved
adults. With an examination of the types of anthraeinus and a
topotype of pluvialis, it appears that the characters assigned to
pluvialis are likewise characteristic of many specimens of anthra-
einus. Thus, in the greater number (more than 95 percent) of the
specimens examined, the number of scale rows is 26-28, and the
reduced number of labials (six) occurs occasionally in specimens
having 28 scales rows. It is significant that the second known
specimen identified as pluvialis from Mobile has only 25 scale rows.
The type of pluvialis has a dim median stripe which is likewise
usually present in anthraeinus. Cope, himself, mentioned such a
specimen (Cope, 1900, p. 663). Consequently, it seems wisest to
regard the two forms as belonging to the same species, and I have
here so considered them.
The material available for study consisted of 91 specimens, the
larger number being from Kansas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas. The
types (No. 3138 U.S.N.M., 5 specimens) are now in very poor condi-
tion, faded badly so that the color patterns are effaced, and most
of the scales are wanting.
Within the presumed range several states are without locality
records. I have found no authentic records of the species in Illinois,
Indiana, Virginia, West Virginia, New Jersey, Kentucky, and
Tennessee. It seems reasonably certain, however, that the species
is present, but rare or difficult to find, since in several other states
it is known from very few or only a single record. In eastern Kan-
sas its distribution seems quite erratic.
Diagnosis. A medium-sized species with a maximum head-body
length under 70 millimeters; a broad, brown lateral stripe; a dor-
solateral light line from last superciliary or supraocular extending
onto tail, sometimes bordered above by a dotted brown line; lateral
light line from labials to some distance on tail, passing through the
Taylor: The Gkxvs Kvmeces
375
ear, tending to break into spots on posterior labials; a more or less
distinct secondary median lighter line, not or rarely edged with a
dim, dotted dark line; 24 to 28 scales about middle of body; seven
labials; one postmental and no postnasal; scales under tail widened;
limbs moderately well developed, overlapping in all young and in
adults except older females when distended with eggs; postgenial
bordered by a scale longer than wide.
Description of the species (drawn largely from No. 1620. E. H.
Taylor Collection. Baxter Springs, Cherokee Co., Kansas I: The
portion of the rostral visible from above triangular, equal or nearly
Fig. 62. Eumeces anthradnus (Baird). K.U. No. 8221; Imboden, Ar-
kansas. A. lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head
length. 10.2 mm.; width. 9 mm.
equal to frontonasal in area ; supranasals with edges more rounding
than angular, forming a median suture (rarely separated, allowing
contact between rostral and frontonasal), normally separated from
the prefrontals; frontonasal wider than long, making a suture with
the first loreal, separated from the frontal (rarely in contact) ; pre-
frontals angular, forming a median suture (rarely not), equal to or
somewhat less in size than the frontonasal, forming subequal sutures
with two loreals, the first superciliary and first supraocular; frontal
obtusely angled anteriorly, nearly a right angle posteriorly, the
sides straight, distinctly wider anteriorly than posteriorly, in con-
tact with the three anterior supraoculars, separated from the inter-
parietal; frontoparietals rather regularly rectangular, usually as
large as or larger than the prefrontals; interparietal elongate, not
enclosed posteriorly by the parietals, which are diagonally elongate
376 The University Science Bulletin
and not greatly widened; two pairs of nuchals (sometimes incom-
plete or only one pair present), the anterior pair the larger; nasal
divided by a suture, the entire scale smaller than supranasal; no
postnasal; anterior loreal high and narrow, much higher than pos-
terior, its lower edge forming an obtuse angle between the first and
second anterior labials; posterior loreal about as high as long,
irregular in shape; eight-nine superciliaries, the anterior large, two
to three times area of second, and equally larger than the last
vertically-placed superciliary; the four median palpebral scales in
contact with the superciliaries; four supraoculars; two presub-
oculars and four postsuboculars; primary temporal elongate, nearly
rectangular; upper secondary temporal nearly twice the length of
primary, relatively slender, never in contact with the last labial;
lower secondary temporal regularly fan-shaped, touching primary;
tertiary temporal elongate, entering ear (sometimes separated by a
single scale); two postlabials (normally); seven upper labials
(rarely six), the first higher than the four following; subocular
low, elongate; seventh labial largest (rarely sixth equals seventh);
mental with a slightly longer labial border than rostral; a large,
undivided postmental; three pairs of chinshields; a relatively small,
elongate postgenial, bordered on its mesial edge by an elongate scale
equal to or smaller than the postgenial in size; three or four small
but fairly distinct auricular lobules; 19-20 scales about the ear
opening; lowrer eyelid with a series of four or five enlarged opaque
scales separated from the subocular by three rows of small granu-
lar scales.
Scales on the body generally in parallel rows, but showing some
irregularity occasionally on the sides; scale rows behind ear, 34;
narrow part of neck, 29 rows; in axilla, 38; about middle of body.
26 rows; about base of tail, 21 rows; from parietals to above vent,
53 scales in a dorsal row; subcaudals, 99 from vent to tip of tail.
The dorsal scales are equal (or occasionally apparently smaller in
females with body distended with eggs) to the laterals; about equal
in size to the ventral series. Eight scales border vent anteriorly;
median pair not greatly enlarged, outer preanal scales bordering
them much larger than usual in the genus, the outer scales over-
lapping inner.
Limbs moderately well developed, overlapping in young and
young adults, sometimes somewhat separated when adpressed in
older specimens, especially females; small granular scales in axilla,
and a row usually passing above the limb insertion; a thickened
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 377
scale on outer edge of wrist; palm with several enlarged scales
separated by smaller granules; lamellar formula for fingers: 5; s;
11; 12; 7. Heel bordered by four enlarged plates; sole broad, with
two differentiated, tubercular scales; other scales subequal and
juxtaposed; lamellar formula for toes: 7; !>; 12; 15; 10; terminal
lamella of digits not tightly bound about base of claw.
Color. Above, uniform olive-brown from snout to base of tail,
where the ground color becomes more olive; a very dim median
dorsal line of a lighter brownish shade; dorsolateral lines distinct,
arising on the last supraocular, passing along the third scale row
to the shoulder, then bordering the edges of the third and fourth to
-nine distance on the tail; this line bordered on the internal border
by a dotted line of deep brown; a broad, lateral, deep brown stripe
beginning at eye involving upper edge of the auricular opening,
covering the equivalent of three whole scale rows, passes back to
rail and i> continued as a narrow, less-distinct stripe to near end of
tail; the centers of the scales in the stripe deeper brown or blackish,
-iiiiucsting two or three darker lines on the stripe; lateral light line
broken into spots on labials, tending to pass through the ear, widens
behind it, then narrows, following the middle of the seventh scale
row to behind the hind leg; tip of chin dirty white; undersurface
of body and tail and lower lateral region greenish or bluish-gray,
darker under tail; limbs with indistinct darker areas, the toes
lighter, the lamellae beneath dark.
Age groups. The snout to vent measurements recorded for the
specimens studied show that they tend to fall into groupings which
suggest age groups. At hatching, the measurements are from 21-
23 mm.; 2d year, 26-29 mm.; 3d year, 30-34 mm.; 4th year. 35-40
mm.; 5th year, 42-46 mm.; 6th year, 49-51 mm. ; 7th year, 53-56
mm.; 8th year, 56-59 mm.; 9th year, 59-60 mm.; 10th year, 61 mm.;
11th year, 62 mm.; 12th year, 63 mm.; etc.
The average expectation for spring collecting is 27 mm. 2d year
(but less than one year old ) ; 3d, 32 mm. ; 4th, 37.5 mm. ; 5th, 43 mm. ;
6th, 49 mm.; 7th, 52.5 mm.; 8th, 56 mm.; 9th, 59.5mm.; 10th, 61
mm.; 11th. 62 mm.; 12th, 63 mm.; 13th, 64mm. That the evidence
of these measurements is not conclusive as to the age groups is
admitted, since the number of data is small and in the greater num-
ber of specimens the date of collection is not complete. These data
may be checked against measurements of series taken at the same
locality and at the same time.
Variations. The variations here recorded are compiled from data
378
The University Science Bulletin
P.
m
a
K
-c
c
03
C
u
a,
-*—
to
o3
K3
cvcN'b «-
£12 <
Ooo
-TOO
<5iO
O
■b.2
PL)
5! "
53 so
fsZaU
CO rt tC
■W 00 ■-<
■— I UO CO
00 b-
-H CN
oo
U5 CC
o -•
IN CO
co
OS
o
o
o
"5
CO
CN
00 -XI
—• CN
CD
CN
CD
■-< oo oo
SO <-H i-l
CO
O CO — i
—i — i IN
CN
3
O
c
a.-
c CO — i
— < -h CN
o
CN
CO o o >o Oi
-0 — — ,-H -1
CN
CO
—
as
J3
o u o
C3
o
60
cu
a
a>
60
c
o
—
&
>>
J3
Taylor: The Genus Evmeces
379
12
/
c
■*
l~
09
o
U3
00
(^
= ~i
<o
Ci
cc
~"
"
~
o
(C
oc
C)
!3g*
N
_
»0
OS
o
O
,_,
t-
*s<
<o
CI
CO
CS
—
09
IC
3
r~
to
«s<
50
M
to
C
a;
c
oc
C
IC
03
re
1>
tc
c
<N
rc
es
B
'3
_
c
/.
C3
lO
c
^8-*
£
£T
o
O
oc
c:
iO
cq
t~
wS-S
>c
C)
w
CN
+3
03
-
£
•=■*
O"
C)
~z
oocS
oc
oc
C3
l>
c-
cc
e
t~
3.
-
PQ
=
"pa
0-c
c
CT
05
t^
OC
Oi
IC
c
CM
U3
rH
CI
CM
U
c
-si.
Ifl
in
S
~oi-jf
e
«*
■C
«
r^
oc
»—
u:
to
cc
*£<
-<t
OC
•—
0
*~
<3J
65
cs
M
10
IM
oc
•*
ir;
•c
IC
c
i—
<*
K
ir.
*-<
o
&
c
«
IM
f— 1
E
-5-2
CN
OC
c
c
u:
t£
t^
c
■*
tM
cs
—
;-
3
tc
03
03
s
--
*;
t
[
r
*-
C
. 5
t-
1
—
c
03
O
5"e!5
■4-
c
c
~
c
. b
a.
b
D 4
03
c
5
IS
T
c
» J
C
bo
§
2
C
^.
£
c
V.
:
£
0
c
g
^
380 The University Science Bulletin
taken from the 91 specimens examined. Complete data on all
specimens have not been taken since injury or condition may have
prevented so doing.
The number of scales in a longitudinal line from snout to vent
varies between 50 and 58; the smaller numbers, 50-54, are from
Arkansas and eastern states, the higher series, 53 to 56, are Kansas
and Oklahoma (topotype of pluvialis has 52). Two specimens from
Anderson Co., Kansas, have 59 each. In the entire series 53 occurs
with greatest frequency. In Arkansas specimens, 52 occurs most
frequently. In Kansas and Oklahoma, 53 and 54 are equal. In
eastern specimens the more usual number is 51. The subcaudals
in the few specimens with complete tails number about 100.
The number of scale rows about the body varies as to the place
where the count is made, and it likewise varies when counts are
made at the same point on various specimens. Thus, at a point
behind the ear, the counts vary between 31 and 38; at the constricted
part of the neck, from 28 to 31; about body slightly behind insertion
of the foreleg, 32-36; about the middle of the body, from 24 to 30.
Only a single specimen (Michigan No. 68450) has 30 scale rows;
while only one specimen has 24, and one 25 (aside from the type).
These were U.S.N.M. 38197 and 752!)] {pluvialis), respectively.
The numbers 26 and 28 are most common; 26 occurred 13 times; 27,
!) times; 28, 42 times, and 29, only once.
The normal number of labials is seven, four anterior to the sub-
ocular labial; the exceptions are few. In specimens examined other
than the types, the number 6-6 occurred in three: one from Kansas,
one from Arkansas, and one from Pennsylvania. The reduction on
one side, 6-7, occurred in 5 specimens, three from Kansas, and two
from Oklahoma. The character of the reduced labial series used to
differentiate anthracinus from pluvialis is in reality an abnormality,
and in the Pennsylvania specimen mentioned, the point of junction
between the third and fourth labials is still obvious. The lower
labials are normally six, counting to and including the elongate
posterior scale; however, a number of specimens have only five on
one s.de will) tiie normal number on the other.
The normal number of nuchals is one pair; however, in ten
specimens out of 90, two pairs were present, and in 14 specimens
an extra scale was present on one side or the other; in two specimens
the nuchals as such were wanting or broken into smaller scales.
In all specimens examined the postnasal was wanting, and in all
but two specimens the postmental is a single scale. In these two
there is a complete division.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 381
The number of supraoculars is invariably four, save in two anom-
alous specimens where a part of the second is segmented, making
five . the extra scale being irregularly shaped but touching the frontal,
making four supraoculars touching this scale. In all other specimens
four is the number of supraoculars, three contacting the frontals.
The superciliaries vary between seven and nine, eight being the
most frequent number.
The frontonasal varies considerably in the relative length and
width. In four cases it forms small sutures with the frontal, but
in all others the prefrontals are in contact. The count of scales
surrounding the ear varies between seventeen and twenty; the latter
number is more frequently present. The ear lobules are very small;
two or three are usually discernible. The nasal sutures running
above and below the nostril to edges of the scale are deep and
separate the two parts of the scale.
The frontonasal is almost invariably in contact with the anterior
loreal, three exceptions being noted: two in Kansas specimens in
which the small frontonasals are separated from the loreal on both
sides, and one in a Pennsylvania specimen separated on one side
only. The variation in the number of lamellae under the fourth
toe extends from 13 to 18; however, the smaller number rarely ap-
pears, and does not seem to be confined to any particular region.
However, the western specimens have a slightly higher average,
16 or 17 being the more usual counts, while in the eastern specimens
15 or 16 are more usual. In lamellae under the other digits a similar
variation is evident. This is an anticipated condition, since the
digits of eastern specimens are on the average slightly shorter than
in western and southern specimens. In only three specimens did
I find the frontonasal in contact with the rostral — a variation that
occurs much more frequently in septentrionalis. Presuboculars are
normally two, three occurring abnormally in a few specimens, due
perhaps to the segmentation of a small portion of the second loreal;
four i> the normal number of postsuboculars (rarely three).
The temporal scales are quite fixed in their relation to each other,
all four being invariably present. In not a single specimen ex-
amined is there an exception. The small postlabials — normally
two — may sometimes fuse and form a single scale; the tertiary
temporal may enter the ear or be separated from it by a single scale.
In none did the seventh labial form a suture with the upper sec-
ondary temporal.
The variations in color and markings ate not great and have to
382 The University Science Bulletin
do chiefly with variation in shades of color, and also in the dis-
tinctness of the medial line. In young specimens the dorsolateral
and lateral lines are greenish or greenish-white, showing some me-
tallic reflections; in older specimens these lines may be cream,
yellowish or whitish. The ventral and ventrolateral surface like-
wise may change in adults from a greenish to a dirty creamy white
on chin, and darker grayish or bluish-gray on abdomen.
In very young specimens the tails are blue; the ground color is
dark, almost blackish, and the light lines are very narrow and dim.
Instead of the light lines stopping short at the last supraocular, the
edges of the other supraoculars have their outer edges with irregular
lighter areas that may be contiguous with the dorsolateral line,
and so with the scales anterior to these supraoculars. The lateral
light line is usually represented anteriorly by a series of light areas
beginning on the presuboculars, with a light spot on the three suc-
ceeding labials, one in front of the ear, and one following the ear;
behind this it is evident as a very narrow line. During the second
season the light color of the canthus and the supraoculars fade, so
that in older specimens practically no trace of this is in evidence;
the dots on the labials change but little and rarely become con-
tiguous; the white spot behind the ear usually is joined with the
line and the resultant impression is that the light line passes through
the ear. The lateral dark brown stripe varies but little in width,
but in many older specimens the scales show central areas that
are darker — in fact almost black, thus giving a lined appearance.
The dorsal ground color varies through varying shades of black or
black-brown (in the young) to light browns, greenish-gray to olive.
I have seen a New York specimen and two Pennsylvania specimens
pea-green above. This may be due to fading or may be normal.
Sometimes the median line is evident, sometimes wholly absent in
young, middle-aged and old adults. When present it is usually
only a few shades lighter than the ground color and may or may
not have a deep brown edge of dotted or continuous color. The
dorsal surface of the tail is usually somewhat of the same shade
as the dorsal ground color but more frequently than not is peppered
with dark brown dots irregularly arranged.
The width of the dorsolateral and lateral lines varies; when
passing through a single scale row they are much narrowed; if
slightly lower, or higher, bordering the edges of two scale rows, they
may be distinctly wider; in the young specimens (second and third
seasons), the dorsal and lateral head scales may be heavily edged
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 383
with dark brown, and this color may be retained in some adult-.
There is no trace of markings corresponding to the bifurcating lines
on the top of the head. Likewise there is no trace of a light line on
the posterior part of the femur.
The head never assumes the much distended condition found in
old males of luticcps or fasdatus, although some specimens (pre-
sumably all adult males I have the side of the head tinged reddish
or orange during the breeding season.
The amount of pitting on the scales in the young i> exceeded in no
species of the genus. Practically all the scales on the side of the
neck and body, those on the limbs, and, to a lesser extent, those on
the outer dorsal rows have the posterior part of the scale with a
row of pits six to ten in number. These pits are in evidence in speci-
mens up to a length of fifty millimeters, snout to vent measurement,
but become obsolete save in axillary and groin regions of older
adults, particularly males.
Size. The maximum size of the species, snout to vent measure-
ment, probably does not exceed 65 millimeters, and only a few ex-
amined were above 60 millimeters. A specimen with a perfect tail
from Green Co., Miss. (Univ. of Rochester), has a snout to vent
measurement of 61 mm., and a tail length of 118 millimeters, total-
ling 179 millimeters. K.U. Xos. 8230 and 8226 from Imboden, Ark.,
measure respectively 62 and 63 millimeters, snout to vent, but the
tails are broken or regenerated; while the largest specimen seen
Mil millimeters) is from Franklin Co., Kansas (Ottawa University.
Ottawa, Kan., No. 198). The length when hatching appears to be
about 22-21 millimeters in snout to vent measurement, the total
length from 46 to 19 millimeters.
The relative proportions of the body change from young to adult.
The average proportions in the young are as follows: Tail, 1.1 times
head and body length; length snout to forelimb in head-body length.
2.2 times; foreleg into head-body, 3.01 times; hind leg in head-body
length, 2.4; axilla to groin distance in head-body length. 2.2. In
the largest adults the proportions are as follows: Tail length. 1.77
time- head-body length; length snout to forelimb in head-body
length. 3.05 times: length of foreleg into head-body length, 4.2:
length of hind leg into head-body length. 3.1 times; axilla to groin
distance into head-body length. 1.8 times.
In a Pennsylvania specimen (Ronova, Pa.. U.S.N.M. 38197) the
limbs seem somewhat shorter and the proportions are: length snout
to foreleg in head-body length. 3 time-: foreleg length in head-body
384 The University Science Bulletin
length, 4.46 times; hind leg length into head-body length, 2.2; axilla
to groin distance into head-body length, 1.9 times. It appears that,
in general, specimens from the northeastern part of the range have
somewhat shorter and slightly heavier limbs.
Remarks. This oviparous species appears to be quite secretive,
and as a result a rather small number of specimens have been dis-
covered by collectors.
Specimens which I collected in Anderson Co., Kansas, were found
under rocks on rocky bluffs along Pottawatomie creek. In Chero-
kee county, Kansas, the species was discovered in the neighborhood
of a small spring which had a flowing outlet, filled with water cress.
While I was searching for salamanders, among the roots of the
water cress, a specimen of a skink was routed, apparently having
taken refuge among the plants. Search in a scattered pile of small
rocks in the pasture land adjoining the rivulet resulted in the cap-
ture of 15 specimens of varying sizes. Certain ones near the water
would take refuge in the water, diving among the cresses. One speci-
men was later taken in woods under a log. Apparently they are
wholly terrestrial or fossorial. although the burrows observed merely
consisted of a runway under a rock. Stomach contents show a va-
riety of insects constituting their food, as well as certain other types
of small invertebrate animals.
Gloyd (1928) obtained eight eggs from a captive female which
were laid June 21-23, and hatched July 24-25, approximately one
month after deposition. The eggs averaged 6 x 10 millimeters. The
size of newly hatched young is given as 47 mm. total length. When
hatched (newly) they were black with blue tails. While Gloyd
makes no mention of the dorsolateral and lateral bnes. these are
discernible in newly hatched specimens of 49 mm. total length (snout
to vent, 22 millimeters), although, after preservation in formalin,
these lines can only be discerned with difficulty.
The types of Eumeces anthracinus (No. 3138, 5 specimens), now
in the United States National Museum, are in an extremely bad
state and nothing whatever is left of the original color and markings.
The scales are largely missing so that accurate data cannot be ob-
tained. The following notes were made:
1. Prefrontals much enlarged, the frontoparietal much reduced;
frontal abnormally truncate; first pair of nuchals fused medially;
six upper labials, three preceding the subocular.
2. Interparietal larger than others, approaching the size of the
parietals; frontal and prefrontals normal; seven upper labials,
four preceding the subocular; frontal and frontonasal separated.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
385
3. Typical save only six upper labials, three preceding the sub-
ocular. Interparietal normal.
4. Interparietal very large; frontal touches frontonasals; upper
labials 7-7.
5. Similar to Xo. 4, but the frontal separated from frontonasal.
In three specimens the scale bordering inner mesial edge of the
postgenial is wider than long.
The type of Eumeces phi rial is Cope has been lost and I propose
to designate U.S.N.M. Xo. 7."">291 as a neotype of the form. Were
one to separate pluvialis from anthracinus on the basis of the
character- pointed out by Cope, it would likewise be necessary to
separate the western populations from both on similar slight and
variable characters. Unless large series of specimens in the south-
eastern part of the range can be brought together that show some
differential characters now not known to exist, one is left no alterna-
Fig. 63. Distribution of Eumeces anthracinus (Baird), in the
United States.
25—1123
386 The University Science Bulletin
tive other than to regard it a synonym of Eumeces anthracinus
(Baird).
Distribution. This species is widely spread over the eastern half
of the United States, and its range is rather similar to E. fasciatus
save that its northern range (particularly in the northwest) may be
more restricted. The absence of specimens in collections from
several states where one may presume the species occurs (Illinois;
Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Georgia, etc.) argues
that they may eventually be discovered in Iowa, Wisconsin, Michi-
gan, and Nebraska. As has been suggested, the species seems erratic
in distribution, and even in states where it occurs, the localities
where it has been taken are few in number.
Locality records:
Pennsylvania:
Clinton Co.: Renova (U.S.N.M. 1).
Cumberland Co.: North mountain, near Carlisle (type locality)
(U.S.N.M. 5, cotypes).
Clearfield Co.: (Carnegie M. 1).
New York:
Tompkins Co.: Caroline (Cornell 1).
Orleans Co.: Bergen Swamp (Wright, 1919).
Monroe Co.: Irondequoit Bay (Bishop, 1918).
Ontario Co.: Bristol Hills, near Academy (Bishop, 1918) ; Fishers
(Bishop, 1918).
Maryland :
Allegheny Co.: (A.N.S.P. 2).
Unidentified locality: Mt. City Gap, Md. (Cornell U. 1).
North Carolina:
Transylvania Co.: Chubb Gap, Pisgale forest (Mich. U. 1) ; Looking
Glass (U.S.N.M. 1).
Buncombe Co.: Asheville (E. H. Taylor 1, Gloyd Coll.).
Alabama: Mobile Co.: Mobile (U.S.N.M. 1, pluvialis neotype).
Mississippi: Green Co.: Gaines Creek (Univ. of Rochester 1).
Louisiana: Caddo Co.: Gayle (K.U. 1) (Mich. U. 1) (Field 1); side of Wal-
lace Bayou (Strecker, 1926).
Arkansas :
Lawrence Co.: Imboden (K.U. 19) (Cornell 2) (Carnegie 1) (Mich. U.
3) (M.C.Z. 7).
Lafayette Co.: Lewisville (K.U. 7).
Benton Co.: (Mich. U. 1).
Garland Co.: Hot Springs (Strecker, 1924).
Saline Co.: (E.H.T. 1).
Missouri :
Carter Co.: Near Van Buren (Mich. U. 1).
Jefferson Co.: Peveley (U.S.N.M. 1) (Baylor 1).
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 387
La Clede Co.: (Hurler and Strecker, 1909).
Miller and Pvlaski Cos.: Rubidaux Creek (Mich. U. 1).
Barry Co.: Near Rockhouse Cave (A.M.N.H. 1).
K \ n s.\s :
Andi rson Co.: Near Glenlock (K.U. 1).
Franklin Co.: Ottawa (I Ittawa U. 1).
Dickinson Co.: (K.U. 1).
Miami Co.: Pigeon Lake (Mich. U. 4) (Ottawa U. 1).
Cherokee Co.: Near Baxter Springs (E.H.T. 8) (A.M.N.H. 3).
Oklahoma:
Latimer Co.: (Okla. U. 13).
Bryan Co.: (Okla. I". 1).
Comanche Co.: (Ortenburger, 1926).
Pushmataha Co.: (Ortenburger. 1926).
Tulsa Co.: (Ortenburger, 1926).
Choctaw Co.: Fort Towson (Cope, 1900).
Texas: Only a single record. Cope, 1900, "Brazos River," Shumard Coll.,
U.S.N.M. 2. These specimens are apparently lost and the record may be
regarded as doubtful.
Eumeces copci Taylor
(Plate 33; Figs. 64, 65)
SYNONYMY*
1885. Eumeces brevirostris var. Cope. Proc. Amer. Phil. Soc, XXII, Jan.-Oet., 1885, 387;
Cope, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 32, 1887, p. 46 (part.).
1933. Eumeces copei Taylor. Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, XLVI, June 30, 1933. pp. 133-
137. fig. head, enlarged, dorsal and lateral views (type description).
History. This species was first given a name as recently as June
30, 1933. However, its original discovery in either the valley of
Mexico or the neighboring one of Toluca was made by C. T. Hoege
in 1884 or 1885.f In the latter year, Cope published a short descrip-
tion of the specimen (No. 32291, U.S.N.M.) under the name Eumeces
brevirostris Gthr. var., but failed to name the variety. Cope like-
wise had access to another specimen (No. 7037) in the National
Museum lacking all data save the locality "Mexico." This speci-
men was entered in the Museum catalogue much earlier than the
other, and it> date of discovery, now lost, certainly antedates that
of the specimen collected by C. T. Hoege. This specimen is so
badly faded that the color pattern is all but lost. It is small wonder
that no one ha- placed a specific name on the tag. J
- Possibly also Plistodon lynxe Cope, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1865, p. 197 (Tableland
and Southern Mts. Mexico; Sartorius Coll.).
t Kellogg, Bull. U.S.N.M. No. 160, 1932, p. 9.
% This may be the specimen mentioned by Cope (1865) as Plistodon lynxe, collected by
Doctor Sartorius, in Tableland and Southern Mountains of Mexico, later referred to
brevirostris (Cope, 1887).
388 The University Science Bulletin
Since neither of these specimens bore a definite locality, the type
was chosen from a series of specimens obtained by Hobart Smith
and myself, from near Asuncion in the western part of the state of
Mexico, Mexico, August 4, 1932. It is No. 3859 of the Taylor-
Smith Collection, in excellent condition, save that it is somewhat
darkened by preservatives.
In the Museo Nacional de Mexico there is a specimen of this
species, presumably from the mountains from between Mexico City
and Toluca, state of Mexico, which is labeled Eumeces herrerae.
A search through available Mexican publications, and inquiries
failed to exhume a published description. This does not preclude
the possibility that such a description exists, in some journal, or
that the description was privately printed.
The species has been placed tentatively in the Anthradnus group,
although it differs from the other members in having a reduced
number of scale rows, with dorsal series widened, the dorsolateral
lines originating on the snout in the young instead of on the last
supraocular, the sixth and seventh labials greatly increased in size,
with the primary temporal larger than the lower secondary, and
the upper secondary likewise proportionally smaller. The inter-
parietal is proportionally larger than in all other species.
Diagnosis. A moderately large form, having well-defined lateral
and dorsolateral whitish lines extending the length of the body, but
lacking any trace of a median white line or forking light lines on
the head; the limbs small, widely separated (in adults) when ad-
pressed on sides of body; four supraoculars, three touching the
frontal; two pairs of nuchals; seven labials, last largest or equal
to sixth; a single postmental; no postnasal; large primary temporal
in contact with lower secondary temporal and equal or larger in
size; a broad scale bordering the postgenial on its anterior median
side. Scales in 22 or 24 rows about the middle of the body, the
median rows somewhat widened.
Description of the type. Adult female. Rostral § moderately
high, the part visible above one third, or less, the area of the fronto-
nasal; latter in contact with the frontal and forming sutures with
supranasals, prefrontals, and the anterior loreal; prefrontals quad-
rangular, the longest side forming the frontonasal suture; the
sutures with the frontal next in size; that with the second loreal
larger than the sutures with anterior loreal, superciliary or anterior
§ In the original description the statement which reads "Rostral moderately high, the
part visible above one-third, or less, than the area of the frontonasal, in contact with the
frontal and forming sutures with nasals, prefrontals, and the anterior loreal," should read
as here given.
Twlor: Tin: Genus Eumeces
:w.)
supraocular; frontal large, broad anteriorly, the anterior end a
very obtuse angle, as is the posterior, in contact with three supra-
oculars; two irregularly rectangular frontoparietals, forming a
median suture one third their length; interparietal large, broad, not
enclosed by the parietals; parietals large, irregularly hexagonal;
two pairs of nuchals, the anterior pair largest.
Fig. 64. Eumeces copei Taylor. E.H.T. and H.M.S. No. 1827; near
Tres Marias, Morelos, Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of
head. Actual head length, 102 mm.; width, 8.3 mm.
Nasal relatively small, the part in front of nostril much smaller
than the posterior part including nostril; no postnasal; anterior
loreal much higher than wide, distinctly higher than posterior
loreal, which is longer than high; two presuboculars, the anterior
largest; three postsuboculars, the upper largest; primary temporal
large, equal in area to and broadly in contact with the lower second-
ary temporal, separating the seventh labial from the upper second-.
390 The University Science Bulletin
ary temporal; tertiary temporal small, elongate, widened medially;
a pair of postlabials border anterior edge of the ear, the lower
elongate; seven upper labials, four preceding the subocular, of
which the first is the largest; sixth and seventh very large, of
about same area; eye with four enlarged scales on lower lid sepa-
rated from the subocular by three rows of minute tubercles; six
superciliaries, the anterior large, the second less than half its size;
mental large, having a longer labial border than the rostral; a
single, large, azygous postmental; six lower labials, the last elongate;
three pairs of chinshields, the first in contact medially; the post-
genial elongate, bordered on anterior inner edge by a scale broader
than long.
Scales on the body large, in 22 rows, larger dorsally than ven-
trally, the rows parallel on the sides; about the neck posterior to
the ear, 28 rows; about narrow part of neck, 26 rows; behind arm,
29 rows, and 15 about base of the tail; scales from parietals to
above the anus, 61 ; scales above and behind insertion of limbs with
numerous pits on posterior borders; scales under tail widened,
about 2V2 times as wide as long; anus bordered by two median
preanal scales and two smaller scales on each side, the outer
scales overlapping the inner; a very small area of small juxtaposed
scales in axilla; lateral postanal scale enlarged but not strongly
differentiated.
Limbs small, weak, widely separated when adpressed; palm with
several enlarged, rounded scales mixed with smaller; the wrist tu-
bercle on outer edge of under side of wrist not especially enlarged;
lamellar formula for fingers: 5; 8; 11; 10; 6; foot with (normally)
four enlarged tubercles bordering the heel; usually one enlarged
tubercle on the sole with other smaller tubercles; lamellar formula
for toes: 4; 7; 10; 12; 9; fourth toe with intercalated lateral scales
only at base of the proximal phalanx.
Color in life. Above the general color is a brownish-olive to light
chocolate; a very distinct, very narrow, creamy- white, dorsolateral
line begins on the rostral, passes back along the sides of the head
and along the side of body to some distance on the base of the tail,
occupying the median third of the third scale row. A cream-white
lateral line begins on rostral, passes along the lower part of the first
four labials, then rises somewhat, passing across the upper part of
the succeeding labials, reaching middle and upper edge of ear; be-
hind ear it begins on lower half of the ear edge, then bends down
slightly, continuing back above arm along the side and to some
Taylor: The Genus Ei meces
391
distance on the tail. A deep black or black-brown stripe begins on
the side of the head, runs along the side, occupying the area between
the light lines and bordering the inner edge of the lateral light line;
on the median part of the back there are five brown lines; the three
median, which follow the edges of the scale rows, are quite distinct,
but are much lighter in color and narrower than the deep black-
brown lines bordering the light dorsolateral lines; head with a few
black-brown -pots; below the lateral light line, sides black-brown,
each xale with' lighter grayish areas forming more or less distinct
lighter lines; lower labials, chin, abdomen, underside of limbs and
tail dirty grayish to bluish-gray, the preanals showing some brown-
ish color; scales of arm and leg showing irregular light dots, the
Measurements and scale characters of Eumeces copei Tajdor
Number.
Sex
Snout to vent
Tail
Snout to forelimb. . . .
Snout to ear
Axilla to groin
Width of head
Length of head
Width of body
Foreleg
Hind leg
Scale rows
Interparietal inclosed .
Scales occiput to anus.
Upper labials
Supraoculars
Nuchals, pairs
Post mentals
Posl nasals
Largest labial
Frontonasal touches
frontal
Supraoculars touch
frontal
Seventh labial touches
upper secondary
t( mporal
Type
3859
9
3870
9
23
12
47.5
10
11
11.5
13. S
18 2
22
no
(50
7
4
2
1
0
7
3
no
22.2
1 2 3
45.5
9.5
10 3
12
14
19.4
24
no
64
7
4
2
1
0
7
yes
3
no
3S71
o*
67
95
20.5
12
38
9.5
10.2
10.5
15
20
23
no
63
7
4
2V2
1
0
7=6
yes
3
no
3884
9
65
is 6
11
40
9
9.8
10
13.5
18
23
no
63
7
4
2
1
0
7
yes
3
.'Mill
9
63
19
10. S
37.5
8.2
9.3
10
14
18.2
24
no
60
7
4
2
1
0
7
yes
3
3864
60
20.3
10.5
34
9
9.5
9
12.6
IS
22
no
60
7
4
2
1
0
7=6
yes
3
3886
55
18
10
30
8.6
9.2
9.2
13
17
24
no
62
7
4
2
1
0
7=6
yes
3
3888
&
50
71
16
9.4
28
7
S.7
S
11
16
22
no
62
7
4
2^
1
0
7=6
yes
3
no
3896
9
45
13
8
28
7
7.7
8.2
10.2
14
22
no
64
7
4
2
1
0
7=6
no
3895
yg-
34
49
12
7
19
6
6.8
7
8.5
11.2
24
no
63
7
4
2
1
0
7=6
no
:;vis
yg-
29
11
6
15
5
6
6.5
7.5
92
24
no
63
7
4
2
1
0
7=6
yes
3
no
392 The University Science Bulletin
fingers with cream dots on each scale, the toes only partly so; soles
and palms bluish-black.
Variation. Detailed data taken on 36 specimens show the follow-
ing variations: All show a rather decided tenacity to the color
pattern described, and moreover it seems to be retained in both
sexes to old age with very little change save that the bluish color
of the tail is lost early. There is some variation in the shades of
brown forming the ground color and in a few specimens the three
chocolate lines bordering the edges of the three median scale rows
are dim or obsolete; occasionally the dark spots on the dorsal part
of the head are wanting.
The scale characters show some variation. The frontal occa-
sionally is separated from the frontonasal (8 times in 36). The
parietals fail invariably to enclose the interparietal; the sixth and
seventh upper labials are of about equal area, the seventh occa-
sionally the largest; there are invariably four supraoculars, three of
which touch the frontal (one exception on one side) ; seven upper
labials (one exception with six on each side) ; the scales about the
ear vary between 15 and 17; invariably one postmental; a postnasal
occurs on one side in a single specimen; superciliaries vary between
six and seven (five in two specimens). The number of scales from
the parietals to above anus varies between 60 and 64, while 62 oc-
curs twice as frequently as any other number. Usually one auricu-
lar lobule (rarely two, or none) , enlarged. The frontonasal in-
variably touches the first loreal. The lamellae under the fourth toe
vary between 12 and 14, 13 being the most frequent number (two
specimens have 16 on one side) ; postsuboculars usually three (three
exceptions with four). In the greater part of the specimens the
primary temporal is larger than the lower secondary (which is
unusual in the genus) and is invariably in contact with it, thereby
separating the seventh labial from the upper secondary temporal.
Two specimens show three nuchals on one side. In two specimens
the posterior loreal is broken vertically on one side ; a single presub-
ocular occurs on both sides in four specimens, on one side in one.
The limbs when adpressed fail to touch save in the youngest and
smallest specimens (29-34 mm.), where they may overlap one or
two millimeters; in the largest specimens (76 mm.) they are sepa-
rated by a distance of 15 millimeters.
The color of the specimens in preservative is very much darker
than in life.
Remarks. The specimens collected by Mr. Smith and myself
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
393
were obtained for the most part by turning over rocks on a grassy
hillside (elevation about 6.000 feet) or from under logs and bark
slabs in a pine forest where logging operations had been carried on
(elevation approximately 9,500 feet). The populations were exclu-
sively of this species in these two separate types of localities. In a
near-by locality in exactly the same type of forest habitat, the entire
Eumeces population observed or collected belonged to indubitus.
Our first encounter with copei occurred when Mr. Smith routed a
single specimen from under a rock in a lava field near Tres Marias,
Morelos, in the mountains to the south of Mexico City along the
Mexico-Cuernavaea highway, about thirty miles from Mexico City,
and about fifty miles from the type locality.
The large type series contains 48 specimens of various ages and
sexes. An examination of the sex organs failed to disclose whether
the form is ovoviviparous or not. All the females examined lack
developing eggs in the oviducts; United States National Museum
specimen No. 32291 shows five well-developed eggs in the ovaries.
The stomachs contain a variety of insects belonging to several
families, chiefly coleoptera and blattids. No ants were observed.
The species is named for Edward Drinker Cope, who first noted
the form, but failed to give it a name.
Data obtained by correlating the snout to vent measurements of
Mm
0
"^7
\ f
mi
J i
& r
i < i
* i
' ■ i -
1/ W^K
:
\L S-T~-l
m
i
Fig. 65. Distribution of Eumeces copei Taylor, in Mexico.
394 The University Science Bulletin
the series collected in August show the following expected measure-
ments for the first ten years.
1st 2d 3d 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 'nth'
29 34 . . 45 50 55 60 63 65 76
Distribution. Known certainly only from the states of Morelos
and Mexico, and the Distrito Federal.
Locality records:
Mexico :
Mexico {Stat< ): 10 miles southeast of Asuncion, western Mexico. Type
locality (E.H.T. &H.S. 48).
Morelos: Near Tres Marias, along the Mexico City-Cuernavaca high-
way (E.H.T. &H.S. 1).
Distrito Federal: Santa Lucia ( A.M.N .H. 1).
Indefinite localities: Mexico (U.S.N.M. 1); "Either the Valley of Mex-
ico or the neighboring one of Toluca." (U.S.N.M. 1).
Eumeces septentrionalis septentrionalis (Baird)
(Plate 34; Figs. 66, 67)
SYNONYMY
1858. Plestiodon septentrionalis Baird. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., December, 1858, p. 250
(type description; type locality given as Minnesota and Nebraska; Rev. Manney
Coll.); and Explr. Surv. Railr. Route Pac. Ocean, Zool., Vol. X (1853-1856), Rept.
Rept., No. 3, 1859, p. 18, pi. 24, figs. 2, a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h (details of figures poor;
redescription) ; ?Hayden, Trans. Anier. Phil. Soc. XII, 1862, p. 177; Carman, Bull.
Essex Inst., XVI, Jan., 1884, p. 15 (under Eumeces); Pratt, Vert. Anim. U. S., 1923,
p. 206 (Key); Stejneger and Barbour, Check List N. A. Amph. Rept., 1917, p. 71.
1875. Eumeces septentrionalis Cope. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 1, 1875, p. 44; Coues and
Varrow, Bull. U. S. Geol. Geog. Surv. Terr., IV, No. 1, Feb. 5, 1878, p. 87; Cope,
Bull. U. S. Xat. Mus., No. 17, 1880, p. 39 (Savannah, Ga.); Cragin, Trans. Kan.
Acad. Sci., VII, (1879-'80), 1880, p. 115 (Neosho Falls, Kan.); Yarrow, Bull. U. S.
Nat. Mus., No. 24, 1S82, p. 40; Hoy, Geol. Wisconsin, I. Rept.. p. 423 ("not un-
common as far north as Lake Winnebago"); Davis and Rice, 111. State Lab. Nat.
Hist., Bull. V, 1883, p. 46; Boulenger, Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 374; Higley,
Trans. Wis. Acad. Sci. Arts Lett.. VII, 1889, p. 160; Cope, Ann. Rep. U. S. Nat.
Mus.. 1*98 (1900), p. 505, fig. 113; Ruthven, Proc. Acad. Sci. Iowa, XVII. 1910, pp.
203-206 (color description, habitat and distribution); Somes, Proc. Acad. Sci., XVIII,
1911, p. 150 (Iowa); Graenicher, Nat. Hist. Soc Wisconsin, IX. 1911, p. 79 (numer-
ous localities in Wisconsin); Ditmars, The Reptile Book, 1915, p. 199 (general ac-
count); Jordan, Man. Vert. Animals of the U. S., 12th Ed., 1916, p. 201; Over,
South Dakota Geol. & Nat. Hist, Survey, Bull. 12, Series XXIII, Bull. Univ. S.
Dakota, (let.. 1923, p. 20; Stejneger and Barbour. Check List N. A. Amph. Rept.,
2d Ed., 1923, p. 77; idem, 3d Ed., 1933, p. S2 ; Blanchard, Univ. Iowa Studies Nat.
Hist., X, No. 2, 1923, p. 22; Schmidt, Copeia, No. 154, May 20, 1926, p. 132
(Chippewa Falls, Wis.); Nulting. Rept. Com. State Fauna, Iowa. pp. 1-3; Pope and
Dickinson, Bull. Pub. Mus. City Milwaukee, VIII, No. 1, 1928, p. 45, pi. 11, fig. 3
(photograph); Burt, Jour. Kansas Ent. Soc, I, No. 3, July, 192S, p. 63 (Food);
Burt, Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis, XXVI, No. 1, Aug., 1928, pp. 63-66, fig. 14 (dis-
tribution in Kansas and habits); Burt and Burt, Amer. Mus. Nov., No. 381, Nov. 2,
1929, p. 10; Force, Copeia, 1930, No. -J. p. 29 (Tulsa Co., Okla.); ?Patch, Copeia.
No. 1, Apr. 24, 1934, p. 51 (Onah. Manitoba, 15 miles east of Brandon).
History. This form has been known since 1858, when Baird
described it from specimens in the U. S. National Museum, from
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 395
the type locality "Minnesota and Nebraska, collected by Rev.
S. W. Manney (Type No. 1356)." Baird (1859) figures the species
in considerable detail, giving the type number as U.S.N.M. No. 1356
(pi. 24. Fig. 2). Cones and Yarrow (1878, p. 287) state "Originally
described from Minnesota and also known to occur in Nebraska
and Kansas." Yarrow (1882) lists three specimens from Fort
Ripley. Minnesota (under the number 3156), which, one presumes,
are the cotypes; no* mention is made of Nebraska specimens.
Cope (1900) lists the three specimens (No. 3156) from Fort
Ripley. Minnesota, received from Governor Stevens. Also, No. 31">7
from Sand Hills of Nebraska.
There are at present three specimens in the National Museum
bearing the number 3156 from Fort Ripley, Minnesota (collector,
Doctor Head i. labeled types (cotypes), and it would appear that
the above locality should be considered the actual type locality.
Since no lectotype has been chosen, I propose to designate as lecto-
type of Eumeces septentrionalis, the medium-sized specimen of the
three cotypes No. 3156, having a snout to vent measurements of ap-
proximately 70 millimeters. This specimen, particularly as regards
the character and relationship of the frontonasal, approaches more
closely the norm of the species, while the larger specimen has a
reduced number of labials and has the frontonasal scale fused with
the prefrontals, which are in turn partially fused; in the smallest
of the three cotypes, the frontonasal is reduced to a minute scale,
and the labials are abnormal.
In the type description it would appear that the collector's name
(Rev. S. W. Manney I may be in error, since later mention of the
specimens attributes the material from Fort Ripley to Doctor Head
i the present designation), but in Cope (1900) the three specimens
are noted as "received from Governor Stevens." It will be noted,
too, that the original number as listed by Baird is 1356, while later
works and the present catalogue number of presumably the same
specimens is 3156, suggesting that the former number is a metathe-
sized form of the latter, and in error.
Coues and Yarrow (1878) report the species in their paper on the
Herpetology of Dakota and Montana, without definite locality.
Cragin (InsOi records a specimen from Neosho Falls, Kan. Yarrow
(18<s2) adds Texas ("northern boundary of Texas") and an au-
thentic Nebraska locality, Fort Kearney. Hoy (1883) reports the
• 'Hit-re is an item. U.S.N.M. No. 5325, listed in this work, of 2 specimens from unknown
or doubtful locality. Can these be the Nebraska specimens?
396 The University Science Bulletin
species in Wisconsin. Ruthven (1910) first records the species from
Iowa. Over (1923) substantiates the Dakota report, stating it has
been taken as far north as Roberts county, and that it is common
in the eastern part of the state. Whether the species actually occurs
in Montana may be questioned.
Diagnosis. A medium-sized species (maximum size, about 75
millimeters) with (normally) two postmentals and no postnasal;
frontonasal small, frequently fused with adjoining scales or absent,
not in contact with the anterior loreal; limbs relatively short, not
overlapping when adpressed in adult specimens; dorsolateral white
line arising on the posterior part of the supraocular or superciliary
region, and continuing some distance on tail; lateral white line
arising on snout, passing back above ear to some distance on tail;
these lines bordered above and below by dark brown, and the entire
space between them of the same color ; ground color of back usually
forming three light-brown lines, usually bordered by darker brown
lines.
Description of the species (from No. 6982 et seq. Kansas Univer-
sity Museum; collected June 10, 1928, near Onaga, Pottawatomie
county, Kansas; E. H. Taylor, collector). The rostral large, the
part visible above much larger (sometimes more than twice) than
the frontonasal; supranasals normal, generally rectangular, forming
a median suture and (usually) separating the frontonasal from the
rostral, likewise forming a suture with the prefrontals, separating
the frontonasal from the anterior loreal; prefrontals large, pentag-
onal, forming a broad median suture (usually) ; forming subequal
sutures with the first supraocular, the two loreals (only one on right
side) and the supranasals; frontal short, its length not equal to its
distance from the end of the snout (occasionally as long as this dis-
tance) , bordered laterally by two supraoculars (normally three) the
second of which is very large; frontoparietals large, irregularly
pentagonal, invariably forming a median suture; interparietal mod-
erate, not enclosed by the parietals; parietals very large, broad,
truncate behind; two pairs of nuchals (one pair more usually).
Nasal scale large, nearly equal in area to the supranasal, its anterior
elevation nearly equal to its length and not divided;* two loreals,
the anterior somewhat higher, normally touching the prefrontal
(failing to do so on the left side) ; second loreal nearly as high as
long; four supraoculars, two or three touching frontal; seven super-
* In most species there are strong grooves emerging above and below from the nostril
which divides the nasal into two parts and the shed scale separates along the sutural line.
In this form a simple depression may be observable, but the scale does not separate here.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
397
ciliaries, the anterior about three times the size of the second; the
last vertical, about size of second; two relatively large presubocu-
lars; four postsuboculars ; primary temporal moderately large,
broadly in contact with the lower secondary temporal; upper sec-
ondary temporal largest; tertiary temporal vertical, narrow, sepa-
rated from the auricular opening by a single tiny scale; seven upper
labials, the first largest of the four anterior, and (usually) highest;
the first loreal tends to make a wide notch between the first and sec-
ond labials; subocular labial longer than high; the sixth and seventh
labials with about the same elevation, but the seventh largest and
Fig. 66. Eumeces septentrionalis septentrionalis (Baird). K.U. No.
6988; five miles west of Onaga, Kansas. A, lateral view of head; B, dor-
sal view of head. Actual head length, 10.6 mm.; width, 10.2 mm.
longest (usually i ; two postlabials, upper largest, separated from the
minute auricular lobules by three tiny scales; five (usually) lower
labials anterior to the elongate posterior (sixth) labial; mental large,
with a labial edge much larger than the rostral; two postmentals;
three pairs of chinshields followed by the elongate postgenial, which
is bordered on its anterior inner edge by a scale longer than wide.
Eye moderate, its length equal to the distance from its anterior
corner to the anterior edge of the nostril; the upper median pal-
pebral scales join the superciliaries ; lower eyelid with four or five
enlarged opaque scales separated from the subocular by two rows
of granular scales.
The ear opening of moderate size, surrounded by about 20 scales,
the lobules minute, scarcely differentiated; the scales on the body
are in parallel longitudinal rows except behind the arm. where the
398 The University Science Bulletin
interpolated series back of the arm are diagonal (some specimens
show some irregularity to the groin) ; pitting on the lateral scales
evident, few on sides of neck (2 or 3), while pits may be more nu-
merous on posterior sides of limbs and about insertion of limbs; in
the narrow part of the neck there are 30 scale rows; behind arm, 35
rows; about middle of body, 28 rows; on base of tail behind anus, 21
rows; 60 scales in a row from the parietals to above anus; scales
under the tail somewhat widened; two enlarged preanals (a median
abnormal scale present), bordered laterally by a differentiated pre-
anal, and this by a second smaller scale, the outer preanals over-
lapping the inner.
Limbs small, widely separated when adpressed (a distance of
about 10 scales) the terminal lamellae not tightly bound about claws.
Lamellar formula of fingers: 5; 9; 11; 11; 7; of toes: 7; 9; 13;
15; 9. Palm bordered by enlarged scales; on sole of foot, the scales
are imbricating, flat, irregular in size. The subcaudals are not
greatly widened. (The regenerated tail, however, may show them
very strongly widened. The same is true of the dorsal caudal series
which in the regenerated tail is quite unlike the original dorsal
squamation and is of a different shade.)
Color and markings. Above, the ground color is gray, or olive-
gray, forming a slightly lighter putty-colored median line, terminat-
ing anteriorly at the interparietal, covering somewhat less than half
of each of the two median scale rows; this line bordered laterally by
two darker gray lines with brown spotting (frequently well-defined
dark brown lines), each about as wide as the median; these darker
lines bordered by lines of the gray-olive ground color, each covering
approximately one and two thirds scale rows; lying between these
and the dorsolateral white (or cream) lines are narrow brown lines
less than one whole scale row in width ; these originate on the parie-
tals and continue on the tail; the dorsolateral light line definitely
originates on the last supraocular and continues as a narrow line to
nearly a half the length of the tail, its width rarely more than half a
scale, but occupying edges of two scale rows (fourth and fifth) ;
lying between the dorsolateral and lateral lines is a deep brown
band originating behind eye (although a few brown spots about and
in front of eye suggests that the brown band began farther forward
and has become obscured) ; it continues to some distance on the tail;
the light lateral line begins below eye, runs diagonally upward to
and above the upper edge of the ear, where after a slight break it
passes back, bordering the brown lateral stripe to some distance on
the tail; below the lateral white line there is a very narrow brown
Taylor: The Gents Eumeces
:!!)!)
line (sometimes not a connected line) bordering it; upper labials
generally light from rostral, somewhat edged with darker, gray or
brown on their upper edges and with a tiny light spot in each cor-
ner of the eye; lower labials and chin, to a lesser extent the throat,
breast, underside of limbs and anal plates, creamy white; the lateral
and ventral sides of the abdomen and underside of tail a dull, light
bluish-gray; limbs above generally like ground color of the body
with some darker dots; a whitish black-bordered line on posterior
Table of measurements of Northern Specimens of Eumeces seplentrionalis
st ptt ntrionalis (Baird)
Museum
Number*
Sex
Field
147S7
yg-
Field
14792
yg.
Field
14783
9
Field
I 1780
9
Field
1 1782
9
Field
14779
9
U.S.N.M.
3156
&
I S A.M.
3156
9
U.S.N.M.
3156
9
Snout to vent. . .
32
33
52
62
65
70
57
70
74
Snout to foreleg.
12
11.7
16. S
17
19
19
17.2
20
22
Width of head...
5.5
5.5
7
8.5
8.9
9
9
10
Length of head. .
6.3
6.2
9
10
10
10.2
10.1
12
Foreleg
8.5
8.2
12
13.7
15
16.5
15
15.2
16
Hind leg
10
10.5
15
17.5
IS
20.2
19.5
18.4
18
Longest toe
3.8
3.6
5
5.5
6
6.3
6
6
8
Axilla to groin...
17
17
31
38
39
41
32
38.2
' Field Museum Nos. from Burnett Co., Wisconsin (Schmidt Coll.); U.S.N.M. specimens
are cotypes : specimen 3156 5, 70 mm. in length, chosen lectotype.
Table of measurements of Eumece* s< pit ntrionalis s< pU ntrionalis (Baird)-
Southern Specimens
Museum
Number
Sex
K.U.
7781
yg.
K.U.
7784
yg-
K.U.
6992
yg.
K.U.
6987
yg-
K.U.
6980
cf
K.U.
6993
<?
K.U.
6979
cf
K.U.
6990
9
K.U.
6985
c?
K.U.
69.SS
9
K.U.
6982
&
Total length
55 . 5
26
11
29.5
4.5
5
7
9
3 . :>
12
56.8
26.2
11
30.6
7
9
3
12
105.5
41.5
12.2
64
5.5
1 J
11
15
5
21
117
47
16
70
6.8
7
11.3
15.6
5.5
26
133
50
17
83
7.2
8
12.2
19
6
28
138
54
18
84
8
8.2
14
17
6
32
178
64
21.5
114
10
11
15
20
35
Snout to vent
Snout to foreleg
Tail..
69
21
72.5
23 . 5
74
22
75
22
Length of head
Foreleg
10
10.9
15
19
7
38
11
11.8
16
22 . 2
7.5
40
10.2
15
20
6
40
15.5
Hind leg
21
Longest toe
7
Axilla to groin
45
All specimens from Onaga, Pottawatomie Co., Kai
400 The University Science Bulletin
side of femur; dorsal surface of tail colored like body, and after the
definite dark lines cease, they may be evident as scattered brown
dots.
Variation. The material available for the study of septentrionalis
septentrionalis consisted of 98 specimens. By far the larger number
of these specimens are in the collection of the Kansas University
Museum. The material, with few exceptions, was made up of
small series from widely separated localities. Material from the
critical region in Oklahoma was meager, and more specimens, par-
ticularly large series from a few localities, will determine beyond
peradventure the status of obtusirostris and septentrionalis, which
are here treated as subspecies of the same species.
The maximum size of the subspecies as shown by material studied
is about 75 millimeters, four specimens reaching this size. Newly
hatched young are 25 to 26 millimeters in length.
The number of scales from parietals to above anus varies from
57 to 62, 60 being more than twice as frequent as any other number.
The variation in scale rows about the middle of the body is rather
considerable, varying as they do from 24 to 29, the usual numbers
being 26, 27, or 28, the last appearing the greatest number of times.
The northern specimens from Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin have
a lower number on the average, 26 being the most usual number.
Four of the northern specimens have 25, while in three, the count is
24. The number of upper labials is 7, uniform in all save six speci-
mens, of which there are five having two labials fused on one side of
the head. No specimen showed a larger number.
The number of nuchals is usually one pair, but in 18 specimens
(out of 86) an extra nuchal is present on one side; in 14 two com-
plete pairs are present; in one three pairs, and in one all of the
nuchals are broken, resembling body scales. The supraoculars are
invariably four, three usually contacting the frontal, but in eight
cases, on one side only, two are in contact, while in three cases there
are only two on each side. Three specimens only have a single
postmental. The postnasal is absent in all cases, but in 12 specimens
the anterior loreal is broken transversely, leaving an extra scale
simulating a very large postnasal. The frontonasal is normally
small, surrounded by the supranasal and the prefrontals. In four
cases, however, the scale is in contact with the anterior loreal. In
19 cases the scale is in contact with the rostral; in 18 cases it is
fused with either the right or left prefrontal or equally fused to the
two prefrontals and apparently absent. The superciliaries are six,
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces 401
si /en, or eight, seven being the normal number for Kansas spcci-
mens, with eight rarely, while in the Minnesota and Wisconsin speci-
mens seven is most frequent, with six appearing occasionally.
The number of lamellae on the fourth toe varies from 12 to 17.
In seventy specimens, counting both sides, the following numbers
appeared: 12, four times; 13, twenty-four times; 14, sixty-one
times; 15, thirty-one times; 16, eleven times; and 17, three times.
The limbs when adpressed on the sides of the body fail to touch
in specimens over 50 mm. snout to vent measurement; while under
this size they usually touch or overlap, and in newly hatched speci-
mens may overlap 4 millimeters. In general, the temporals are as
described, the primary moderately large, forming a definite suture
with the lower secondary. In two cases only are there exceptions
which allow the seventh labial to form a definite suture with the
upper secondary temporal. There are usually two postlabials. The
postsuboeulars are three or four (about equally), rarely five.
In large adults the tail is 1.5 times head-body length; snout to
forelimb in head-body length. 3.3 times; foreleg into head-body
length, 4.54; hind leg into head-body length. 3.59 times; axilla to
groin in head-body length, 1.61 times (average male and female).
(Females have a longer axilla to groin measurement than males, i
In younger specimens the proportions are quite different. In
newly hatched young the proportions are as follows: the tail, 1.17
times head-body length; the snout to forelimb in head-body length,
2.4; foreleg into head-body length, 3.67 times; hind leg into head-
body length, 2.85 times; the axilla to groin in head-body length, 2.14
times. From these comparative figures it will be observed that the
limbs are proportionally longer in the young than in the older speci-
mens, a condition that obtains in all species I have examined.
The head length always exceeds the width, even in the oldest
males. The head never assumes the strongly inflated condition
found in males of the Fasciatus group.
Color variation. The variation in color and markings in Eumeces
septentrionalis septentrionalis is not great save that the brown pig-
ment forming dorsal stripes may be sparse, so that instead of lines
the stripes of the ground color may be bordered by dots or merely
a line of deeper olive color. The median line usually shows as a
lighter (sometimes approaching white) line, a difference that is evi-
dent in some newly hatched young. The brown stripes likewise vary
in width and in consequence the lighter, ground color lines are some-
what narrower.
26—1123
402 The University Science Bulletin
In the young the dark stripes occupy more area than the lighter
ground color and the markings on the head are moderately distinct.
These lighter marks are of about the same color intensity as the
median dorsal line and are arranged somewhat concentrically in the
parietal region.
Occasionally the general olive ground color of the back tends
toward a light brown; occasionally toward a somewhat greenish
coloration. The tails of the young are blue and this color may be
retained until the third year. Occasional older specimens may show
some bluish reflections.
Remarks. Males during the breeding season develop a deep
reddish-orange coloration on the t^v> of the lower jaw and the
sides of the head in the temporal region. This soon tends to fade
out and no trace of this color is left in specimens collected a month
later. . .
Specimens collected in May deposited eggs, while in captivity,
during the latter part of the month. The burrows were made in soft
earth "under flat rocks. The clutches numbered from five to eight
eggs. These were removed and placed in boxes of moist earth.
Those completely buried failed to develop, while those with a portion
of the shell left above the surface of the earth under a rock, hatched.
Unfortunately, complete data on dates of laying and hatching, while
kept, have since been lost.
The similarity of this form with multivirgatus is often a bit
puzzling. The two forms, owing to the fact that the ground color
is broken up by the darker brown streaks on the back, appear to
have a larger series of light lines on the back than normal for Hie
genus. However, the pigmentation (or lack of it) of the secondary
lines is of a different quality from the typical dorsolateral and
lateral lines as may be noted in young specimens and older ones
preserved in formalin. In multivirgatvs, too, there is a tendency
for a dark area on the head to divide the lighter color on the head,
resulting in a marking suggestive of the bifurcating lines found in
the Fasciatus and Brevilineatus groups. In fact, it may be the
connecting link between these two patterns.
In the young of septentrionalis the three dorsal lines of the ground
color are dimly in evidence at hatching and there is a series of light
marks, scattered in a more or less definite pattern on the parietal
region of the head, but in no way suggesting the bifurcating lines
of the other mentioned groups. The typical dorsolateral and lateral
light lines are strongly marked.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
403
Fig. 67. Distribution of Eumeces septentrionalis seplentrionalis (Baird)
;tnd E. s. obtusirostris (Bocourt), in Central United Stati -
404 The University Science Bulletin
Distribution. The locality records show the presence of sep-
tentrionalis septentrionalis in Canada, North Dakota, South Dakota,
Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma.
However, perhaps throughout the greater part of the latter state
some of the characters are present that distinguish the subspecies
obtusirostris. I have examined a single Kansas specimen that had
the typical obtusirostris frontoparietal.
Locality records:
Kansas :
Pottawatomie Co.: Five miles north of Onaga (Field 5) (U.S.N.M. 3)
(Mich. 2) (M.C.Z. 2) (A.M.N.H. 6) (Ottawa U. 1); St. Marys
(M.C.Z. 1) (E.H.T. 14).
Woodson Co.: Neosho Falls (K.U. 2) (U.S.N.M. 1).
Wabaunsee Co.: Maplehill (U.S.N.M. 3).
Anderson Co.: Near Glenlock (U.S.N.M. 1); Fish creek near Glenlock
(K.U. 2).
Douglas Co.: Near Lawrence (K.U. 1) ; 10 miles west of Lawrence
(K.U. 2) ; 5 miles west of Lawrence (K.U. 3).
Franklin Co.: 8 miles east Ottawa (E.H.T. 1).
Atchison Co.: Atchison (Mich. U. 1).
Cherokee Co.: (Burt, 1928; no definite locality).
Minnesota:
Chisago Co.: Rush City Bridge (Pub. Mus. Milwaukee 1).
Crow Wing Co.: Brainard (Toledo Z.S. 3); Fort Ripley (U.S.N.M. 3,
cotypes; Dr. Head Coll.).
Sherburne Co.: Elk River (U.S.N.M. 4).
Beltrami Co.: Bemidji (K.U. 4).
Unidentified localities: Elk Head Minn. (A.M.N.H. 2); ?Red River of
the North (U.S.N.M. 2).
Wisconsin :
Burnett Co.: Randall (Pub. Mus. Milwaukee 2, Graenicher, 1911);
mouth of the Yellow river (Pub. Mus. Milwaukee 3, Graenicher,
1911) (Field 15).
Polk Co.: Nevers Dam (Pub. Mus. Milwaukee 1, Graenicher, 1911).
Clark Co.: Chippewa Falls. Worden township (Schmidt, 1926).
Washburn Co.: (H. V. Ogden Coll. 2) ; (as far north as Lake Winnebago,
Hoy.).
Nebraska :
Buffalo Co.: 2 mi. south Kearney (A.M.N.H. 2) (U.S.N.M. 1, Fort
Kearney) .
Unidentified locality: Sand Hills, Neb. (Cope, 1900).
Iowta :
Dickinson Co.: Lake Okoboji (M.C.Z. 1).
Palo Alto Co.: (Mich. U. 1) ; 3 mi. west of Ruthven (Mich. U. 1).
Clay Co.: 2 mi. SE Greenville (Mich. U. 1) ; Milford (Mich. U. 1).
Polk Co.: Des Moines (U.S.N.M. 1).
Taylor: The Genus Eume< i - 405
OKLAHOM \ :
fTulsa Co.: I Force, 1030).
Woods Co.: Near Alva (K.U. 1).
Caddo Co.: Old Fort Cobb (Cope, 1900; l/.S.X.M. 1).
North Dakota: Richland Co.: Lidgerwood d'.S.X.M. 1) ; Wahpeton
(U.S.N.M. 1).
Soi in Dakota: 'Roberts Co.: Eastern part of the state as far north is
Roberts Co. (Over, 1923).
Canada: Manitoba: Onah, 20 mi. east of Brandon (Patch, 1934, 1).
Eumeces septentrionalis obtusirostris (Bocourt)
(Plate 28, Figs. 1, 2; Fig. 67)
SYNONYMY
1879. Eumeces obtusirostris Bocourt. Mission Sci. Mexique, Liv. 6, 1879, p. 423, pi. 22 D,
fig. 1, la, lb, (type description in key; type locality, Texas), and Liv. 7, 1881, pp.
441-413.
1880. Eumeces pachyurus Cope. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 17, 1880, pp. 19, 20, 39 (type
locality, near Dallas, Texas: Mr. Boll, collector; compared with septentrionalis, speci-
mens of which are erroneously listed from Savannah, Ga.); Boulenger, Cat. Liz. Brit.
Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 377; Cope, Ann. Rept. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1898 (1900); p. 659;
Brown, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil., 1913, p. 553; Strecker, Baylor Univ. Bull., XII,
No. 1, Jan., 1909, pp. 11-15 (reports Eumeces tetragrammus from Paisano, Brewster
Co., Texas; this specimen, now 58337 U.S.N.M., is a specimen of E. s. obtusirostris);
Strecker, Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XXIII, 1910, pp. 118, 119, pi. II, fig. 2 (photo of
two specimens) (Waco, Texas ; detailed descriptions of two specimens) ; Ditmars, The
Reptile Book, 1915, p. 20 ; Stejneger and Barbour, Check List N. Amer. Amph. Rept.,
1923, pp. 76, 77; Ortenburger, Uni. Okla. Bull., Proc. Okla. Acad. Sci., pt. 1, VI, p.
95 (Caddo and Cleveland counties, Okla.); Strecker, Copeia, No. 162, Jan.-Mar., 1927,
p. 9; Stejneger and Barbour, Check List N. Amer. Amph. Rept., 3d Ed., 1933, p. 82.
1887. Eumeces tetragrammus Boulenger (part.). Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, pp. 375,
376.
1917. Plestiodon pachyurus Stejneger and Barbour. Check List N. Amer. Amph. Rept.,
1917, p. 70.
History. This form was first recognized by Bocourt, in 1879,
who published the name Eumeces obtusirostris with key characters
and figures of the same, in livraison 6, Mission Scientifique au
Mexique et Dans l'Amerique Centrale. The complete description,
however, appeared in livraison 7, in 1881. It would appear that
the earlier date of 1879 must be recognized since that is the date of
the first publication, and the name obtusirostris must take prece-
dence over pachyurus of Cope. The description as given in the
key is brief, but the figures are excellent and unmistakable. The type
is a specimen which Bocourt received from Prof. W. Peters; the
type- locality is Texas. The type is presumably in the Natural
History Museum of Paris.
Cope, in 1880 (Bull. U.S.N.M. No. 17), described as new Eumeces
pachyurus. The type locality of his species is near Dallas, Tex., the
type having been collected by Mr. Boll and presented to Cope.
On a comparison of the description it appears indisputable that
406 The University Science Bulletin
they refer to the same species and that the older name must be
retained.
Boulenger, without having carefully examined the description and
figures of the types, has placed Eumeces obtusirostris in the syn-
onymy of Eumeces tetragrammus, and Cope (1900) has followed
Boulenger's disposition of the species.
While I have not examined the type, it is quite obvious from a
study of the description and figures that the form cannot be
tetragrammus. My conclusions are based on the following facts:
1. Two postmental plates; one in tetragrammus usually.
2. A grayish median line; none in tetragrammus.
3. Dorsolateral line bordered above with darker; not true in
tetragrammus.
4. Head with darker dots; not present in tetragrammus.
5. The lateral white line passes above the ear; passes through
the ear in tetragrammus.
6. Head without curving lines; present in tetragrammus.
The descriptions and figures do agree with the type of Cope's
Eumeces pachyurus and the two must be considered synonyms.
Boulenger (1887), in his catalogue, recognizes Cope's pachyurus,
but he had no specimens available. Save for the type no new speci-
mens were known until Strecker (1909) obtained a specimen in
Brewster Co., Texas, which he called Eumeces tetragrammus. This
specimen, now 58337 U.S.N.M., is an obtusirostris, typical save that
the frontonasal is slightly smaller than normal and fails to touch
the first loreal. It is quite certainly not tetragrammus.
Strecker (1910) recognizes specimens collected near Waco, Tex.,
as belonging to Copes' E. pachyurus, and gives descriptions of an
adult and a young specimen. He compares the forms with tetra-
grammus, but he had no specimens of the closely related septentrion-
alis at hand for comparison.
Ortenburger (1926) lists the species from Caddo and Cleveland
counties, Oklahoma.
As has already been pointed out by Cope (1880), the form is
related to septentrionalis. However, the characters used to separate
pachyurus from septentrionalis are not as stable as Cope supposed,
particularly as regards the number of scale rows about the middle
of the body. It appears that the characters of the southern form
are usually more stable than those of the northern form. The
necessity of combining obtusirostris and septentrionalis as subspecies
under a single species becomes obvious when series of these forms
are compared.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 407
In obtusirostris the white lateral lines originate on the posterior
supraocular region; a dim median line is often present; in many
specimens four brown lines are evident on the back. The legs are
usually a little longer in septentrionalis and in consequence their
separation when adpressed is less than in obtusirostris. In this
character there does not appear to be an abrupt change. Unfortu-
nately in Oklahoma, which is the critical region between obtusirostris
and septi ntrionalis, only few specimens have been available. Those
from Cleveland county agree with the characters laid down for
obtusirostris, while in a brood of four from Kay county, Oklahoma,
two show the frontonasal as in septentrionalis and two as in obtu-
sirostris.
Whether the total population shows such intergradation of these
characters may be doubted and larger collections must be obtained
before the distributional limits of the two forms can be determined.
A single southern Kansas specimen shows the typical characters of
obtusirostris, while all others examined, chiefly from the northern
part of the state, are septentrionalis.
Diagnosis. Similar to Eumeces septentrionalis septentrionalis,
but with the frontonasal larger and in contact with the anterior
loreai; limbs averaging somewhat shorter; with a tendency to lose
the dim median lighter stripe and the brown dorsal lines, save those
bordering the dorsolateral light lines.
Description of the species. Since the two subspecies are so closely
related, I shall make the description of obtusirostris chiefly a com-
parison with s. septentrionalis, using Texas specimens from near
Waco and San Antonio, Tex.
The part of the rostral visible above usually smaller and the angle
more obtuse. The supranasals are of the same size or slightly
larger, always in contact, preventing the rostral from touching the
frontonasal (hitter scales frequently in contact in northern speci-
mens of s. septentrionalis). The frontoparietal is always wider than
long, and only in two cases (one, Benton, Atascosa county, and one
from Brewster county) do the frontonasals fail to touch the anterior
loreals. The frontal and associated supraoculars are similar in the
two forms (the frontal touching the frontonasal in about 50 percent
of the specimens [rarely touching in septentrionalis] > ; frontoparie-
tals are larger than the prefrontals (of equal size or smaller usually
in s. septi ntrionalis). One or rarely two pairs of nuchals; the inter-
parietal always in contact with the nuchals; seven labials, the last
largest, their character as in septentrionalis. The first loreai is rarely
408
The University Science Bulletin
transversely segmented (in two specimens a small fragment is
segmented, leaving a tiny postmental on one side) ; the nasal is
apparently not completely divided ; the anterior loreal always higher
than the posterior. The scales in a row from the occiput to above
anus, from 55 to 58, the average being 57 (the usual number in s.
septentrionalis being 60). The scales about the neck average two
less. On the body the number of scale rows is 28; the type of
pachyurus and one other has 26 rows.
The limbs average a little shorter than those of s. septentrionalis
where specimens of equal snout to vent measurement are considered,
and the number of lamellae under the fourth toe averages only one
less.
Color. The color characters are very similar. A dorsolateral
line originates on the last supraocular and follows the middle of
the fourth row of scales to tail. In s. septentrionalis the origin is
the same, but in practically all cases the line follows the outer edge
of the fourth row and the inner edge of the fifth for the greater
part of the body length. The median secondary line is dim even in
young and usually does not reach nuchals; it is bordered by very
dim darker lines (usually very distinct in s. septentrionalis). The
dorsolateral light line is bordered above by a dark line usually
much narrower than in s. septentrionalis; the course of the light
lateral line is the same with relation to the ear in both forms.
Specimens from Waco are olive, showing the same shades of color
Measurement? of Eumeces septentrionalis obtusirostris (Bocourt)
Museum. .
Number. .
Sex
Snout to vent . .
Tail
Snout to eye . . .
Snout to ear. . . .
Snout to foreleg.
Axilla to groin. .
Width of head . .
Length of head
Foreleg
Hind leg
Longest tos. . . .
A.N.S.P.
13545
74
22
9
10.2
14
IS
7.5
K.U.
7801
rf1
66
10S
4
10.3
20.2
36
8
9
12
17.5
5.4
K.U.
13159
63
4.2
11.2
20.3
37
10
10.2
14
18.2
6
K.U.
15562
9
62
4
10.3
18
37
8.5
9.2
13
17
5.7
K.U.
7745
3.5
10
17.5
32.5
7.3
S.l
11
15.7
5 4
K.U.
12744
9
3.2
9.2
17 2
32.5
7.3
8.3
112
15.4
5.5
K.U.
13158
yg-
45
73
3
8.2
15.2
26
7
7.8
11
14
5
K.U.
8892
yg-
32
2.3
6
11.7
15.5
5
6
8
9
3.8
No. 13545, type, Dallas, Texas; 7801, 13159, 13158, Waco, McLennan Co., Texas; 7745,
12744, Atascosa Co., Texas; 15562, Bexar Co., Texas; 8892, central Texas.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 409
as s. septcntrionalis, while those about San Antonio are usually
brownish above. In young specimens the tip of the snout is cream
color. The median line is always more distinct in females than in
males.
Variation. Most of the variable characters have been discussed
in the foregoing description.
R( marks. This species, like its neighbor, Eumeces brevilim atus,
frequents the vicinity of the large masses of Opuntia so common in
southern Texas, and usually takes refuge in the sand about their
bases, from which places they may be captured only with con-
siderable difficulty. Near Waco, Tex., I captured several specimens
from debris about the bases of willow trees in gravel pits. Here
they were feeding in company with Leiolopisma. In this same
locality and association were collected more than one hundred
specimens of the small snake Potamophis striatulus (Linne).
While collecting amphibians at night about a small pond near
Somerset. Tex., two were discovered and captured. They were
first observed on a small stump in the edge of the water, and when
disturbed took to the water to escape, diving below its surface. It
suggests that they may be somewhat nocturnal in habit. To the
west of Waco, along the Brazos river, two specimens were taken
from leaves and other debris at the base of a large tree.
Distribution. The extent of the range of this subspecies cannot
be fixed with certainty. It appears to have an east-west range in
Texas, from Houston to Alpine. The characters on which the two
subspecies are founded seem to intermingle and many of the
Oklahoma records (and one from Kansas) are of specimens more
or less transitional between the two forms. (See Fig. 67 for dis-
tributional map.)
Locality records:
Oklahoma :
Cleveland Co.: (Okla. U. 2).
Tulsa Co.: (Okla. U. 1) (Mich. U. 5).
Kay Co.: (Okla. U. 4).
Okmulgee Co.: (Okla. U. 2).
Garvin Co.: (Okla. U. 5).
Seminole Co.: (Okla. U. 1).
Caddo Co.: Old Fort Cobb (U.S.N.M. 1).
Texas :
Atascosa Co.: Near Somerset (K.U. 2) (E.H.T. 1); near Lytle (Bay-
lor 3).
McLennan Co.: 3 mi. NW Waco in gravel pits (K.U. 8) (Baylor 2);
Waco (Baylor 3) (Field 1) (U.S.N.M. 1) (Strecker, 19L0, 2); 7 mi.
410 The University Science Bulletin
west Waco (Baylor 1); Flood's farm near Waco (Baylor 1); Traver's
Farm (Baylor 1); Tonkaway Creek (Baylor 1).
Palopinto Co.: Near Mineral Wells (K.U. l).
Brewster Co.: Near Paisano (U.S.N.M. 1).
Dallas Co.: Near Dallas (A.N.S.P. 1. type); Dallas (Baylor 2).
Kansas: Kingman Co.: Near Norwich (K.U. 1) ; (this specimen approaches
this subspecies more closely than the typical s. septcntrionalis, and
is associated with this subspecies).
SKILTONIANUS GROUP
In the Skiltonianus group I include several forms occurring in
the western part of North America, characterized by the presence
(at least in the young) of typical dorsolateral and lateral light
lines, the former pair always separated by less than four scale
rows. No median light line present or lines on the head. Postnasal
normally present ; two postmentals. Subcaudals much widened.
Tails in young blue or red; scale bordering postgenial on median
side elongate; upper labials seven or eight; lateral postanal scale
more or less differentiated in males.
The relationship of this group is with the Mexican Brevirostris
group primarily, from which it differs in but few characters. E.
lagunensis appears to be the annectant form. The group next
closely related is probably the Quadrilineatus group in southeastern
Asia.
In examining the western skinks classified in American collections
under the name Eumeces skiltonianus, it becomes apparent that the
extraordinary differences evidenced by the material cannot be ex-
plained by considering them as variants of a single species. Not
only are there marked differences in the evolution of color patterns
in certain populations, but there are also different growth patterns,
as well as marked differences in maximum size. Unfortunately
these color and growth differences are not accompanied by any
striking or constant scale differences, and all the specimens exam-
ined seem to fit into a single form when the usual key characters
alone (Cope's, 1900) are considered.
In the genus Eumeces one cannot always depend on the usual key
character of head scales to distinguish species; and often two wholly
unrelated species may bear a striking resemblance if scales alone
are considered. In such cases characters other than the presence
or absence of postnasals, a single or divided postmental, the number
of labials, supraoculars and superciliaries must be considered; the
color markings and growth characters must also be given definite
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 411
consideration. Often the variation of the usual key characters
within a species is such as to permit it to tit the characters of more
than one form. Hence the great unreliability of most keys in de-
termining the identity and validity of a species. Often, too, the
descriptions published are so meager as to prevent a species from
being recognized.
I am fully convinced that the evolutionary factors that make
for the permanent changes in a color pattern, and that permanently
change rate and amount of growth, are quite as significant as one
that unites two scales such as a nasal and postnasal; that divides a
postmental into two scales; or allows an intercalated axillary scale
row to extend farther on the sides of the body, thus increasing the
number of scale rows about the body. Often forms designated as
color varieties may be far more worthy of the name species than
presumed species founded on a scale variant which may be anoma-
lous.
That more than a single specific entity is involved in the skil-
tonianus complex has been recognized by various authors, and names
have been proposed for most of the recognizable forms.
History of the described forms. The first notice I have seen of
any member of this group in scientific literature appears in a paper
by Avery J. Skilton in the American Journal of Sciences and Arts
iSilliman's Journal), vol. VII, May, 1849, where the author men-
tions: "Also several skinks resembling S. quinquelineatus were
caught by the Indians for the missionaries, with hair snares. They
dreaded them, declaring they were poisonous." These specimens
were sent by Rev. George Gary, superintendent of the Methodist
Missions, to Skilton, who in turn forwarded them to the National
Museum, where Spencer Baird and Charles Girard as coauthors
described them under the name Plestiodon skiltonianum in two pub-
lications which appeared practically at the same time.
There is some question as to which description of skiltonianus ,
that of Baird and Girard in Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.. VI, 1852-
1853, p. 69 (April, 1852, proceedings), or that of Baird and Girard
in Exploration and Survey of the Valley of the Great Salt Lake of
Utah by Howard Stansbury, 1852, Philadelphia, should be regarded
as the type description. Tt is obvious that the former description
was prepared to precede the latter, since the statement in the paper
t'p. 68) states: "Full description- and figures of these species will
shortly appear in Captain Stansbury's Report to Congress on the
Great Salt Lake (Utah)." I have not been able to ascertain the
412 The University Science Bulletin
exact date of publication of either of these publications. In the
Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., VI, 1852-1853, p. 124, appears a com-
munication, dated August 3, in which Prof. S. F. Baird claims
priority for a species published in Stansbury's report — "as this re-
port was published early in June [1852] and earlier than the Pro-
ceedings (for May and June)." Vol. VI, No. 1, Proc. Acad. Nat.
Sci. Phila., was received in the Smithsonian Institution, Washington,
before April 14, 1852 (see same publication, p. 71).* Vol. VI, No.
2, was received by the American Philosophical Society before June
21, 1852. The May and June number (No. 3?) was published be-
fore August 3.
Thus it will be seen that certainty as to which of the two publica-
tions was first published apparently cannot be accurately ascer-
tained unless more accurate data is unearthed than is here produced.
At any rate, not more than a very few days can have intervened,
and it is quite likely that the April "Proceedings" actually antedated
the Stansbury report. Since no question of authorship is involved,
the question is academic.
There are two cotypes now in the National Museum, both still in
fair condition, save that in the larger of the two the scales have
slipped in several places. I designate the smaller specimen as the
lectotype of the species.
In 1854 Edward Hallowell described a specimen under the name of
Eumeces sp. This specimen came from southern California, "Near
Mojave river, and in San Bernardino valley." Later, Hallowell
(1859) describes this same specimen as Eumeces quadrilineatus,
and figures the form. This type is present in the National Museum,
but is in such a poor state that absolute identification is impossible.
However, the description is such as to make practically certain that
it is a typical skiltonianus.
Later collections have extended the range throughout California,
Oregon and Washington. Boulenger (1887) reported the species
from Vancouver Island; Van Denburgh (1905) reported the species
on the Coronados Islands, which are situated on the coast of Baja
California; Ruthven and Gaige (1915), from northeastern Nevada;
Van Denburgh (1915), from Utah; and Van Denburgh and Slevin
(1921), from Idaho.
In 1879 Bocourt described as new a species, Eumeces hallowelli,
characterized by a single postmental and 24 rows of scales about
the body. The type is a young specimen from California and ap-
* Mr. L. M. Klauber in letter states: "Volume 6, No. 2, of the Proceedings of the
Philadelphia Academy was acknowledged by the Smithsonian Institution on June 9, 1852."
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 41 3
pears, from the careful description, to be an anomalous specimen of
skiltonianus. Specimens having 24 scale rows occur occasionally
throughout its range. The undivided postmental is, however, of
rare occurrence. Unfortunately, no definite type locality is known.
Wan Denburgh, in 1895, described a species, Eumeces lagunensis,
from Baja California from two specimens collected in the Sierra de
La Laguna in The southern part of the peninsula. This description,
while brief, is accompanied by a carefully drawn figure, showing
well the differential characters of the species. The types were after-
wards destroyed in the fire of 1906. In 1896 Van Denburgh de-
scribed another species from the Yosemite in the Sierra Nevada of
California. This was named Eumeces gilberti, having been collected
by Dr. Charles H. Gilbert and James M. Hyde the same year. The
description is discrete and a series of measurements is given of the
paratypes. The type and paratypes of this species are still in exist-
ence in Sanford University. I have not seen the type but I have
examined several paratypes collected at the same locality by the
same collectors.
Cope (1900) described two varieties of skiltonianus. One was
based upon a specimen from Fort Humboldt, which was given the
name amblygr animus. The character used to separate the form
from the typical skiltonianus was the fact that the body was deep
black and the dorsolateral stripes were much wider — "occupies the
adjacent two-thirds of the second and third rows of scales from
middle of back and is half as wide as the black dorsal interspace."
The type of this form could not be found in the collection of the
U. S. National Museum in 1933.
The second form mentioned by Cope is var. brevipes, based on a
large female specimen, the body greatly distended with eggs. The
limbs are proportionally shorter than in typical skiltonianus, and
there is but a single postmental. I have been able to examine the
type of this form, and regard it as belonging to a subspecies differ-
ing from skiltonianus.
The subsequent fate of these various species names concerns us.
Baird (1859) makes quadrilineatus a synonym of skiltonianus and
it has been so accepted by subsequent writers save Hallowell, who
in 1859 or '60 reported the species from Astoria, Columbia river.
Eumeces hallcnuelli Bocourt was placed in the synonymy of E.
skiltonianus by Stejnegcr (1893) and has so been regarded by
writers since that time.
Eumeces lagunensis was first questioned by R. B. McLain (1899),
414 The University Science Bulletin
who states: "It is not improbable that Mr. Van Denburgh's species
has abnormal head shields, and is simply a synonym of E. skil-
tonianus." Eumeces gilberti Van Denburgh was recognized at first
by Grinnell and certain other authors. However, Camp (1916)
concludes that there is only a single species in California and con-
siders gilberti a synonym of skiltonianus. He has been followed
in this opinion by most subsequent writers on this form.
Grinnell and Camp (1917) formally place the above forms, to-
gether with Cope's brevipes and amblygrammus, in the synonymy of
skiltonianus. Nelson (1921) recognized lagunensis as a subspecies
of E. skiltonianus. Stejneger and Barbour (1923) recognized E.
lagunensis as a full species. Loveridge (1930) again places the
species back in the synonymy, only to be resurrected by Linsdale
(1932) as a subspecies of skiltonianus. The fact that such variable
and changeable opinion has obtained regarding the western skinks
is proof that the problem of their identity is not simple by any
means.
I have examined most of the preserved specimens of these western
forms in the museums of the United States. My conclusions which
are here expressed are tentative. They represent my solution of
certain of the problems; but due to lack of material, I leave certain
problems unsolved to my own satisfaction. These, it seems, must
await the accumulation of more material from critical territory, and
a study of the vertical distribution of the various forms.
Thus, I have associated with Eumeces skiltonianus, as a sub-
species, a group of specimens from Eldorado county which differ
from the typical and which agree with Cope's skiltonianus brevipes;
with gilberti, two forms which, save for lack of adequate material
and the possibility of their being aberrant specimens, would be
regarded as distinct forms.
The nominal species amblygrammus, owing to the fact that the
type appears to be lost and that no material is available which I
can unhesitatingly associate under this name, is placed in the
synonymy of skiltonianus.
I wish to express my heartiest thanks to Dr. Joseph Grinnell,
who has made available the large Eumeces collection of the Mu-
seum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, and has read
this part of the manuscript and offered numerous and valuable sug-
gestions; to Dr. Jean Linsdale and Mr. Fitch of this institution,
who have likewise read this section, offered many helpful sug-
gestions and checked spelling of geographical names; to Mr. L. M.
Taylor: The Genus Ei meces 415
Klauber and Mr. Joseph Slevin, who have made available large
collections, either privately owned or under their charge. They
likewise have read the manuscript on the Skiltonianus group and
have offered suggestion-.
Key to the Species of the Skiltonianus Group
PAGE
A. 'rin' seventh labial broadly in contact with the upper secondary temporal; parietals
enclose interparietal; tail uniform red or salmon colored in young; primary temporal
small; seven upper labials; limbs, adpressed, fail to touch by a short distance; juvenile
markings (except those of tail) retained in adtdts. Scale rows usually 24; 60 mm. max.
size. (Baja California) Eumeces lagunensis Van I >enburgh, 431
AA. The seventh labial not in contact with the upper secondary temporal; interparietal
enclosed or not; tail red or blue in young. Primary temporal large; limbs variable.
B. Young with red tails and four light lines. Adults uniform olive; size large —
101 mm. max.: 24-2t> scale rows, usually 24. (Lower central half of California
and upper Baja California) Eumeces gilbert lotus subsp. now. 1 16
BB. Young with blue tails and four light lines.
C. Smaller, max. size about 7"> mm.
D. General character of the markings of young retained in adult male
and female save the blue of tail is lost. Scale rows 24-28, usually 26
Parietals enclose parietal only in southern part of California — not in
other part of range. Two pairs of nuchals; 7 or 8 upper labials. 59
scales snout to above anus. The dorsolateral line usually occupies
only about one half or less of the second scale row, leaving light dorso-
lateral lines separated usually by two whole and two one-half scale
rows. (West of Rocky Mts.i
Eumeces skiltonianus skiltonianus (Baird and Girard), 415
DD. Larger, maximum size 8.5-90 mm. Similar to the above subspecies
but head longer, axilla to groin distance longer and the limbs propor-
tionally shorter. Scales more glazed in appearance. Tail lavender.
Eldorado Co.,Cal.,and north along the Sierra, and south to (?) Fresno
Co Eumeces skiltonianus brevipes Cope, 428
CC. Larger, maximum size above 113 mm.; the juvenile coloration lost about
third or fourth year by both males and females. The dorsolateral light line
usually occupying more than half of second scale row. Usually eight upper
labials. (California east of the San Joaquin Valley.)
Eumeces gilberti gilberti Van Denburgh, 438
Eumeces skiltonianus skiltonianus (Baird and Girard)
(Plates 35 and 36, Figs. 2. ;;. 4; Fig. 68)
SYNONYMY
1849. [ •] Skilton. Amor. Jour. Sci. An- (Silliman's Journal), VII, May, 1849 (men-
tions several skinks resembling S. quinquelineatus [types]).
1852. Plestiodon skiltonianum Baird and Girard. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1852, p. 69
(type description ; type locality, Oregon; collected by Rev. George Geary [or Gary]);
Baird and Girard, in Stansbury's Expl. Surv. Val. (in at Salt Lake, Inc. Recon. Route
Rocky Mts., 1853, Rept., App. C, pp. 349-354, pi. IV. figs. 4. 5, r, (redescription) ;
Baird, Expl. Surv. R. R. Route Pac, Zool., Rept., X. No. 3, 1 -:,T, p. 18 (Fort
Humboldt); Baird. Expl. Surv. R. R. Route Pac., Zool., Rept. (Williamson and
Abbot), X, pt. 4, 1859, p. 9, pi. IX, fig. 3; Carman. Bull. Essex Inst., XVI, Jan. 9,
1884, p. 15 (Eumeces) ; Grinnell and Camp, Univ. Cal. Publ. Zool., XVII, No. 10,
1917, pp. 175, 176; Stejneger and Barbour, Check List X. Amer. Amph. Rept., 1917,
p. 71; Cowles, Journ. Ent. and Zool., XII, Xo. 3, 1920, p. 66; Stephens. Trans. San
Diego Soc. Nat. Hist.. Ill, No. 4, 1921, p. 63 (San Diego Co., Calif.); Van Denburgh
and Slevin, Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., (4), XI, No. 3, July 8, 1921, pp. 40, 44, 52
(Idaho); idem, No. 3, 1921, p. 28 (Nevada); Van Denburgh, Occas. Papers Calif.
416 The University Science Bulletin
Acad. Sci., X, Vol. 1, Nov. 23, 1922, pp. 578-587 (part.); Schmidt, Bull. Amer. Mus.
Nat. Hist., XLVT, Art. 11, p. 682 (also mentioned pp. 612, 613, 617, 620, 621, 622,
628, 630) (part.); Pratt, Vert. Anim. U. S., 1923, p. 207; Erwin, Eleventh Bien.
Kept. Board Trustees State Hist. Soc. Idaho, 1927-1928 (1928), p. 32 (Idaho);
Woodbury, Copeia, No. 166, Mar. 23, 1928, p. 19.
1854. Eumeces sp. Hallowell. Proc. Acad. Nat, Sci. Phila., 1854, p. 95 (near Mojave River
and in San Bernardino Valley, southern California "Lower California").
1859. Eumeces quadrilineatus Hallowell, Expl. Surv. R. R. Route to Pac, 1853, pt. IV,
Zool. Rept., 1859 (Williamson), p. 10, pi. IX, figs. 3a, b, c, d (type description; type
locality near "Mojave River, and in San Bernardino Valley, southern part of upper
California"); Heerman, Expl. Surv. R, R. Pac, 1853, pt. IV, Zool. Rept., 1859, p. 24;
Hallowell, Trans. Amer. Phil. Soc, XI, pp. 73, 74.
1875. Eumeces skiltonianus Cope. Bull. U. S. Nat, Mus., No. 1, 1875, p. 45; Yarrow and
Henshaw, in Wheeler's Ann. Rept. Chief Eng. Geog. Surv. Terr. U. S. west 100th
Mer. etc, Appendix NN, 1878, p. 218; Bocourt, Miss. Sci. Mex., Rept., 6th Livr.,
1879, p. 433, pis. XXIIA, fig. 3, and XXIIIA, fig. 3: Yarrow, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus.,
No. 24, 1883, p. 41; Cope, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1883, p. 32; Boulenger, Cat.
Liz. Brit, Mus.. Ill, 1887, p. 373; Townsend, Proc. U. S. Nat, Mus., X, 1887, p. 238;
Stejneger, N. Amer. Fauna, No. 7, 1893, p. 201 (part,); Van Denburgh, Occas. Papers
Calif. Acad. Sci., V, 1897, p. 144, fig.; McLain, Contr. N. Amer. Herp., 1899, p. 10
(regards E. lagunensis a synonym of this species) ; Cope, Ann. Rept. U. S. Nat, Mus.,
1898 (1900), pp. 460-464, fig. 126 (part.) (good discussion, detailed description); Van
Denburgh, Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., (3), IV, No. 1, p. 18 (N. Coronados I, Mex.);
Ditmars, Rept, Book, 1907, p. 198, pi. LVII, fig. (part.); Grinnell and Grinnell,
Throop Inst, Bull., No. XXXV, Mar., 1907, pp. 35-37 (Los Angeles Co.); Van Den-
burgh, Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., (4), III, Jan. 17, 1912, pp. 147, 149, 151; Hurter,
First Ann. Rept. Laguna Marine Lab., 1912, p. 67; Atsatt, Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool.,
XII, No. 3, Nov. 20, 1913, pp. 40, 41, 46, 48 (part.); Van Denburgh and Slevin,
Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., (4), IV, Dec. 30, 1914, pp. 133, 138, 140, 141 (Catalina
Island, North and East Coronados Islands); Ditmars, Rept. Book, 1915, p. 198;
Ruthven and Gaige, Occas. Papers Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich., No. 8, Apr. 25, 1915,
pp. 26-28; Van Denburgh and Slevin, Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., (4), V, No. 4, 1915,
pp. 105-106 (Utah); Camp, Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., XVII, No. 7, 1916, pp. 72, 86
(note on color); Grinnell and Camp, Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., XVII, No. 10, July 11,
1917, pp. 175, 176 (locality records); Stejneger and Barbour, Check List N. Amer.
Amph. Rept., 2d Ed., 1923, p. 77; Tanner, Copeia. No. 163, Apr.-June, 1927, p. 56
(Utah); Bogert, Bull. South. Calif. Acad. Sci., XXIX, Jan. -Apr., 1930, pt. 1, pp.
3-14; Klauber, Bull. 5, Zool. Soc. San Diego, Mar. 12, 1930, p. 4; Woodbury, Bull.
Univ. Utah, XXI. Feb., 1931, fig. 20 (Biol. Surv., Vol. 1. No. 4) (Utah) (part.);
Stejneger and Barbour. Check List N. Amer. Amph. Rept,, 3d Ed., 1933, p. 83;
Svihla and Svihla. Copeia, No. 3. Oct, 15, 1933, pp. 125-127 (Washington).
1879 Eumeces hallowelli Bocourt. Miss. Sci. Mex.. Rept,, 6th Livr., 1879, p. 435, pi.
XXIIE, fig. 7 (type description; type locality, California); Boulenger, Cat. Liz. Brit.
Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 373.
71898. Eumeces skiltonianus var. amblygrammus Cope. Ann. Rept. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1898
(1900), p. 643 (type locality, Fort Humboldt).
Diagnosis. Characterized by four longitudinal white lines, the
dorsolateral originating on the first superciliary and continuing
back on the tail for some distance, following the second and third
scale rows, not or rarely occupying more than one half of the
second row; lateral line beginning on the anterior labials, usually
the third or fourth, passing back toward upper half of ear, not
involving upper edge, then continuing along the sides to the tail;
tail in young blue, in adults, colored like body; the dorsolateral
and lateral stripes not obliterated in old specimens; scale rows nor-
mallv 26, 24 occurring more or less frequently, while 28 occurs
Taylor: The Gi nus Ei mi.ces 417
rarely; seven or eight upper labials; two postmentals ; one1 post-
nasal; parietals separated or in contact; normally two pairs of
nuchals; maximum size not exceeding 90 millimeters; upper second-
ary temporal normally separated from the seventh or eighth labials;
prefrontals either separated or forming a median suture; tail in
cross section usually somewhat subquadrangular; adpressed limbs
usually overlap in males and fail to overlap in females 1 rarely in
old males); adult males lacking a distinctive red head, but oc-
casionally showing some reddish during breeding seasons.
I)( scription of the species. Portion of the rostral appearing
above distinctly less than a half the size of the frontonasal;
supranasals large, their length not quite one and one half times
their depth, in contact medially; frontonasal large, much broader
than long, in contact laterally with the anterior loreals, in contact
(or not) with the frontal; prefrontals moderate, in contact or not
medially, the suture with frontonasal and frontal about equal;
frontal typical, its length about a fourth greater than its distance
from the tip of the snout, touching three supraoculars; fronto-
parietals subrectangular in shape, forming a median suture less
than half their length; interparietal relatively narrow, elongate,
not enclosed by the parietals (often enclosed); parietals large, fol-
lowed by two pairs of nuchals, the anterior much the larger; nasal
small, not wholly divided by a suture, the part anterior to the
nostril much larger than the part posterior; a single postnasal;
anterior loreal much higher than wide, higher than the posterior;
latter short, often as high as long, but normally a little longer than
high; four supraoculars, the anterior forming a broad suture with
the prefrontal, occasionally excluding the first superciliary from
contact with this scale; seven superciliaries, usually the last much
-mailer than the first; two presuboculars, three or four postsub-
oculars; the median upper palpebral scales in contact with the
superciliaries; a small preocular, followed by two or three granular
scales; two small postoculars, the lower the larger; primary tempo-
ral moderately small, quadrangular; upper secondary large, slightly
widened posteriorly; lower secondary generally triangular, often
somewhat emarginate, often extending farther back than the seventh
labial, in contact in front with the primary; tertiary temporal not
much enlarged, bordering the upper secondary, separated from the
ear by one or two scales; labials seven or eight, four or five preced-
ing the subocular, the first usually no larger than succeeding scale-;
subocular nearly as high as its labial border; last labial largest
27—1123
418 The University Science Bulletin
(seventh or eighth), separated from the ear by a pair of post-
labials or by a large postlabial followed by a pair of scales
(rarely two pairs of postlabials).
Normally six lower labials; mental with a labial border much
longer than that of rostral; postmental divided (very rarely not) ;
three typical chinshields; a large postgenial, bordered usually by
a scale longer than wide (occasionally this scale fused with the
postgenial, the scale then bordering the latter usually wider than
long ) .
Scales on the lower eyelid enlarged, separated from the subocular
by about two rows of granular scales; ear opening moderate, with
two or three lobules of unequal size. Body scales in parallel rows
on the sides; median dorsal rows usually distinctly wider than the
adjacent rows and likewise larger than the lateral or ventral scales;
scale rows around neck immediately behind ear, 33; about con-
stricted portion of neck, 27; in axillary region, 31; about middle of
body, 26; about base of tail, 17; scales under tail much widened,
about 104 scales in the series; six preanal scales, the median much
enlarged, the outer scales overlapping the inner; a distinctly en-
larged postanal scute in males, frequently forming a slight mound-
like projection; females with a more or less definite constriction
at the base of the tail; latter subquadrangular in cross section, at
least through the proximal half, better defined in some specimens
than in others.
About 14 scales around the insertion of arm; outer wrist tubercle
well defined; palm with several scattered larger tubercles; lamellar
formula for fingers: 5; 9; 11; 11; 8. About 19 scales around the
insertion of the leg; usually four enlarged heel pads, the two median
usually not in contact; a few larger pads on the sole, usually form-
ing a diagonal line from the base of the first digit across to the
base of the fourth; lamellar formula for toes: 6; 9; 12, 14; 9.
Terminal lamellae not tightly bound about claws; a small area of
granular scales in axilla, none behind insertion of hind leg.
The pits on the scales of the side of neck and body are distinct
in young, dim or obsolete in old specimens. The usual number is
two, usually placed close together, or somewhat wider apart on the
larger, more-dorsal rows. There may be three or four pits on scales
behind ear and in the posthumeral, postfemoral and axillary regions.
( oloration of young. Above blackish, with a bluish or bluish-
white dorsolateral line on or near the rostral, passing along the
edges of the head and body on the outer half of the second scale
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 419
row and the inner half or third of the third scale row, to a shorl
distance on the tail, where it becomes lost. The lateral light line
begins en the labials (varying from the second to the subocular
labial), passes to ear and borders the anterior side; on the posterior
edge of the ear only the lower half is bordered. Thence it passes
back along the side of the body, usually on the sixth or sixth and
seventh scale rows, to a distance on the tail usually a little greater
than the dorsolateral line. The color between the two light lines
is more intense than on the back. There is a narrow dark line
below the lateral light line. The tail varies from ultramarine to
cobalt blue above and on the sides. The chin and throat are usually
flesh or cream, the abdomen bluish-gray to gray, and the underside
of the tail frequently lavender with a median light line indicated.
The under sides of the limbs and the anal region are cream.
Adult coloration. The juvenile coloration tends to become lighter,
the dorsal ground color becoming lighter, usually gray-olive or
brown-olive, leaving a black or deep brown line bordering the dorso-
lateral line above. The dorsal scales may show some dark edges or
flecks. The lateral stripe between the two light lines becomes deep
brown, either uniform or, in southern forms, with gray flecks or a
threadlike line of flecks. The tail now is greenish-gray and later
becomes the same shade as the dorsal surface. The dorsolateral
lines remain distinct, often, however, having only a slightly lighter
shade of olive or brown than the ground color; the lateral line is
usually lighter, often remaining more or less cream color. The head
in older specimens becomes brownish and at the breeding season
shows a reddish tinge on the sides of the head. The head never
lose- the darker pigment nor becomes a uniform reddish as in
gilberti. The dark line bordering the dorsolateral line above be-
come- frequently broken into a series of dots. The light line below
the tail is retained and is usually fairly well defined.
Variation. Eumeces skiltonianus in various parts of its range ex-
hibits numerous variations from the typical, some of which might
warrant recognition of subspecies were they constant. In certain
cases it would appear that these may have been brought about by
isolation, but since tin- isolation no longer exists, the populations
have been allowed to mingle, and the characters which had become
fixed are being broken down. This i- suggested in the case of speci-
mens with a reduction of the interparietal and its consequent sepa-
ration from the nuchals by the junction of the parietals, and those
with the interparietal in contact with the nuchals.
420
The University Science Bulletin
u
o
XI
a
-
-
CQ
• 5^
e
o
4c
60
CC
o
CJ}
«5
— ~i a
-■m .
con.
at;
03 ^
H^CC^
03^
03 eo
_-co
03ci
Pooo
03
DDJJ
03
at
a> a
3 5 X
sis
to m oo n
~i -i m m to co os ^j
m M MM cm.
-Ht^tO00OCOM05t>
,H CM i"" •"' ^
-^ocooooo-for^
i-l M "-' — . ^H
X) co "d< O ffl
1.0 O i-l CM
,-1 to CO M 00
H i-l CM
n m « ° °
mo i-i m -i
o
to
M
CO
m
to
O f oo
CM M
t- m -i oo
-H CM
■* O CM O -1 t- **
IM M --1 -1 -i
^MOiMoom-io
m ci m
CM M
cm oo t- -^ cc
rt h CN
oo <n m -i © o -h o t- ^ ©
to M CM M i-l i-l cn
CNNOcMcNOcNClt-JgCS
jf-i CN CM T -i -i i-l CN
CM
t-< o cm OS t- m o
o
c
03
=1
o
a
33
S
B
tft
O
o
w
M
a
o
Hi
03
J3
c
p
o
>>
'5
'? 6
•5 *
- _3
go
CD C
b el
03 03
n" S
£ *
i-O
0)
U)
—
-r
CO
-
K
f-i
r-
<D
rH
a
f/>
pi
— ?
to
CO
c
»5
to ^.
• i — I Q)
-O -* Cy
t- 0; _
M 3 B
-
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 421
A very limited number of specimens has been examined from the
northern parr of the range in British Columbia, Washington and
Oregon. From no locality of this region have I had more than two
or three specimens. Those that were available displayed much
variation among themselves. Most of the northern specimens seem
to -how more of a light area on the snout where the dorsolaterals
join. Some of the individual peculiarities observed are as follows:
A.M.N .11. No. 28654, West Branch Kootenay river, is young,
measuring 26 mm. snout to vent. The body is brownish and white,
the tail faintly blue. The colors appear to have faded. A small
scale on each side of the frontonasal separates the latter from the
anterior loreal. The temporals are typical. A second >pecimen,
U.S.N.M. No. 6282, Washington Fork, Lower Kootenay river, has
no characters to distinguish it from typical specimens in California.
Both have the labials 7-7.
Two "Washington specimens are peculiar in having the primary
temporal fused with the upper secondary temporal, leaving the
seventh labial broadly in contact with the upper temporal. A speci-
men from "Fort Klamath. Des Chutes river," Oregon, has the
seventh labial forming a suture with the upper secondary temporal,
while the primary temporal is present, but small. I am doubtful
that this character is as common in the northern specimens as the
small -cries I have seen might indicate. This relation of the seventh
labial to the upper secondary temporal is extremely rare in Cali-
fornia specimens; two such were observed in some three hundred
specimens. Nevertheless tin- is the normal condition which obtains
in K. laguru nsis, as well as in certain other species related to skil-
tonianus occurring in Mexico.
The northern forms have 24 or 26 scale rows, the latter occurring
only rarely; the upper labials are 7-7. The largest specimen is
si mm. and is regarded as one of the types. Moreover, it is larger
than any typical specimen seen. In the northern part of California
(including Siskyou and Tehama counties) a series of 22 specimens
were examined. These do not differ greatly in color from more
northern specimens. The males and females differ in the length of
limbs, the females having a greater axilla to groin length and slightly
shorter limbs, which in adult specimens fail to overlap, when ad-
pressed, by two to four millimeter-. In males of the same snout to
vent measurement, the adpressed limbs overlap two to four milli-
meters. The maximum size observed in the 22 specimens is (ill mm.
The scales in a row from the parietals to a point above the vent
422 The University Science Bulletin
average about 59. The upper labials are usually eight, 13 having
eight upper labials, five having that number on one side and seven
on the other, while four have seven on each side (eight occurring in
about 70 percent of the cases). In 12 the prefrontals are in contact,
in 10 they are separated. The temporals show no peculiarities. In
none is the interparietal enclosed. Twenty-six scale rows about
the body is the typical number. The heads of males are not partic-
ularly widened and there are no peculiarities of markings that
would identify their locality.
From the group of counties to the south of the above-mentioned,
including Mendocino, Lake, Sonoma, Napa, Solano and Marin, I
have examined in detail some 40 specimens. These are quite like
those from the northern counties save for proportions, or variations
in certain scale characters. Thus, the number of specimens having
the eight labials is reduced to about 30 percent of the cases. The
relative length of limbs in proportion to the axilla to groin length
is the same as in the counties to the north. The scale rows about the
middle of the body is 26 in about 96 percent of the cases. In no
specimens are the parietals in contact, inclosing the interparietal.
The maximum size is 72 millimeters.
In the group of counties west of the San Joaquin valley to the
south of San Francisco Bay, extending south to Los Angeles county,
more than a hundred specimens were examined. In this region the
presence of eight upper labials is very rare, occurring in only about
4 percent of the specimens and these from the extreme northern
part of the region under consideration. The interparietal is enclosed
by the parietals in about 10 percent of the cases, the condition being
encountered most frequently in specimens in the southern part of the
range. The number of scale rows is normally 26, although 24 occurs
in a small percent of the specimens and an occasional one shows 27
or 28. In some localities practically all have the prefrontals sepa-
rated, while in others most of the specimens have theirs forming a
median suture, the average being about 50 percent each way. The
maximum size of specimens in this region is 72 millimeters.
In the region about Carmel, in Monterey county, as well as farther
south, a few specimens were noted having shorter, broader heads
than typical (note illustration). Some of these are much browner
in color than is typical (PI. 36, fig. 3).
South of the San Bernardino mountains the species appears to be
of somewhat smaller maximum size. The largest specimens are
about 67 millimeters in length (snout to vent) and in the southern
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces \-.\
part of San Diego county and the northern part of Baja California
most specimens have the median scale rows no wider than the ad-
joining rows. From north to south there is a continual increase
in the proportion of specimens having the parietals enclosing the
interparietal. The percentage in San Diego Co. readies as high as 70
percent, while in northern Baja California the average is 80 per-
cent. On Todd- Santos the average is 100 percent. In this region
the number of scale rows is lower, 24 occurring about as frequently
as 26. There is less difference in the proportional length of the
legs in males and females. The coloration is typical; the tails in
the young are blue.
An excellent series of specimens from the Coronados Island group
is present in the California Academy of Sciences. These are quite
similar in detail to those occurring along the coast about Los
Angeles, the maximum size reaching 72 mm. Here, in 11 specimens
out of 35, eight labials are present on one or both sides, the actual
percentage (counting both sides) being 24 percent. There are only
seven specimens which do not have the parietals enclosing the in-
terparietal. The nuchals are more frequently 2-2. In many north-
ern specimens the formula might be 2-1 or 1-1, although 2-2 is
common. In 15 percent of the specimens the nuchals are 3-3. The
prefrontals are in contact in all but 9 specimens, and where sepa-
rated the separation is very minute. In coloration there is but little
difference between these and typical mainland specimens. It is
noticeable that there is a line of small lighter flecks in the upper
edge of the brown lateral stripe, a character evident in some speci-
mens on the mainland. The larger number of specimens have 26
scale rows, the others 24 rows.
The specimens from Todos Santos Island differ more from the
mainland forms than those of the Coronados Islands (see PI. 36,
fig. 2 l. In general the scale characters are the same save that there
i- a separation of the first superciliary from the prefrontal in about
half of the specimens. These specimens are less olive and more
brown in color than is typical.
In many of the southern specimens, on islands as well as on the
mainland, there i< a tendency for the seventh labial (last I to be
somewhat smaller, while the lower secondary temporal extends
farther back: that i-. beyond a vertical line drawn from the back
edge of the last labial.
Specimens from Idaho, Utah and eastern Nevada differ in no
striking characteristics from central California specimen-. The
424 The University Science Bulletin
limbs appear to be slightly longer in these females than in those
from California, since in practically all specimens (two exceptions)
examined the adpressed limbs touch or overlap. The labials are
usually 8-8 or 8-7 ; only three out of seventeen have the number 7-7.
The oldest and largest specimens examined showed the dorsolateral
and lateral lines clearly defined. The dorsal ground color is olive-
gray or olive-brown with a trace of a dark line bounding the dorso-
lateral light line. There may be a row of darker flecks near the
middle of the median scale rows. The median scale rows are
widened normally. These specimens have the dorsal scales very
slightly rugose. I have not noticed this in California specimens.
The brown lateral stripe is very distinct in the oldest specimens, and
the light line under the tail is evident in all. Scale rows are 24 or
26, the numbers occurring about equally. Dorsal scales in a row
from parietals to above vent average about 60. In the young
specimens the tails are blue and the dorsolateral and lateral lines
are almost of the same shade of blue as the tail. This is likewise
true of certain California specimens. Nuchals are 2-2 usually,
the prefrontals usually touch, and the parietal is never enclosed.
In the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard is a specimen
(No. 4727) which purports to have been collected in Colorado. I
feel that this locality should be questioned. The specimen appar-
ently was killed by being run over by an auto, and apparently was
dried when found. There is no assurance that the specimen origi-
nated in Colorado even though it was collected there. In all char-
acters it agrees with the normal Utah specimens. It is, of course,
not improbable that the species extends into Colorado.
Remarks. The supposed types of Eumeces skiltonianus, now in
the United States National Museum, are in good condition (1933),
but in the larger of the two the scales are missing in many places.
The larger specimen has a snout to vent measurement of 83 mm.,
which is larger than the typical specimens from California, in fact
larger than any other specimen seen of typical skiltonianus. It
raises a question as to whether this is actually one of the types,
and if so, whether it really originated in Oregon. The catalogue
card suggests California as its locality. I therefore propose to
designate the smaller of the presumed two types as the lectotype,
since there is an element of doubt that the larger specimen originated
in Oregon and that it was one of the original types.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
425
Fig. 68. Distribution of Eumeces skiitonianus skiltonianus (Baird and
Girard), and Eumeces skiltonh \ pes (Cope), in Western United
Stat< -
426 The University Science Bulletin
Locality records:
British Columbia:
West Branch Kootenay river (A.M.N.H. 1) ; Vaseux Lake south of
Penticton (Patch, 1934, 1); Vancouver I. (Brit. Mus. 2).
Nevada :
Elko Co.: Carlin Cortez Range (Mich. U. 4) (M.C.Z. 2).
Clark Co.: Charleston Park (S.D.S.N.H. 2).
Colorado: (M.C.Z. 1). (I regard this as very doubtful. See note elsewhere.)
Idaho :
Ada Co.: Boise (C.A.S. 1).
Bannock Co.: Pocatello (K.U. 1).
Bingham Co.: Fort Hall (C.A.S. 1).
Nez Perce Co.: Lewiston (C.A.S. 1).
Tooele Co.: Foothills east of Fischer's Pass, V-/i miles west of Clover
(Knowlton and Janes, 1934, 1).
Utah :
Beaver Co.: (U.S.N.M. 2) ; Beaver (C.A.S. 4) ; Wild Cat Canon
(C.A.S. 1).
Juab Co.: Levan (C.A.S. 1).
Millard Co.: Fillmore (Mich. U. 1).
Washington Co.: (A.M.N.H. 3) (M.C.Z. 1).
Oregon :
Harvey Co.: Diamond (U.S.N.M. 1).
Klamath Co.: Deschutes river (U.S.N.M. 1); ? between Ashland and
Klamath Falls (U.S.N.M. 1).
Marion Co.: Salem (U.S.N.M. 2).
Multnomah Co.: Ardenwald near Sellwood (L.M.K. 1).
Localities not allocated to counties: Willamette Valley (A.N.S.P. 2) ;
Columbia river (A.N.S.P. 3).
Washington :
Adams Co.: Swamphake (Cornell 2).
Spokane Co.: Cheney (Cal. U. 3) ; Spokane (Cal. U. 1).
Whitman Co.: Pullman (A.M.N.H. 1) (Cornell 1); Wawawei (A.M.N.H.
1) (M.C.Z. 1).
Unidentified: Clark's Ford, Lower Kootenay River (A.M.N.H. 1).
California:
Siskiyou Co.: Fort Jones (Stanford U. 1).
Modoc Co.: Fort Bidwell (U.S.N.M. 1).
Humboldt Co.: Near Harris (Cornell 1); Fortuna (M.C.Z. 1).
Trinity Co.: Yollo Bolly Mt., 4,000 ft. (Cal. U. 1).
Shasta Co.: Anderson (Stanford 1); Pit river (Van Denburgh, 1922);
Baird (Van Denburgh, 1922).
Lassen Co.: Pit river (Stanford 1).
Tehama Co.: Manton, 3,000 ft, (Cal. U. 1); Red Bluff, 350 ft. (Cal.
U. 1) ; Turner's Lyonsville. 3,500 ft. (Cal. U. 18).
? Plumas Co.:* Near Keddie (Cal. U. 1).
Mendocino Co.: Covelo (Cal. U. 1) (C.A.S. 1); south of Covelo (Cal.
U. 1); Ukiah (U.S.N.M. 1); Lake Leonhard, 10 mi. NW Ukiah (Cal.
*l have questioned the above locality.
Taylor: The Genus Kumeces 427
U. L); west of Summil of Sanhedrin (4.500 ft.) (Cal. U. 1); Cornptchc
\ M.N.H. 1) (CAB. 17).
Co.: Lakeporl (Cal. U.2); Kelseyville (Stanford 1).
Co.: Camp Meeker (C.A.S. 4); West Cazadero (Cal. I". 2);
Sonoma (Cornell 1); Skaggs Springs (C.A.S. 9); Petaluma (M.CZ.
7); Eldridge (C.A.S. 1); Cloverdale (Van Denburgh, 1922); Healds-
burg (Van Denburgh, 1922).
Napa Co.: Calistoga (Cal. U. 1) (U.S.N.M. 4) (M.C.Z. 2); near Napa.
200 ft. (Cal. U. 3); Suscol (U.S.N.M. 1); St. Helena (A.N.S.P. 3).
Marin Co.: (U.S.N.M. 4): Canon near Fairfax (Cal. U. 1); San An-
selmo, 300 ft. (Cal. I". 1); Fairfax (Cal. U. 1); Larkspur (Stanford
1); Lagunitas (U.S.N.M. 1) (C.A.S. 2); Mill Valley (C.A.S. 1); San
Rafael (C.A.S. 2); Point Reyes (Van Denburgh. 1922); Phoenix
Gulch (Van Denburgh . 1922); Rock Springs (C.A.S. 1).
Solano Co.: Near Vacaville (Cal. U. 2); Ware Island (U.S.N.M. 1).
Contra Costa Co.: Redwood Canon (Cal. U. 1); Pinole (Cal. U. 1) ;
Grizzly Peak (Cal. U. 5); Wild Cat Canon (Cal. U. 1).
Alameda Co.: Berkeley (Cal. U. 1) (Cornell 1) (U.S.N.M. 1) (C.A.S. 1);
Clarement Canon near Berkeley (Cal. U. 1); South Oakland (Cor-
nell 1); Oakland (U.S.N.M. 1) ; Hayward (U.S.N.M. 1); Oakland
Hills (C.A.S. 2); Leona Heights (C.A.S. 1).
Sari Mateo Co.: Pescadero (Stanford 1); Summit above Searsville
(Stanford 1); San Mateo (M.C.Z. 2).
Santa Clara Co.: (U.S.N.M. 2); College Park (Stanford 1); Stanford
University (U.S.N.M. 3) (C.A.S. 3); Palo Alto (M.C.Z. 21) (Stan-
ford 19) (Mich. 2); Jasper Ridge (Stanford 7); near Black Mountain
(Stanford 1); Alum Rock Canon (Stanford 1); Wright's (Stanford
1); Rucker's Moss Valley (Stanford 1); Mount Hamilton (Stanford
1); Smith Creek. Mt. Hamilton (Stanford 1); Rucker's. Uvas Valley
(Stanford 1); Milpitas (U.S.N.M. 1); San Jose (A.N.S.P. 3) (M.C.Z.
2); Los Gatos (Van Denburgh, 1922).
S la Cruz Co.: Santa Cruz (U.S.N.M. 5); Covey's Cove west of Ben
Lommond (Cal. U. 1); Corralitos (Stanford 1); Big Basin, Santa
Cruz Mts. (Stanford 2); Boulder Creek (Stanford 1).
Monterey Co.: Monterey (U.S.N.M. 1) (C.A.S. 1); Soledad (A.N.S.P.
1); Pacific Grove (M.C.Z. 5) (C.A.S. 1); Carmel (C.A.S. 13); San
Benito (A.M.N.H. 1) ; Jamesburg (C.A.S. 1).
San Luis Obispo Co.: La Panza (Cal. U. 1).
5 la Barbara Co.: Santa Barbara (E.H.T. 1) (A.N.S.P. 1) (M.C.Z. 1).
Vi ntura Co.: NordhorT (Cal. U. 3).
Oranqi Co.: (U.S.N.M. 1); Laguna Beach (Van Denburgh, 1922).
San Bernardino Co.: Fish Creek, San Bernardino Mts. (Cal. U. 3);
Fork Santa Ana. 6.200 ft., San Bernardino Mts. (Cal. U. 2); San
Bernardino Mts (St Milord 1) (U.S.N.M. 1).
Loi Angeles Co.: (U.S.N.M. 3) (A.N.S.P. 7) (C.A.S. 1); Arroyo Seco
near Pasadena (Cal. U. 1); foothill.- near Pasadena (Cal. U. 1);
Bailey Canon, Sierra Madre (Cal. U. 2); San Gabriel Mts.. 6.000 ft.
(Cal. U. 2) (A.M.N.H. 1); Sierra Madre. 2,500 ft. (Cal. U. 1);
Corral Canon. Santa Monica Mt-. (Cal. U. 1); Clan mont (Cornell
1); Los Angeles (A.M.N.H. 1); Boquet Canon, 45 miles from Los
428 . The University Science Bulletin
Angeles (U.S.N.M. 1); Placenta Canon (U.S.N.M. 1); Avalon, Cata-
lina Island (C.A.S. 1); La Crescenta (C.A.S. 1); San Pedro (Van
Denburgh, 1922); Fish Canon (Van Denburgh, 1922).
Riverside Co.: First Mill Site, San Jacinto Mts., 5,300 ft. (Cal. U. 1);
Strawberry Valley, 5,500 ft.. Jacinto Mts. (Cal. U. 1); Palm Springs
(Cal. U. 1) (Stanford 1); Idyllwild (S.D.S.N.H. 3) (A.M.N.H. 1);
San Jacinto (Stanford 1); Banning (U.S.N.M. 3); North of Cabezon
(U.S.N.M. 1).
San Diego Co.: (A.M.N.H. 1) (K.U. 1) (L.M.K. 2) (Field 1); Chula
Vista (Cal. U. 1); Balboa Park (Cal. U. 1) (S.D.S.N.H. 1); Point
Loraa (S.D.S.N.H. 1) (L.M.K. 1); San Diego (C.A.S. 3) (U.S.N.M.
2) (A.N.S.P. 1) (M.C.Z. 2) (S.D.S.N.H. 2); Camp Kearney (S.D.S.
N.H. 1); Lamina Mts. (S.D.S.N.H. 9) (L.M.K. 4) (A.M.N.H. 1);
Monument 258 (S.D.S.N.H. 2) ; Deerhorn Flat (S.D.S.N.H. 2) ; Tor-
ivy Pmes (S.D.S.N.H. 1); Alvarado Canon (S.D.S.N.H. 1); Viejas
Valley (L.M.K. 1); Pine Hills (L.M.K. 1); Alpine. (L.M.K. 1)
(K.U. 1); Julian (L.M.K. 1); Lakeside (L.M.K. 1),' Doane Valley,
Palomar Mt. (L.M.K. 2) ; Palomar Mt, (K.U. 5) ; Jamul (Indian
Spring) (L.M.K. 1); Cuyamaca Mt. (L.M.K. 3); Pauma (L.M.K. 1);
La Mesa (L.M.K. 1); Dulzura (Stanford 1); Fallbrook (Cornell 1);
Mussey (K.U. 1); Twin Oaks (U.S.N.M. 1); near Escondido (Van
Denburgh. 1922); Witch Creek (C.A.S. 1); Poway (Van Denburgh,
1922).
Tulare Co.:* Kaweah (C.A.S. 1); Monache Meadows Sierra Nevada
(Cal. U. 1); ? Traver (U.S.N.M. 1).
Baja California, Mexico :t
Coronados Is. (M.C.Z. 6) (C.A.S. 6); South Coronados (Cal. U. 1)
(S.D.S.N.H. 2) (L.M.K. 2) (C.A.S. 17) ; East Coronados (A.M.N.H.
1) (C.A.S. 9); North Coronados (A.M.N.H. 1) (C.A.S. 2); Todos
Santos Islands (Cal. U. 3) (C.A.S. 7); San Quentin (C.A.S. 1) ;
Ensehada (C.A.S. 2); Alcatraz, San Pedro Martir Mts. (C.A.S. 1);
Arroyo Encantado (C.A.S. 2) ; San Jose, 2,500 ft,, Lat. 31° (C.A.S. 4)
(Cal. U. 1); La Grulla, 7.500 ft., San Pedro Martir Mts. (Cal. U. 1);
Rosarita Divide (Field 1); San Pedro Martir Mts. (U.S.N.M. 1);
Aqua Caliente (C.A.S. 3).
Eumeces skiltonianus brevipes (Cope)
(Fig. G8)
SYNONYMY
1900. Eumeces skiltonianus var. brevipes Cope. Ann. Rept. TJ. S. Nat, Mus., 1898 (1900),
pp. 043, 044 (type locality, Fresno, Cal.; G. Eisen, collector; type No. 12558
U.S.N.M., in good condition).
1922. Eumeces skiltonianus (part,) Van Denburgh. Occ. Papers Cal. Acad. Sri., X, Vol. I,
pp. 579-583 (Eldorado Co. specimens).
History. The type, together with certain Eumeces which appear
to belong to the form here recognized as Eumeces gilbe7*ti rubri-
* I have questioned the above localities. There is some doubt either about the identifica-
tion or the locality.
t Guerrero, Mexico (Acapulco). A specimen in Harvard Museum of Comparative Zoology
purports to he from the above locality. I regard this specimen as having originated in
California, even though acquired in Acapulco. The specimen has had the tip of the lower
jaw pierced, suggesting that it may have been held on a leash when alive.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 429
caudatus, were collected a1 Fresno by Gustav Eisen. Cope recog-
nized the form under the name brevipes, stating thai "Additional
specimens are necessary to determine the question of the rank of
this form." The specimen lias an undivided postmental, and this,
1 suspect, is an anomalous condition. This name has invariably
been referred to the synonymy of skiltonianus.
Diagnosis. Related to skiltonianus skiltonianus, but larger and
more robust, the body proportionally more elongate, the scales hav-
ing a more glassy appearance. The tail is lavender, a color retained
more or less in the adults.
Description of tin type. (Type No. 12558, U.S.N.M., G. Eisen,
collet tor. I From Cope (1900).
"In ;i large and probably old specimen (Cat. No. 12558) there is but one
mental plate, and the limbs are conspicuously shorter than in the adult of the
typical form. The color is also modified in a way which is different from
that seen in other adults Additional specimens are necessary to determine the
question of the rank of this form. It diverges, however, so widely from the
normal that I describe it under a distinct name.
"The limbs, adpressed to the sides, do not meet by a space equal to the
length of the forearm and hand, which is more than double the space between
the limbs in the adults of the typical variety. The hind limb is one-third the
length from the groin to the end of the muzzle. The tail is usually robust,
but the extremity is lost in the specimen. In coloration the dorsal ten rows
of scales are all alike, dark olive, bordered with brown. There is a pale spot
on the outer border of the scales of the third row from the median line on
i ach side, which gives the impression of an indistinct narrow pale streak. Belly
and posterior gular region blue; chin, throat, a crossband at axillae, and the
inferior surfaces of limbs and tail, light yellow. The external border of the
broad median row of subcaudal scales (which are twice as wide as those of
the adjacent rows) are bordered with plumbeous, forming two narrow streaks.
The scales of the upper side of the tail are brown bordered. The dimensions
equal those of the largest adults of the usual type."
Scale rows, 26 about middle of body; upper labials, 7-8. Tail
especially thick; foot with four large scales winch cross the foot
diagonally; limbs separated by 10 scales. The specimen is a large
female greatly distended with eggs. Except for a greater length
of the head and head scales the form resembles the general char-
acter- of skiltonianus skiltonianus, save those mentioned in the diag-
nosis. The color has now faded considerably. The dorsolateral
lines are still distinct, separated by two whole and a little more
than two half rows of scales. The lateral line is not clearly differ-
entiated. The tail, however, shows four dim lighter lines. All the
anterior labials white; posterior labials with upper edges dark.
430
The University Science Bulletin
Measurements of El Dorado county specimens referred to Eumeces skiltonianus
brevipes Cope
s.u.
3645
yg-
S.U.
3648
yg-
S.U.
3647
9
S.U.
3640
S.U.
3639
S.U.
3641
d1
S.U.
S.U.
3607
Sex
cf
43
46
79
16
25
9
6
11
17
60
68
74
123 +
24.2
42
10
13
19
25
77
24.6
41
10
12
20
26
79
123+
26
44
12
14
20
28
80
Tail
142
15
23
8.5
6
10
15
18
33
11
8
14
20
22
3S
12
9
17
24
24
43
12
14
19
25
No. 3607, Sugar Loaf P.O., 5000 ft., El Dorado Co.; others from Fyffe, El Dorado Co.
Variation. I have associated with skiltonianus brevipes a group
of specimens in Stanford University, from Eldorado county. The
series consists of numbers 3607, 2639-3648. (No. 3420 [89mm.]
purporting to be from Eldorado county [Fyffe] is Eumeces gilberti
gilberti, quite probably from Yosemite Valley.) In this series the
young have the light greenish-white dorsolateral line occupying
about three fifths of the second scale row. The dorsal coloration
in the youngest (42 mm.) is gray-olive with black lines bordering
the dorsolateral light lines. The lateral stripe is deep black-brown.
The lateral greenish-white line begins on the rostral, involves all
but the upper and lower edges of the ear, and passes to the tail;
below this is a narrow dark line. The tails are lavender above and
on sides; the chin, throat, breast and underside of tail cream; the
belly grayish.
This color pattern is largely retained by both males and females
until a length of approximately 80 mm. is reached. The lateral
stripe, however, is not so dark, and the light lines become more
olive but still distinct. One specimen, No. 3607 (80 mm.), shows
the dorsolateral lines merging posteriorly into the dorsal coloration
so that they are lost on the posterior part of the body.
In general the specimens appear to have a smooth, more glazed
appearance, are less robust than the gilberti forms and apparently
do not show the red heads and complete loss of the juvenile mark-
ings of that species.
Scale data from these specimens are as follows: upper labials,
7-7 in five specimens, 8-8 in four, 8-7 in two, 8-6 in one ; prefrontals
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 431
in contact in eight, separated in four; nuchals, 2-2 in eight, 1-1 in
three. 1-2 iii two; scale rows, 2(i four times; 25, twice; 24. seven
times; median scale rows widened; none with the parietal enclosed.
Limbs in males touch or overlap two or three millimeters; in fe-
male- they barely touch or are separated by two to five millimeters.
The subcaudals are from 109-113; scales from parietals to vent
hi to 63.
R( marks. Inasmuch as Gustav Eisen sent from Fresno speci-
mens of typical skiltonianus skiltonianus (which apparently does
not occur in this locality at the present time), together with gil-
ln Hi rubricaudatus and the type of the present form, I regard it as
quite probable that there may be an error as regards the type lo-
cality of the present form, skiltonianus brevipes.
Distribution. The specimens which I refer to this form are all
from Eldorado county, California. It seems likely that it replaces
gilberti gilberti in the sierras north of Eldorado county, and that
it may possibly also be taken to the south, if the type locality is
authentic. The locality records are given in the table of measure-
ment-.
Eumeces lagunensis Van Denburgh
(Plate 36, Fig. 1 ; Figs. 69, TO)
SYNONYMY
1895. Eumeces hi Van 1) nburgh. Proc. Cat. Acad. Sri., (2), V, 1895, pp. 79,
184. 135, pi. XIII (general drawing of entire animal, with details of head and fore-
luiil): rype description; type locality, San Francisquito, Sierra de La Laguna, Gustav
i Coll.): McLain, Critical Notes, 1899, p. 10 (Synonymy of skiltonianus);
Stejneger and Barbour, Check List X. Amer. Rept., 2d Ed., 1923, p. 75.
1921. Plestiodon lagunensis Van Denburgh and Slevin. Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci., (4), XI, 1921,
pp. 2-. 4". 44, 52; Van Denburgh, Occ. Papers Cal. Acad. Sci., X, Vol. 1. Nov. 23,
L922, pp. 587-589 (detailed description); Schmidt, Bull. Amer. Mus. Xat. Hist.,
XI, VI. Dec, 7. L922, )'. 682 (mentioned as a synonym of skiltonianus) .
1921. Plestiodon skiltonianus lagunensis Nelson. Mem. Xat. Acad. See. XVI, 1921, pp.
114, 115.
1930. Eumeces skiltonianus Loveridge. Copeia, No. 173, 1930. pp. in, 112.
1932. Eumeces skiltonianus lagunensis Linsdale. Univ. Cal. Puhl. in Zool., XXXVIII. No. 6,
p. 374.
History. Two specimens, collected in Baja California by Gustav
Eisen, March 28, 1892. were sent to the California Academy of
Sciences and were described under the name Eurru ces laguni nsis by
John Van Denburgh in 1895. The specific name refers to the Sierra
de La Laguna of Baja California, in which the type locality, San
Francisquito, is located.
This description, which is somewhat brief, was supplemented by
carefully drawn figure. Unfortunately the most distinctive character
432 The University Science Bulletin
of the form, that of the relationship of the temporals, was omitted
from the description, and despite the fact that it is clearly shown by
the figures, it seems to have been disregarded by subsequent writers
treating of the form. The description states that there are seven
labials; the figure (type ?) shows eight.
McLain (1899) expresses the opinion that lagunensis is a synonym
of skiltonianus, on the basis of an orange-tailed specimen of (?)
skiltonianus* Schmidt (1922), without having seen a specimen of
lagunensis but basing his opinion on specimens of skiltonianus from
Todos Santos Island opposite Ensehada, Baja California, regarded
lagunensis a synonym of skiltonianus.
Loveridge, in 1930, on the basis of certain specimens collected by
C. T. Brues on Los Coronados Islands, Baja California, concludes
that skiltonianus and lagunensis are identical. It is apparent that
he failed to examine the type figure with regard to squamation of
the temporal region. Linsdale (1932), having a specimen of la-
gunensis before him obtained at Comondu, Apr. 9, 1931, by Chester
C. Lamb, concluded that the specimen "helps to confirm the opinion
expressed by the describer of the species (1922, p. 589) that it should
be recognized as distinct." Linsdale believed that, because the
differences were small, it should be considered subspecifically.
I have been fortunate in having Linsdale's specimen (U. of C,
No. 13760) for study and find it conforms very closely not only to
the description, but also to the careful figures given by Van Den-
burgh published with the type description, save in number of labials
— seven instead of eight — and the differences are very striking from
the typical skiltonianus, particularly as pertains to the significant
differences in the temporal region.
In an examination of the Eumeces material in the United States
National Museum, I find a series of six specimens collected between
Loreto and Comondu, Baja California, by Dr. W. M. Mann, and
classified as skiltonianus. This material is uniform in regard to the
peculiar characters of the temporals and agrees likewise with the
type figures.
The reddish-orange color of the tail is retained in the California
specimen, but has been lost in those in the National Museum. This,
of course, is to be expected, since in practically all the species, the
color of the tail in juveniles is changed in the adult. So far as I
have observed in skiltonianus the pink or orange color is never
present alone save in regenerated parts of the tail, reports to the
* This specimen, from the Chihuahua Mts., Coolidge Coll., is a young gilberti rubricaudatus.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 433
contrary notwithstanding (an orange tail does occur in gilberti
rubricaudatus I .
Unfortunately, the types of lag inn nsis (C.A.S., Nos. 400 and 402)
were destroyed in the earthquake and fire in 1906. I designate
U.S.N.M., Cat. No. 67398, collected by Dr. W. M. Mann, Feb., 1924,
"on the trail between Loreto and Comondu" to serve as a neotype,
of which Xos. 67399, 67400, 67401, 67402, and 67403 may be re-
garded as neoparatypes, since no topotype is available at the
moment.
The original type locality is San Francisquito, presumably* the
barrio of that name belonging to La Paz, near the southern end of
the peninsula.
Diagnosis. A medium-sized member of the Skiltonianus group,
having a well-defined dorsolateral light line from snout to some
distance on tail and a lateral line arising on anterior labials passing
through the ear to groin; 24 scale rows about body; four supra-
oculars, three touching frontal; frontonasal in contact with frontal
or not; seven upper labials, four preceding the subocular; parietals
enclosing the interparietal; seventh labial broadly in contact with
the upper secondary temporal, widely separating the primary from
the lower secondary temporal; tertiary temporal present; two post-
labials, not superimposed. Tail of young orange, this color dis-
appearing in adults. The light lines on body are retained in adults.
Description (from University of California Museum of Vertebrate
Zoology, No. 13760; Comondu, 1,000 ft., Baja California, Mexico,
Apr. 9, 1931. Chester C. Lamb). Part of rostral, appearing above,
small, triangular, less than a third the area of the frontonasal;
supranasals moderate in size, forming a median suture, touching
postnasal and loreal; frontonasal longer than broad, touching an-
terior loreals, supranasals, prefrontals, and narrowly in contact with
;he frontal; prefrontals distinctly smaller than the frontoparietal,
forming sutures with the two loreals, first supraoculars, frontonasal
and frontal, excluded from first superciliary, and not making a
median suture; frontal elongate, much longer than its distance from
end of snout, in contact with three supraoculars, not constricted on
sides; frontoparietals broadly m com act. not or but slightly smaller
than the interparietal; parietals large, broadly in contact behind
the interparietal; two pairs of nuchals, the anterior distinctly deeper
than posterior.
•There :>• also a barrio San Francisquito between 20° and 30° north lat. ; also a point
and a bay of that name about 29° 20' north lat. Comondu is between 2<i° and 27° north lat.
28— 1123
434
The University Science Bulletin
Nasal small, divided by sutures from the nostril, the anterior part
much larger than the posterior; postnasal large, touching two
labials; anterior loreal distinctly higher than wide, higher than
posterior; latter short, only a little longer than high; four supra-
oculars, the first relatively large; seven superciliaries, the first not in
contact with the prefrontal, smaller than the last; two presuboculars,
the anterior much the largest; four postsuboculars; primary temporal
small; upper secondary large, of equal width throughout its length,
forming a broad suture with the seventh labial; lower secondary
Fig. 69. Eumeces lagunensis Van Denburgh. U. of C. No. 13760; Co-
mondu, 1,000 feet, Baja California. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view
of head. Actual head length, 7.3 mm.; width, 6.5 mm.
rectangular, widely separated, from primary; tertiary temporal
narrow, elongate, not entering ear.
Seven upper labials, the first neither larger nor higher than the
three succeeding; seventh much larger than sixth, followed by a
relatively large postlabial, which is separated from the auricular
opening by a single small scale.
Eye small, the upper palpebrals in contact with the superciliaries
throughout the greater part of the series; lower eyelid with a series
of four semitransparent, enlarged scales, separated from the sub-
ocular by three rows of granules. A minute preocular, and two
small postoculars, of which the lower is largest; ear opening rela-
tively large, with two well-defined lobules; 17 scales surrounding
ear. Mental large, with a longer labial border than rostral; two
postmentals; three pairs of chinshields, the median largest, the last
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 435
followed by an enlarged postgenial and a scale bordering the post-
genial which is longer than wide.
Scale- on dorsal surface somewhat widened, the four median rows
of about equal size, and larger than laterals or ventrals; scale row-
about neck behind ear, 28; about narrow part of neck, 27; about
body at axilla. 29; about middle of body, 24; about base of tail, 16;
scales in a row from parietals to above vent, 58; scales under the
tail very broad, 102 scales from vent to tip.
Limbs moderate, failing to touch when adpressed ; no small gran-
ular scales in axilla, and none following insertion of hind leg; 13
scales about insertion of foreleg; 16 about insertion of hind leg;
outer wrist tubercle well developed; palm with three enlarged tuber-
cular scales; lamellar formula for fingers: 5; 7; 10; 10; 7. Heel
bordered by four larger scales; sole with one enlarged tubercular
scale; lamellar formula for toes: 5; 9; 11; 14; 8. Toes apparently
a little more compressed, with the terminal dorsal scale less en-
larged than in skiltonianu*. Vent bordered by six scales, the outer
overlapping inner; median pair strongly enlarged.
Pits on scales poorly developed. Scales of the sides of neck and
body usually with only a single punctate pit; in the posthumeral
and postfemoral regions occasionally two or three pits.
Color (in formalin). Above dark slaty black; a dorsolateral
whitish line begins on rostral, continues along side of body to tail
where it widens and is lost; the line covers the outer half of second
-•ale rows and inner third of the third, separated from its fellow by
two whole and two half scale rows; lateral line begins on second
labial, follows the lower edge of the anterior labials, then rises a
little, leaving a narrow darker line on the edge, maintaining a
straight even course to ear, which it enters about its middle; behind
ear it begin.- on the lower half and continues back to groin on the
sixth scale row; chin and breast light; belly lead color; under side
and major portion of tail light, dull reddish orange, flecked with
darker and with a median darker line; underside of limbs light.
Variation. Seven specimens have been available, measurements
of which are given in the following table. The variation in scale
rows i- as follows: behind ear, 28 to 30; on constricted part of neck,
27 to 29; about axillary region, 2!) to 32; about body, 23 to 24, the
first number occurring once. Scales in a row from parietals to
above vent, 58, 59 or 60. the latter once, the other two, three each;
scales about ear, 15 or 16, the latter number the more frequent.
Upper and lower labials invariable, as are the supraoculars, post-
430
The University Science Bulletin
Table of measurements of Emmas lagunensis Van Denburuh
Museum
Number
Sex
U.S.N.M.
67403
&
II. of C.
13760
yg-
U.S.N.M.
67402
9
U.S.N.M.
67400
&
U.S.N.M.
67399
9
U.S.N.M.
67401
&
U.S.N.M.
67398
9
Total length
141
Snout to vent . .
39
50
56
57
5S.5
59
60
Snout to eye. .
3.4
4
4.3
4
4
4.3
4.2
Snout to ear. . .
8
9.3
10.4
10.5
9.8
11.3
11
Snout to foreleg,
13
18
17.8
19.8
IS
20
19.3
Tail
91
6
Width of head. .
6.5
6
9
8
9.3
8.2
Length of head,
7.3
8.5
8.5
9.2
9.2
9.8
9.3
Width of body
7
8
9.4
10
10
10
12
4 4
6
6
6
7
Foreleg
9.5
12
13
14
13.7
13.2
13
Hind leg
13
IS
18
20
IS
20
19
Longest toe. . . .
5.2
6
6.1
6
6
6.1
6.6
Axilla to groin..
23
27
. 34 5
33
35
34
35
nasals, postmental, and the character of the enclosed parietal. Four
specimens have the frontonasal in contact with the frontal, three
separated; lamellae under fourth toe. 14 to 16, the latter occurring
once only. Four postsuboculars in all save one specimen.
The limbs overlap in the smallest specimen (two millimeters),
touch in those of intermediate size, and are separated a little in the
largest specimens. The character and relationship of the temporals
are invariable. The single large postlabial seems to be constant.
In the largest specimen the color above is olive-brown, the dorso-
lateral line complete, greenish-white in color, bordered above by
darker color; sides with a dark-brown band, bordered below by the
lateral line; latter bordered below by a dark line; belly bluish-
green; scales on limbs with grayish centers; tip of regenerated tail
purplish. In the youngest specimen the ground color of back is
darker. The tail is gray, the regenerated tip light orange.
The specimen described in detail appears to have been preserved
in formalin; those in the National Museum have been preserved
in alcohol and are generally lighter.
The older specimens have the pitting on the scales somewhat less
distinct than in the younger. Many of the scales show two pits. In
the postfemoral region the pits are a bit nearer the posterior edge of
the scale, and in some cases notch the scale.
Taylor: The Genus Ki.meces
437
R( marks. Aside from the differences in the temporals, this form
- in- !«> differ from skiltonianus in a slightly lower count of sub-
digital lamellae, usually two less scale rows around the body, the
gr< ater differentiation in size between the sixth and seventh labials,
in having the last labial in contact broadly with the upper secondary
temporal, and the difference in the character of the axillary scales
(not examined in the National Museum series). It also differs in
having an orange tail in the young instead of a blue tail. I have
seen no voting specimen of skiltonianus with an orange tail: the
newly begun regeneration takes an orange color (the orange tail
does occur, however, in gilberti rubricaudatus) . Also the limbs are
somewhat shorter.
Until further evidence to the contrary can be marshalled, fili-
form should be considered as a species distinct from skiltonianus.
The critical region where this evidence may be found is the northern
and central part of Baja California.
Distribution. The form is known only in the southern third of
Baja California.
30
25
Fig. 70. Distribution of Eumeces lagunensis Van Denburgh, in
Baja California
Locality records:
Baja California: San Francisquito, Siena de La Laguna (type locality,
C.A.S. 2, destroyed); Comondu (U. of C. 1. Lamb Coll.); on trail between
Loreto and Comondu (U.S.N.M. 6, Mann Coll.; No. 67398 designated as
neotype) .
438 The University Science Bulletin
Eumeces gilberti gilberti Van Dcnburgh
XPlates 37, 38; Figs. 71, 72)
SYNONYMY
1891. Eumeces skiltonianus Stejneger. N. Amer. Fauna. No. 7, 1893, pp. 201, 202 (part.);
Grinnell and Storer, Hall, Handbook of Yosemite Nat. Park, 1921, p. 179 (part.);
Van Denburgh, Occas. Papers Calif. Acad. Sci., X, Vol. I, 1922, pp. 584-587 (part.)
(description; the plate given is of Eumeces rubricaudatus) ; Grinnell and Storer, Anim.
Life Yosemite, Univ. Calif. Press, 1924, pp. 633-635 (part.) (descriptions and habits).
1896. Eumeces gilberti Van Denburgh. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., (2), VI. 1896, pp. 350-352
(type description; type locality, Yosemite Valley, Mariposa county, Calif.); and
Occas. Papers Calif. Acad. Sci., V, 1897, pp. 147-149 (part.) (redescription with
additional locality records); Ditmars, Rept. Book, 1907, p. 198; ? Grinnell, Univ.
Calif. Publ. Zool., V, No. 1. 1908, pp. 163, 164 (San Bernardino Mts., Calif.);
Atsatt, Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., XII, No. 3, pp. 31, 50; Ruthven and Gaige, Occas.
Papers Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich., No. 8, 1915, pp. 26-28 (comparison, skiltonianus with
gilberti); Camp, Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., XVII, No. 7, Dec. 28, 1916, p. 72 (places
gilberti in synonymy of skiltonianus).
History. Eumeces gilberti was first recognized by Dr. John Van
Denburgh, in a collection of reptiles made by Dr. Charles H.
Gilbert and James M. Hyde in 1898, in and near Yosemite Valley,
Mariposa county, California. The description is a careful one, and
measurements are given of a series of paratypes. The young
(snout to vent, 52 millimeters) are likewise described. The type
chosen is No. 4139, Leland Stanford Junior University Museum,
collected June 10-15, 1898.
In 1897 Van Denburgh, in his "Reptiles of the Pacific Coast,"
again describes this species and gives additional data and new local-
ity records. He compares the form with skiltonianus. Here he states
(p. 149), "Were it not for the different position of the light stripes
o-f the young and the fact that this form seemingly does not occur
in most parts of the range of E. skiltonianus, Eumeces gilberti
might be regarded as a color phase of the western skink."
Between the time of its description and 1916 this species was
generally accepted by herpetologists. In this latter year Camp
(1916) discussed the specimens of Eumeces in the Museum of
Vertebrate Zoology of the University of California, and pointed
out that on the basis of coloration and markings all are one species
{i. e., skiltonianus and gilberti). He states: "The upshot of the
matter, then, is that all the California Eumeces are to be considered
as a single species, skiltonianus, which exhibits age and sex varia-
tions almost identical with those shown by the eastern skink, E.
quinquelineatus. According to Cope (1900, pp. 636-637), quin-
quelineatus attains a much larger size in the more southern states
than in the northern, there going through all the stages of colora-
tion, and that the farther north the more is this restricted to the
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 439
primary pattern. A parallel situation seems to obtain in skil-
( on ian us."
The comparison which Camp drew from Cope's statement (which
is erroneous, due to the fact that Cope confused three eastern
species) is to be given no weight.
Since 1916, on the basis of Camp's conclusions, the name gilberti
lias been relegated to the limbo of synonymy, no one, apparently,
reviewing the same or other material to determine whether char-
acters other than size might separate the two forms.
Van Denburgh apparently accepted Camp's conclusions with
considerable reluctance, since, in his "Reptiles of Western North
America" (pp. 585-58(i I , he gives a complete separate description of
giWt rti Hinder skiltonianus) . Speaking of Camp's action, he states:
"It. therefore, seems necessary to regard all California skinks as
belonging to one species, although no explanation has yet been
given of the fact that this species in a portion of its range (southern
California and the Sierra Nevada) grows much larger than else-
where and develops a color phase — sometimes even in the young —
which in other regions seems never to be fully shown. Under these
circumstances, it seems best to give separate descriptions of the
two phases although one name is used for both."
My study of this group of California skinks seems to vindicate
Van Denburgh's belief in the distinctness of E. gilberti. Apparently
the greatest difficulty in recognizing gilberti has been due to the
fact that the young of gilberti gilberti and skiltonianus are very
similar in general characters. Yet a careful comparison will doubt-
less show gilberti larger at hatching and with certain details of
the color different from those of skiltonianus. There is usually no
difficulty in recognizing the adults, although the color evolution
brings a variety of age color-patterns that is very confusing when
limited material is available.
"With the recognition of the subspecies Eumeces gilberti rubri-
caudatus, a second difficulty is encountered. In the case of these
forms, the young are strikingly different; however, the adults in
some cases arc very similar and difficulty may be met in separating
them.
Diagnosis. A large species belonging to the skiltonianus group,
having four bluish or whitish lines in the young; these lines soon
fade and may be lost as early as the third year. The upper
(dorsolateral I light lines occupy from one half to almost the whole
of the second scale row, and are thus separated sometimes by only
440
The University Science Bulletin
two scale rows; the lateral light line is usually continuous from
the rostral and usually with straight edges on the labials, wider
than is usual in skiltonianus. The tail is blue. The lateral brown
stripe is lost early. Adults with body rather stout, with the tail
practically circular in cross section; the limbs long, overlapping in,
males, touching or narrowly failing to touch in the females. Scale
rows, 24-26, the median widened; scales occiput to above vent
average about 62.5; upper labials, eight; nuchals, one pair, nor-
mally; two postmentals; one postnasal; superciliaries, normally
seven; prefrontals forming a strong median suture; subcaudals,
112. Body brownish or greenish-olive, the scales sometimes darker
Fig. 71. Eumeces gilberti gilbertl Van Denburgh. U. of C. No. 12611.
east of Cooperstown, on county line between Stanislaus and Tuolumne
Cos. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length,
about 16 mm.; width, about 15 nun.
edged, rarely washed with reddish; toward tail, often verdigris-
green; head bright poppy-red.
Description of species (chiefly from paratypes and topotypes).
The portion of rostral visible above usually equals half (or more)
of the frontonasal; supranasals moderate, slightly longer in propor-
tion to width than in skiltonianus; frontonasal large, touching
anterior loreal; prefrontals distinctly hexagonal, forming a strong
median suture; frontal as long as. or minutely longer than, its
distance from the end of the snout, touching three supraoculars;
frontoparietals smaller than the prefrontals, forming a median
suture; interparietal narrow, elongate, normally not enclosed by
the parietals; parietals relatively short and wide; normally a single
pair of large nuchals.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 441
Nasal small, at least partially divided by a slight groove, the
area of the anterior part greater than that of posterior part; post-
nasal invariably present; anterior loreal narrow, higher than wide;
posterior loreal large, longer than high; normally seven super-
ciliaries, the anterior large, broadly in contact with the prefrontal,
more than twice as large as the posterior; four supraoculars; two
presuboculars ; normally four postsuboculars I occasionally three or
five); a small preocular, followed by several small granules di-
minishing in size; upper median palpebral scales contacting the
superciliaries ; two small postoculars. the lower larger; the lower
eyelid with four or five enlarged scales separated from the suboc-
ular labial by four rows of granules; primary temporal moderately
large, in contact with the somewhat fanshaped lower secondary
temporal; upper secondary subrectangular, slightly broader pos-
teriorly than anteriorly; tertiary temporal elongate, bordering the
upper secondary, separated from ear by a single scale.
Eight upper labials, five preceding the subocular; latter with a
labial border a little greater than its height; eighth labial much
larger than the seventh, followed by two pairs of postlabials, the
lower anterior being much the largest and sometimes fused with
the lower scale of the posterior pair; usually two well-defined
auricular lobules; about twenty scales surrounding the ear; mental
moderate, with a labial border a little longer than that of the ros-
tral; six lower labials; two postmentals; these followed by three
pairs of chinshields, the anterior pair in contact; postgenial large,
normally bordered on anterior inner edge by a scale longer than
wide.
Body scales on sides in parallel lines, the median dorsal row-
wider than others; scales around head behind ear, 33; around nar-
row part of neck, 29-31; about middle of body, 24-26; about base of
tail. 17. Subcaudals much widened, about 110-112 from anus to
tip of tail; six preanal scales, the two median much the largest,
the outer lateral scales overlapping the inner; lateral postanal scales
more or less differentiated in males, usually showing in older speci-
mens a distinctly raised and rounded surface; about Hi scales
around insertion of arm; outer wrist tubercle clearly defined; sev-
eral large, fiat tubercles on palm, sometimes arranged in a V-shaped
or triangular series; lamellar formula for fingers: 7; 10; 12; 13; 9.
Heel plates very variable, usually four or five; sole with several
large fiat pads, sometimes forming a row to base of fourth toe;
lamellar formula for toe-: 7; 11; 14; 16; 10; toes surrounded by
442 The University Science Bulletin
only a dorsal and ventral series; the intercalated scales on outer
side not extended the length of basal phalanx; lamellae not tightly
bound about the claws. A series of small granular scales in the
axilla; none or only a single row of tiny scales about posterior part
of insertion of hind leg; 22 scales about insertion of hind leg; ad-
pressed limbs overlapping about two millimeters in adult males,
touching or failing to touch by one or two millimeters in adult
females.
Color. Very young specimens are blackish or dark brown above,
bordered by dorsolateral lines of grayish white which begin on the
rostral or prefrontal and continue back, with a somewhat varying
width, covering part of the third and two thirds to five sixths of
the second row; the lateral light stripe appears to be continuous
from the rostral, widens somewhat posteriorly, the edges appearing
straight. It emerges from the ear, involving much more than the
lower half of the ear and continues back chiefly on the sixth, but
partially on the seventh, rows; the lateral brown stripe is very dis-
tinct and relatively narrow, involving two complete scale rows and
the edges of the adjoining scale rows; below the lateral light line
is a dim, narrow, gray-olive line. Belly below, grayish; tail blue,
with a suggestion of lavender below.
In slightly older specimens the median part of the back becomes
olive and the darker coloration remains bordering the dorsolateral
line. During the third and fourth year the dorsolateral and lateral
lines become olive as does the general coloration, while some trace
of the lateral stripe can be traced to the fifth year. The blue of
the tail is lost about the third year.
In adult male and female specimens, the color becomes nearly
uniform, without a trace of dorsolateral or lateral lines. The gen-
eral color is greenish-olive, sometimes showing bluish-olive with a
slight brown wash. The head is colored almost uniformly red (yel-
low in preservative). The sides of the body are gray or bluish-gray.
The chin and throat as well as part of the breast are uniform
cream (red in life?) and this color extends upward, almost sur-
rounding the ear. Limbs about the same color as body, the toes
being somewhat lighter. Under surfaces of limbs and underside of
the tail light cream color in alcohol.
Variation. I have examined forty specimens from the Yosemite
region. The following variation is noted. Scale rows, 24-28, 24
occurring six times; 25, six times; 26, twenty-three times; 27, four
times; 28, once. The number of scales from parietal to above vent
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
143
M
X
.- -r
r: XI •£
c
«
•x
X
c
■<t
•-£
.- =
*j
-
1- M
*"
•—
0
- M
^ "O
£j EC
•«■ u:
■.o
tN
i-C
0. «
JO >
<N
CO X ■*
CN
co
1^
X
ir.
ir
>
1^.
M
~.z
u >~
— QJ
ir.
■ ■
lo
tr:
u:
> <
. • -
co a
«c
X
t^
C3 L-
a
cr
»eo &
L~
M
I- ~. >
.
0 »
CO
ic
1— 1
=j2
— — 0
x
■«
C5
c
—
M
X
X
X
c"
M
■*
c3
u
K M
c
N «
— M .
•x
■.-:
"+
■>
X
X
»-T
X
t>
<N
■*
M
13
w£
- a
-C
<M S
Ef
X
c
ut
-
—
c
^00
— MIS
a
*
t-~
l*;
#
c
M
_
c
t^
*r c
«"
M
co
■*
M
M
1-
~i -
r-i X
c
QQec
X g
Q
"5 >>
OS
t^
»c
M
<M
':«
0
— *
"-' ?» V
. • x '
u •-
SC
~
a
re
c
c-
C
0 -
>
*
C
■t
M
M
—
in
•/ 10
■ ^
C <M
~
C-
^
^
M
"C ■•>
^
——
- = ■-,-
c
X
-.
».*
M
M
M
So
s
«
M
^>
""
.—
M
Un
*
' ^■
>, IS
-*~
- 1.
K
— 0
b
ic
s -
• —
02 m
l£
t>
Q
*
-r
^
c-
C
►"S
«
L~
•*
H
—
= s
00
y
<B
03 >>
s
3
^
lC
J~ C3
-l'f*
- /
_ 1-
c
M
*
c
M
cr
M
rc
CM
c
s
co
tfl
•—
—
cs
CC
t—
Et5
GO -^
*—
*° B
O
B<
Uj
— — K,
. ■ S. C
<r
M
C:
r^
a
C^3
Tt
X
c
<N O
■4J
c
g
CC
IC
M
IN
I-
GO >h
c 0
1
»r
u:
»r:
ir
•7 C5
•— '
*
CO
— •
|I-S
M
X
c
*
c
M
p
Tf
<c
u;
Cv
•-w
x
rH
?
n
3C
-x
(M
CC
r-
-
2
,9 t*
03O
gl0
■r 0
^«
hH "**
»*«
>'°o
U M
— -r
r. co
> ..
t 6
— C/j
-3 ^ c
t
!
5S r-B
a
—
r
ss«s
P
c
t-
1
'c
£
5
«201?
a
>
r
J
u
J
—
--
~- ff.
*
>
1
c
a
] *
^_
C
) * * KD O
= §
c
c
C
4-
c
_
c
"c
6
: I
*
t,
a
c
e
C
> c
c
•-
C
a
t-
=
C
T-l O
p
v
V.
c
) a
c
1 V.
£
<
£
c
C
C
•-
•-
c
C0\J
444 The University Science Bulletin
are: 61, occurring five times; 62, fifteen times; 63, nineteen times;
and 64, three times. The upper labials are 7-7 in three specimens;
7-8 in two specimens; 8-8 in thirty-five specimens. The nuchals are
usually 1-1, this average being found in 30 specimens; 1-2 in five;
and 2-2 in three specimens. The prefrontals are broadly in contact
in 36 specimens, narrowly separated in four. Subdigital lamellae
under the fourth toe (70 counts) are: 14, twice; 15, nine times;
16, thirty-nine times; 17, seventeen times; and 18, three times. The
character of the postmentals, postnasal and supraoculars is constant.
The parietals are separated in 37 specimens; in three they enclose
the interparietal.
The specimens from Inyo county on the east slope of the Sierra
Nevada differ somewhat. Nine specimens have an average of scales,
occiput to anus, of 61.6; the number of scale rows averages a little
lower, the number 24 occurring in five of the nine specimens. The
nuchals are 2-2 in seven and 2-1 in two. The labials are 8-8 in all.
The prefrontals are joined in six of the nine specimens. No young
specimens were examined from the eastern slope. These Inyo
county specimens are a little darker generally. Some trace of the
dorsolateral line is visible until a somewhat greater age is reached,
not so much by its remaining light but by slightly darker color
which edges the scales of the two median rows.
I am, at least temporarily, associating with gilberti gilberti three
specimens from San Joaquin county. This is done with considerable
reluctance, as the color characters, combined with growth and scale
characters (if constant), would warrant separation from this species.
The adult female has four dark lines down the back, and the head
is uniquely mottled. The lateral light lines are widened and the
adpressed limbs widely separated. The general ground color is of
a bluish-gray.
The two young are grayish olive with a suggestion of two darker,
continuous or dotted lines on the back. The heads likewise show a
mottled condition. The photographs are excellent, so no detailed
discussion of the markings is given. (PI." 38, figs. 1, 2, 4.1
The measurements of the large female (Gal. Mus. Zool. No. 3559)
are as follows: snout to vent, 98 mm.; to eye, 6.2 mm.; to ear, 18
mm.; axilla to groin, 57 mm.; width of head, 15 mm.; length of head,
16.4 mm.; body width, 16 mm.; foreleg, 23 mm.; hind leg, 33 mm.;
longest toe, 10.6 mm.; adpressed limbs fail to touch by 2 mm.
In the collection of the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University
of California (No. 3985) is still another puzzling specimen (PL 38,
Taylor: The Gent s Ki meces
445
lit:-. 3) from Carbondale, Amador county, California. The specimen
is an adult female having a much elongated body and relatively
shorter limbs. The dorsolateral lines are evident, bordered on their
inner side by a strongly defined series of deep black dots on the
second scale row. The ground color is deep olive-brown. The lateral
brown stripe is distinct but not of solid color. The lateral light
line is also evident.
Measurements: snout to vent, 89 mm.; to eye, 6 mm.; to ear,
14.8 mm.; axilla to groin, 53 mm.: width of head, 10 mm.; length
of head, 13.2 mm.; body width, 12 mm.; foreleg, 20.2 mm.; hind
leg. 29 mm.; longest toe, 9.5 mm.; adpressed limbs fail to overlap
by 8 mm.
# trubr/cauddes
Fig. 72. Distribution of Eumeces gilberti gilberti Van Denburgh and
E. <j. rubricaudatus suhsj >. nov., in Southwestern United State-.
446 The University Science Bulletin
Locality records:
California :
Mariposa Co.: Bear Valley, west slope of the Sierra (U.S.N.M. 1) ;
Pleasant Valley, 600 ft. (Cal. U. 6) ; Coulterville, 3,200 ft. (Cal. U. 9) ;
near Kinsley, 2,800 ft. (Cal. U. 4) ; Smith Creek, Coulterville (Cal.
U. 1); Yosemite Valley, 4,000 ft. (Cal. U. 2) (Stanford 4); Anderson
Flat, 3,400 ft. (Cal. U. 1); Dudley, 3,000 ft. (Cal. U. 1); Inspiration
Point, Yosemite (Stanford 2); between Groveland and Crockers
(Stanford 1) ; four miles from Wawona, 4,500 ft. (Stanford 1).
Madera Co.: Raymond, 940 ft. (U.S.N.M. 1) (Cal. U. 5); Jesbel, 540
ft.. 8 miles NW Raymond (Cal. U. 1); Norfolk (Cal. U. 1).
Tulare Co.: Monache Meadows, Sierra Nevada (Cal. U. 1); Strath-
more (Cal. U. 1); White River (Stanford 1).
Stanislaus Co.: La Grange, 6,054 ft. (Cal. U. 1) ; East Cooperstown, on
county line between this and Tuolumne Co. (Cal. U. 1); Berkeley,
Tuolumne Camp (Cal. U. 1).
Inyo Co.: Panamint Mts. head of Willow creek, 7,000 ft. (U.S.N.M. 1);
Argus range, Manturango Spring (U.S.N.M. 2) ; Johnson Canon,
6,000 ft. (Cal. U. 1); Panamint Mts. (Cal. U. 3) (C.A.S. 1); Honopee
Canon (Field 5); Beveridge Canon (Field 1); Coso Valley (Field 1).
Arizona :
Yavapai Co.: Prescott (U.S.N.M. 1).
Eumeces gilberti rubricaudatus subsp. now
(Plate 39; Figs. 72, 73)
SYNONYMY
1882. Eumeces skiltonianus Yarrow. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, 1882, p. 41 (part.);
Stejneger, N. Ahum. Fauna, No. 7, 1893, pp. 201-212 (part.) (Fort Tejon) ; Van
Denburgh, Ore. Papers Calif. Acad. Sci., V, 1897, pp. 144-147 (part.) (Fort Tejon);
MeLain. Contr. N. Amer. Herp., 1899, p. 10 (Chihuahua Mts.) ; Van Denburgh, Proc.
Calif. Acad. Sci., (4), III, Jan. 17, 1912, p. 147 (Lytle creek, San Bernardino county);
Atsatt, Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., XII, No. 3. 1913 (part.) (San Bernardino Mts.);
Camp, Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., XVII, No. 7, Dec. 28, 1916, p. 72 (part.); Grinnell
and Camp, Univ. Calif. Pub. Zool., XVII, No. 10, July 11, 1917, pp. 175, 176.
1908. ? Eumeces gilberti Grinnell. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., V, No. 1, pp. 163, 164 (non
Van Denburgh) (Santa Ana Canon, San Bernardino Mts.).
1917. Plestiodon skilt.onianus Grinnell and Camp. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., XVII, No. 10,
pp. 175. 176 (part.); Van Denburgh, Occ. Papers Calif. Acad. Sci., X, 1922, pp.
578-587 (part.), pi. 56 (Eumeces skiltonianus).
In examining the preserved skinks from the region about Fresno
and localities to the south, it was noted that, instead of having the
blue tails typical of skiltonianus or gilberti gilberti, the young skinks
have tails which lack all dark pigment and are of a uniform whitish
or pinkish color. Tags or published data called attention to the
fact that the tails of specimens just captured were red or pink. It
was furthur noted that these young bore the scale characters of
a large form which likewise occurred in the San Joaquin Valley
and the region to the south as far as Baja California — a form re-
Taylor: The Gem s Eumeces 447
sembling gilfa Hi gilberti in size and both skiltonianus and gilberti
gilberti in numerous scale characters. There were, however, in the
upper part of the range no blue-tailed young of any kind, and in
the southern part of the range the only blue-tailed forms were those
of the skiltonianus occurring in southern California (parietals
usually enclosing interparietal, and usually only seven supralabials).
In this region were also occasional young specimens with uniformly
colored, red or pink tails, differing from the blue-tailed form in
lacking an enclosed interparietal and in having usually eight instead
of seven upper labials. Other less obvious differences, such as in
the color details of the upper labial line, greater width of the dorso-
lateral line and the higher average count of scales both under the
tail and from occiput to above vent, were evident.
That the two species gilberti rubricaudatus and skiltonianus occur
in the same general territory and maintain completely separate
identity, precludes any possibility of considering the former either
as a subspecies or as a color variety of skiltonianus.
Although some of the larger adults of gilberti rubricaudatus bear a
certain resemblance to some specimens of gilberti gilberti, I am not
certain that they should be regarded as subspecies, despite the ab-
sence of striking scale characters. It is obvious that the forms
occupy contiguous territory. It may be that the barrier is one of
altitude. Final judgment on the relationship of rubricaudatus and
and gilberti — whether specific or subspecific — must await thorough
collecting in the region where the two forms occupy contiguous terri-
tory or where their ranges overlap. A few problematic specimens
from the region of Calaveras and Jan Joaquin counties may offer
a clue to the relationship. However, this material is too meager to
draw fast conclusions. These specimens are discussed elsewhere.
Nevertheless, in this work I am regarding the forms as subspecies,
influenced in some measure by the opinions of Dr. Joseph Grinnell
and Dr. Jean Linsdale, who regard this as being the most probable
relation-hip.
Diagnosis. Young with four light yellowish or whitish lines, the
dorsolateral pair originating on anterior part of head, passing to
tail along the second and third scale rows, and occupying from one
half to four fifths of the second row; lateral line beginning on the
anterior labial- and passing straight back, involving all except upper
edge of auricular rim. thence passing to tail, covering the sixth
-rale row and edges of the adjoining rows; darker line below lateral
line very dim or entirely wanting; tail bright, uniform pink or red.
448
The University Science Bulletin
lacking dark pigment. Adults lacking all stripes, olive above, the
Males edged with brownish, the tail much lighter brown; entire
under surface of tail uniform light cream (in alcohol), or edges of
subcaudals may have a slight edging of lead color (in the southern
specimens). Upper labials normally eight (rarely seven) ; 24 to 26
scale rows, usually 24; parietals not in contact; scales occiput to
above vent 61-64 (average 62.3); nuchals more frequently two
than one (average 1.7) ; postmentals two; superciliaries seven; pre-
Fig. 73. Eumcces gilberti'rubricaudatus subsp. now Cal. U. No. 560; Old
Fort Tejon, Kern Co. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head
(parietal region drawn more elongate than actual). Actual head length,
13.2 mm.; width, 10.8 mm.
frontals in contact or not, usually the former. Adpressed limbs in
males may touch or overlap; in adult females they are separated.
Description of Type (C.A.S. No. 39002, Tehachapi Mts., Calif.).
Portion of rostral above small, less than half the size of the fronto-
nasal; supranasals moderate, forming a suture; prefrontals larger
than frontoparietals, forming normally a median suture; frontal
longer than its distance from the tip of the snout, touching three
supraoculars ; frontoparietals small, quadrangular, forming a median
suture; parietals not enclosing the elongate interparietal; two pairs
of nuchals, the anterior with much the greater depth; nasal small,
at least partly divided; postnasal present; anterior loreal much
higher than posterior, touching the frontonasal; posterior loreal
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces 449
very much longer than high; four supraoculars; seven superciliaries,
the anterior large and in contact with the prefrontal; two nresub-
oculars; three postsuboculars ; primary temporal rather large, touch-
ing lower secondary; upper secondary temporal large, distinctly
wider posteriorly than anteriorly; tertiary temporal touching upper
secondary, narrow, elongate, separated from the ear by small
granules; upper labials eight-seven, the last very much larger than
the adjoining labial and separated from the ear by a pair of post-
labials and a pair of very minute scales; mental rather small, with
a somewhat larger labial border than rostral; two postmentals; five
or six lower labials; three pairs of chinshields; large postgenial
bordered by a scale longer than wide; eye moderate, about equal
in length to its distance from the nostril; ear typical, with two well-
defined auricular lobules; about 21 scales around ear.
Scales in 31 rows about the neck, 33 rows at axilla, 26 rows about
middle of body, and 14 rows about tail at first widened subcaudal;
scales on sides parallel; the two median dorsal rows not or but
slightly widened; subcaudals widened.
Limbs moderately long, barely touching when adpressed. Other
characters not mentioned are generally as in Emmas gilberti
gilberti.
Color. The young are generally brownish-black above. The
dorsolateral greenish or gray-white lines arise on or near the rostral
and continue back to the base of the tail, occupying about three
fourths or four fifths of the second scale row and the inner half of
the third, with the edges of each scale slightly darker. The dorsal
blackish ground color extends beyond the base of the tail, a distance
about equal to the length of the hind leg. The lateral white or
cream line begins on the third upper labial (the first and second
brown-white), passes under the eye. widens on the posterior labials
and involves all except the extreme upper and lower margins of the
ear. On the sides of the body it occupies most of the fifth and a
half of the sixth scale rows; no dark line is present below the lateral.
The lateral region between the light lines is slightly darker than
the back; the belly is gray or bluish-gray. The lower labials, the
region below the ear. the breast, under side of the arms and legs
and the entire under side of the tail are light cream or pinkish
cream. The tail is red or pink in life. This color begins to dis-
appear about the second or third year, and by the fourth year (50
to GO mm.) it appears to be lost entirely (preserved material).
The adults vary somewhat, but the general color is uniform olive
29—1123
450
The University Science Bulletin
brown, each scale showing a slightly browner edge. Traces of a
lateral dark stripe may persist until a length of 80 mm. is at-
tained in females, but is probably lost earlier in males. The head
apparently does not assume the uniform red coloration found in
gilberti gilbert i; at least there is no suggestion of the typical colora-
tion of preserved gilberti gilberti in the preserved specimens of
gilberti rubric -audatus. There is, at least in many specimens, a total
absence of the lines on the under side of the tail typical of skil-
tonianus and gilberti.
Measurements of Eumeces gilberti rubricaudatus subsp. nov.
Museum
Number*.
Sex
Snout to vent. . .
Tail
Snout to eye. . . .
Snout to ear
Snout to foreleg
Axilla to groin. .
Width of head . .
Length of head.
Postanal width .
Foreleg
Hind leg
Longest toe
C.A.S.
40301
U.S.N.M.
20385
101
19.5
33
53
16.5
17
13.5
25
36
13
96
8
20
32
50
16.2
17.3
12
23.2
32
12
U.S.N.M.
11799
d"
86
6
16
30
53
14.6
15
11
19
27
8.5
C.A.S.
39002
88
tl25
6.3
16
28
55
12
15
9
21
29
9.2
C.U.
5560
9
87
5.5
14.5
25
54
10.8
13.2
8
20.2
25
6.2
C.A.S.
39001
51
3
9.8
17.4
29
7
9.5
6
12
18
6
C.A.S.
35363
yg.
39
66
2.5
9
15
19
6
7.6
4
10.6
15
5
* 40301 is from Campo, San Diego Co.; 20385, from Witch Creek San, Diego .Co., Cal.;
11799 Fresno, Cal.; 39002, Fresno; 5560, Tehachapi, Grapevine Or., Old tort lejon, rfyuui,
Tehachapi Mts. ; 35363, Witch Creek, San Diego Co.
f Regenerated tip.
Variation. The length of the limbs of this form, as is true of
many species of Eumeces, differs in the males and females. In
the latter the limbs are actually shorter and the axilla to groin
measurement is greater than in males having the same snout to
vent measurement. It appears that there is a slight difference in
specimens from the northern and southern part of the range. The
material is especially inadequate for drawing conclusions, but it
appears that the specimens in the San Joaquin Valley are more
slender than those in San Diego Co., although the young are
practically indistinguishable. The limbs touch and overlap slightly
in males and are more or less widely separated when adpressed in
females.
The interparietal is apparently never or but rarely enclosed by
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 451
the parietals. The scales from the occiput to above anus vary be-
tween 61 and 64 (average 62.3) ; scale rows on neck, from 27 to 30,
slightly higher in the southern part of the range; scales about
middle of body, 24 to 26, 24 occurring more than twice as frequently
as 25 or 26. The upper labials are 8-8 or 8-7; only two specimens
examined had 7-7. The nuchals are most frequently 2-2 or 2-1,
the formula 1-1 occurring in only 6 percent of the specimens ex-
amined. The frontonasal is in contact with the frontal in about
40 percent of the specimens examined, and is invariably in contact
with the first loreal. The lamellae under the fourth toe vary be-
tween 14 and 18; the higher numbers are more frequent. The super-
ciliaries vary between six and eight, seven being the most frequent
number.
Distribution. The distribution of the red-tailed form is from
Fresno Co., Cal., south through the lower part of the San Joaquin
Valley, through the Tehachapi Mts. south to northern Baja Cali-
fornia. Much collecting in the southern region will have to be done
before more exact limits can be traced. (See Fig. 72 for dis-
tributional map.)
Locality records:
California :
Fresno Co.: (U.S.N.M. 1).
fFriant: (M.C.Z. 6).
Tulare Co.: (Cal. No. 7403).
Kern Co.: ? Fort Tejon (U. S. N. M. 4, also with label, Cape St. Lucas
B. Cal.); Grapevine Canon, Old Fort Tejon (Cal. U. 1); Old Fort
Tejon (U.S.N.M. 1); Tehachapi Mts. (Cal. U. 1) (U.S.N.M. 1)
(C.A.S. 1); Rosedale (Cal. U. 2).
Riverside Co.: Strawberry Valley, 5,500 ft., San Jacinto Mts. (Cal. U. 1).
San Diego Co.: Santa Ysabel, Witch creek (U.S.N.M. 1); Witch creek
(C.A.S. 1); Jacuraba Hot Springs (U.S.N.M. 1); Mussey (K.U. 1);
Chihuahua Mts. (Stanford 1); ? Campo (C.A.S. 1); Doane Valley,
Palomar Mt. (Klauber 1); Deerhorn Flat (S.D.S.N.H. 1); Lawson
Valley (S.D.S.N.H. 1).
QUADRILINEATUS GROUP
This group includes a single medium-sized eastern Asiatic species,
characterized by the absence of a median line or bifurcating head
lines. A dorsolateral and lateral line are present.
Median scale rows widened, number around body reduced to 20.
Most of the palpebral scales in contact with the superciliaries.
Three pairs of nuchals; parietals enclose interparietal. Limbs elon-
gate, overlapping. No small scales behind insertion of femur.
452 The University Science Bulletin
It, seems probable that this is an Asiatic relative of the Skil-
tonianus group. Unfortunately a very limited amount of material
has been available and not a single young specimen has been seen.
Eumeces quadrilineatus (Blyth)
(Plate 40, Fig. 1; Figs. 74, 75)
SYNONYMY
1853. Plcstiodon quadrilineatum Blyth. Journ. Asiatic Soc. Bengal, XXII, 1853 p. 652
(type description; type locality, China [Hongkong ?], J. C. Bowr.ng Esq., Coll.; type
in Asiatic Society Collection).
1860. Eumeces quadrivirgatus Hallowell. Proc. Acad. Nat. So. Phila., I860, p. o02 (Hong-
kong, collected by Mr. Wright, May 4, 1854; an apparently older tag in the bottle
gives Stimpson as collector).
1864 Mabouia quadrilineata Giinther. Rept. Brit. India. 1864, pp. 82, 83. pi. X, fig. 3
(redescription); Theobald, Cat. Rept. Mus. Asiat, Soc. Bengal (extra number Journ.
Asiat. Soc. Bengal, No. CXLVD, 1866, p. 24 (Hongkong).
1879. Eumeces quadrilineatus David. Jour, de mon Trois. Voy. d'Explor. dans lEmp.
Chinois I & II Paris, 1875; Bocourt, Miss. Sci. Mexique, Rept., Liv. 6, 18,9, p. 423,
pi XXII D fig'. 5 (Cambodia; specimen in the Paris Museum); Boulenger, Cat. Rept.
Brit Mus., 1887, p. 381 (redescription, Hongkong); Giinther, Ann. Mus Z°ol. St.
Petersbourg, I, 1896, pp. 199-219 (Szechuan) ; Werner, Abh. K. Bayer Akad. Wiss.
II Kl XXII, Bd. II, Abt., 1903, pp. 343-384 ("Szetschwan," Kwangtung) ; Mocquard,
La Revue Co oniale, July, 1906, (1907), p. 37; Mell, Arch. Naturg 88 Abt ,10 He
19,0 pp 100-134; Schmidt, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., LIV, Art. 3 p. 428, fig. 12
ctc'ripti'on of a specimen from Hainan with figure of head); Smith Journ Siam
Soc Nat. Hist., Suppl., VIII, No. 1, Dec, 1929, p. 49 (Muak Lek near Korat, Siam
Manson Mts., Tonkin); Mell, Beitr. zur Faun. Sin., IV, Grundz. Okol Chin. Rep .
Berlin-Leipzig, 1929, pp. 11, 27, 28, 209; Gee, Bull. Dept. B.ol. inching Univ., I,
No. 1, 1929, p. 63.
History The type of Eumeces quadrilineatus, collected (presum-
ably on Hongkong) by J. C. Bowring, Esq., reached the collection
of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, and was described briefly by E.
Blyth in the journal of that society in 1853 as Plestiodon quad-
rilineatum. Blyth notes a similarity of this form to Plestiodon
laticeps of America. When Theobald prepared his catalogue of the
reptiles of the Asiatic Society of Bengal (1866), he notes this speci-
men as follows: "M. [abouia] quadrilineata, Blyth J. A. S. XXII,
652 (labeled Plestiodon quinquelincatum, L, North Carolina, Rev.
F Fitzgerald) a. Fine specimen— Hongkong— J. C. Bowring, Esq."
It may be presumed that a part of the type series (certainly topo-
types) were sent to the British Museum, for Giinther in 1864 had
available two specimens, likewise collected by J. C. Bowrmg in
Hongkong. .
Specimens of this species were collected May 4, 1854, m Hong-
kong by Mr. Wright (a tag in the container also credits the speci-
men to Stimpson) and these specimens reached the United States
National Museum prior to 1860 when Hallowell published a descrip-
tion of the form under the name Eumi ct s quadrivirgatus, apparently
Taylor: The Genus Eume< es 453
unaware that the species had already been described by Blyth.
This specimen (U.S.N.M. 7498) is still extant, but in poor condition.
It is softened, and most of the scales have slipped, and to a large
extent the color pattern is obscured.
Bocourt (1879) lists a specimen from Cambodia, French Indo-
China, then in the Paris Museum of Natural History. Schmidt
(1927) reports a specimen from Hainan, and Smith (1929) reports
the discovery of the species near Korat, Siam.
I believe that there arc but two specimens in American museums,
one. Xo. 30197, in the American Museum of Natural History, and
the type specimen (U.S.N.M. 7498) of Eumeces quadrivirgatus. I
was unsuccessful in obtaining the species in my collecting on Hong-
kong.
Diagnosis. A medium-sized species, characterized by a pair of
dorsolateral greenish-white lines beginning on the rostral, and fol-
lowing the second scale row to some distance on the tail; a lateral
light line from the labials passes through the lower part of the ear
and continues to the groin; ventral surfaces white.
One postnasal; two postmentals; three pairs of chinshields, with
a very large postgenial which is bordered by narrow, elongate scales;
seven upper labials (rarely eight), the last largest; four supraocu-
lars; parietals enclose the interparietal; superciliaries in contact
with the upper palpebrals; outer preanals overlap inner; subcaudals
widened; granular scales in the axilla; none behind the hind leg;
fingers and toes with an intercalated series of scales on the outer
side of digits (making three rows surrounding the toes) ; terminal
lamellae not tightly bound about the base of the claws; twenty scale
rows about the middle of the body.
Description (from AMNH No. 30197, collected in the mountains
south of Nodoa, Hainan). Snout moderately short, the portion of
the rostral visible above less than half the size of the frontonasal;
supranasals large, forming a median suture, touching the postnasal
and first loreal; frontonasal large, broader than long, touching the
anterior loreal; prefrontal- forming a relatively broad median su-
ture, and forming sutures with the frontonasal, frontal, posterior
loreal, first supraocular, first superciliary and the anterior loreal,
the length of the sutures in the order named; frontal relatively
short, obtusely angulate at both ends, shorter than its distance
from the end of the snout; frontoparietals elongate, larger than the
prefrontals or interparietal, forming a median suture; interparietal
small, enclosed by the large parietals; three pairs of nuchals, the
454
The University Science Bulletin
anterior shorter transversely, but wider (longitudinally) than the
two succeeding pairs.
Nasal moderate, divided, the sutures from nostril reaching the
supranasal and first labial; the nostril pierced posterior to the
rostrolabial suture; postnasal small, touching two labials; anterior
loreal high and narrow, somewhat higher than the posterior, which
is large and longer than high; seven-eight superciliaries, the an-
terior slightly larger than the posterior; a small square preocular,
and two small postoculars; four supraoculars, the three anterior
touching the frontal; two presuboculars and four postsuboculars;
Fig. 74. Eumcces quadrilineatus (Blyth). A.M.N.H. No. 30197; South
mountains, Nodoa, Hainan. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of
head. Actual head length, 14 mm.; width, 12 mm.
most of the upper palpebrals touch superciliaries; four enlarged
scutes on lower eyelid, separated from the subocular by three rows
of granular scales; primary temporal square, touching the triangular
lower secondary temporal narrowly; upper secondary temporal
large, slightly wider posteriorly (broken on the left side into two
parts) ; tertiary temporal touches the upper secondary but is sepa-
rated from the nuchal by a single scale, and from the auricular
opening by two scales; seven upper labials (eight on left side), the
first normally not larger than others preceding the subocular;
seventh labial very large, separated from the ear by two pairs of
postlabials (on left side the two lower scales of each pair fused) ;
auricular lobules two, not conspicuously enlarged; about eighteen
scales surround the ear.
Mental large, with a labial border much longer than that of the
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
455
rostral; six lower Initials; two postmentals, the second largest; three
pairs of chinshields, the posterior largest, the anterior pair in con-
tact; the postgenial scale is especially large, bordered on the inner
side by two very narrow, elongate scales.
Body scales in parallel rows, the two median rows very distinctly
widened; fifty-four scales in a row from parictals to above vent.
Scale rows about neck behind car, 30; on constricted portion of
neck, 26; in axillary region, 30; about middle of body, 20; 14 about
the base of the tail. Scales in the postauricular, posthumeral,
axillary and postfemoral regions with several (three to six) minute
pits. Fifteen scales about the insertion of the forearm; wrist tu-
bercle double, conical; three conical palmar tubercles, the basal
digital lamellae conical, as are certain subarticular lamellae. Lamel-
lar formula for fingers: 6; 9; 14; 13; 8 (left hand amputated ). A
small area of granular scales in axilla. Scales about insertion of
hind limb, 19; heel with two conical tubercles, separated by a row
of granules, the inner preceded by another conical tubercle; outer
part of sole with rather large imbricating scales; basal lamellae
tubercular; lamellar formula for toes: 6; 12; 14; 19; 14. Six pre-
anals, the two median greatly enlarged, the outer smaller scales
overlapping the inner; subcaudals greatly widened; lateral postanal
scale small, not or but slightly differentiated. Adpressed limbs
overlap the length of seven scales; postfemoral scales not differ-
entiated.
Color. Back dark gray-brown, the head more yellowish-brown
Measurements of Eumeces quadrilineatus
(BIyth)
A.M.N.H.
30197
&
Type
Brit. M.*
Sex
Snout to vent
73
63 reg.
4.8
14
26
40
12
22
28
10.2
70
121
55
Tail
85
Snout to eve
Snout to ear
Axilla to groin
Width of head
8
15
Hind leg
24
22
*Boulenger, 1887, p. 381. Hongkong.
456
The University Science Bulletin
with a slightly darker area in the interparietal region; a silvery
dorsolateral line extends from the parietals to more than halfway
the length of the tail, covering the greater part of the second scale
row as far as the tail, and here it encroaches on the median scale
row; the lateral line can be traced from the lower edge of the ear
along the side a short distance where it becomes lost in the silvery-
gray lateral coloration; below uniform dirty brownish-cream. Area
between the lateral and dorsolateral line of the same color as back.
Variation. The scale characters given in this description differ
in no pertinent detail from data given in other descriptions. The
type of Eumeces quadrivirgatus Hallowell has the following char-
acters: nuchals, 2-3; the number of supraoculars touching the
frontal is two on one side, three on the other; superciliaries, 7-7.
The formula of the body scales is: 30 behind ear; 27 neck; axillary
region, 27; middle of body, 20. Lamellae under the fourth toe, 19-
20. The postgenial very large, bordered on inner side by a scale
wider than long, and followed by three narrow scales.
The dorsolateral light line begins on the rostral, continues back,
occupying a little more than half the second scale row, but is
nearer the inner than outer side; the lateral line borders the lower
edge of the ear, then follows along the middle of the fifth scale row.
The area between the dorsolateral and the lateral lines is a deeper
brown than the back; there is a brownish stripe below the lateral
light line. The abdominal scales show slightly darker areas. The
tail is broken.
Fig. 75. Distribution of Eumeces quadrilineatus (Blyth), in
Southeastern Asia.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 457
Distribution. The species is known from Siam, French Indo-
China, southern China and Hainan. It appears to be rare.
Locality n fords:
Siam: Muak Lek near Korat (Brit. Mus. 1); Doi Nang Ka Mt., 20 miles
north Cheingmai (Brit. Mus. 1, M. Smith Coll.).
French Indo-China: Manson Mts. Tonkin ::. 1.000 ft. (Brit. Mus. 1); Cam-
bodia ( Paris Mus. D.
China:
Kwangtung: (Z.S.S. Munchen 10); Hongkong (Brit. Mus. 2) (Asiat.
Soc. Bengal Mus. 1; type, Bowring Coll.); Hainan (A.M.N.H. 1).
Szechwan: (Z.S.S. Munchen 16) (David. 1875) (Gunther, 1896).
THE BREVIROSTRIS GROUP
The species associated in this group include Eumeces dugesii,
colimensis, dicei, ochoterenae, indubitus and brevirostris. This
group, which is probably most closely related to the Skiltonianus
group, appears to be confined to Mexico.
The group may be characterized as follows: Small or medium-
sized species, in which tin' scale bordering the postgenial is wider
than long: there is but a single postmental scale, and the postnasal
is wanting. In most of the species the seventh labial is in contact
with the upper secondary temporal (variable in ochoterenae) .
The basic color pattern is four-lined, but there is a strong
tendency to reduce the lines posteriorly in certain species. There
is no trace of a median line, or lines on the head. Usually the dorso-
lateral lines are separated by more than two whole and two half
-cale rows (less in ochoterenae) .
The relationship with the Skiltonianus group is shown in the
primary color pattern; the tendency for the interparietal to be
enclosed by parietals; and the tendency for the large last labial
to form a suture with the upper secondary temporal (occurs in
lagunensis and as an occasional anomaly in skiltonianus).
Key to the Species of the Brevirostris Group
A. Supraoculars 3; subcaudals visually less than !».">; ovoviviparous; scale rows 24; two
pairs of nuchals; parietals enclose interparietal: five-six superciliaries; primary temporal
small; seventh labial forms a suture with the upper secondary temporal, the lower
secondary small; eleven-twelve lamellae under fourth toe; two supraoculars touch
frontal; dorsolateral and lateral lines lost on back and side in young and adults; max.
size 67 mm. (Guanajuato and Michoacan, Mexico) Eumeces dugesii Thominot, 47l>
\ \ >upraoculars four.
B. Frontal in contact with interparietal; limbs much enlarged, broadly overlapping
when adpressed; prefrontals separated; two pairs of nuchals; primary temporal
absent or fused with upper secondarj : seventh labial broadly in contact with tin-
upper secondary temporal; lower secondary temporal | dorsolateral lines
broad, continue to tail, separated by ei<r'it scale rows; two or three supraoculars
• ch frontal; max. size 69 mm Colima, Mexico. ...Eumect its Taylor, 47^
458
The University Science Bulletin
BB. Frontal not in contact with interparietal.
C. Primary temporal wanting or fused with upper secondary temporal; lower
secondary temporal wanting; 22-24 scile rows; eleven scales about ear
opening; parietals do not enclose interparietal; last labial broadly in contact
with upper secondary tern jor il; tivilve li.-n3llae unler fourth toe: dorso-
lateral line to tail; lateral line to ear; adpressed legs very widely sepa-
rated (IS scales); max. size, 47 mm. (Northeastern Mexico).
Eumeces dicei Ruthven and Gaige, 482
CC. Primary temporal present; lower secondary temporal present but small;
seventh labial in contact with the upper secondary temporal (except in cer-
tain specimens of ochoterenae, in which case the parietals are not enclosed,
and the primary temporal does not approach the size of the upper secondary
temporal).
E. Dorsolateral lines broad, occupying outer two thirds of second scale
row and inner half of third, extending onto proximal third of tail; a
lateral line passes to arm, involving lower edge of ear; bluish color of
tail retained more or less in adults; 22-24 scale rows, usually 22; nu-
chals, two pairs; 54 scales from parietals to above anus; parietals do
not enclose interparietal; upper secondary temporal sometimes in
contact, sometimes not, with last labial; twelve lamellae under fourth
toe; body small, slender; max. size 56 mm. (Southern Mexico.)
Eu?nec(s ochoterenae Taylor, 485
EE. Dorsolateral lines longer or shorter, but if extending to tail, follow
third row of scales, leaving lines separated by four whole scale rows.
F. Larger robust form; 22-24 scale rows; parietals enclosing inter-
parietal; lateral line to ear; dorsolateral line not extending back
of shoulder; tail blue in young, color lost in adult. (Southern
part of Mexican Plateau Eumeces indubitus Taylor, 466
FF. Usually smaller, extremely variable; parietal enclosed or not;
lateral line to ear or farther; (if only to ear, dorsolateral line
usually more or less distinct for more than half the length of
body). (Southern part Mexican Plateau.)
Eumeces brevirostris (Gunther), 459
Fig. 76. Distribution of the species of the Brevirostris group in Mexico.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 459
Eumeces brevirostris (Gunther)
(Plate 41; Figs. 76, 77)
SYNONYMY
1860. Mabouia brevirostris Gunther. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, isco, |,p. 316, 317 (type
description; type locality, Oaxaca, Mexico); Ann. <fc Mag. Nat. Hist., 1860, p. 442,
pi. VI; Carman, Bull. Essex Inst., V, Jan. 9, 1884, p. 16 (listed under Eumeces).
1879. Eumeces brevirostris Bocourt. Miss. Sci. Mexique et Cent. Amer., Kept., Liv. VI,
1879, pp. 439-440, pi. XXIIA. fig. 7, 7a, 7b, and pi. XXIIE, fig. la (complete
description); Cope, Proc. Amer. Phil. Soc, XXII, Jan. to Oct., 1885, p. 170 (Key);
Gunther, Biol. Cent. Amer., Rept. Batr., 1885, p. 32, pi. 22, fig. b; Boulenger, Cat.
Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 379 (Oaxaca; Ciudad; Forrer Coll.); Cope, Bull. U. S.
Nat. Mus., No. 32, 1887, p. 46 (part.) (Vera Cruz, Tehuantepec, Oaxaca; record for
"Valley of Mexico" or "Toluca" is Eumeces copei Taylor) ; Cope, Ann. Rept. U. S.
Nat. Mus., 1898 (1900), p. 630 (Key); ? Gadow, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1905,
p. 218 (Eumeces brevirostris?).
Histori/. Albert Gunther described this species in 1860, under the
genus Mabouia, from a specimen collected in Oaxaca (presumably
the city), Mexico, by Auguste Salle, probably about 1855, and sent
to the British Museum. The single type is an adult. The type
description is very incomplete, the author comparing the species
with Mabouia agilis, stating that "The general arrangement of the
shields of the head being the same as in Mabouia agilis — it does not
appear necessary to give a detailed description." Bocourt (1879)
gives a careful description of the species from two topotypes col-
lected by Salle in Oaxaca, and states that the specimen is "en-
tierement identique au type unique." He fails to note the unusual
relationship of the temporals.
Boulenger (1887) redescribes the types specimen, giving some de-
tails omitted by Gunther, and records two additional specimens
collected by Alfonso Forrer in Ciudad (this is very probably a
village of that name near Durango, Durango, Mexico, situated on
the trail between Mazatlan and Durango).
Mr. H. W. Parker, who courteously examined the type for me,
-tates in a letter: "There were only three specimens in the British
Museum when the Biologia was written and of these only one with
a complete tail is the type. Consequently the figure must have been
drawn either from this specimen or from imagination. Actually, the
enlarged drawing of the head scales is most inaccurate; for instance,
the length of the frontoparietal is only contained once and a quarter
in the interparietal length instead of as shown, and the relationship
of the first supraocular to the frontal is more as shown in the small
figure to the right than as depicted in the large one."
The specimen which was described by Cope (1885, p. 387) as
Eumeces brevirostris var, is a specimen of Eumeces copei Taylor.
The United States National Museum obtained three specimens
460 The University Science Bulletin
from Francis Sumichrast (Nos. 30213, 30089; 39089). E. W.
Nelson and E. A. Goldman obtained a typical specimen at La
Parada, Oaxaca (USNM No. 46682). It is from this specimen that
the following description is taken. A few other specimens are in
museums; these are listed in the locality records. Whether the
specimens in foreign museums are identified correctly I cannot say,
since I have not seen them. In many cases no descriptions of these
have been published, the lists having been furnished to me in letters
by curators of collections in various museums. Boulenger has, I
believe, erroneously placed Eumeces dugesii Thominot as a syno-
nym of this species. (Note remarks under that species.)
Diag7iosis. The dorsolateral line originates on the rostral and
continues back a variable distance on back; the lateral line may ex-
tend to tail, or terminate in front of ear; seventh labial very large,
forming a broad suture with upper secondary temporal; lower sec-
ondary temporal widely separated from primary; tertiary temporal
present or absent. Scale rows, 22 or 24; no postnasal; one post-
mental; seven upper labials; prefrontals in contact or not; parietals
enclose interparietal or not; two pairs of nuchals, the anterior much
the larger; limbs short, widely separated when adpressed; post-
genial bordered by a scale wider than long; palm with its largest
tubercle at base of inner finger.
Description of species (from U.S.N.M. No. 46682 from La Parada,
Oaxaca, Mexico; Coll. Nelson and Goldman, August 19, 1894).
Adult male: Portion of rostral visible above, distinctly smaller than
frontonasal; supranasals large, approaching the size of first loreal,
forming a median suture; frontonasal large, broader than deep,
touching anterior loreals laterally; prefrontals large, touching both
loreals, also forming sutures with first supraocular, first superciliary,
forming a common median suture separating widely the frontonasal
from frontal; latter distinctly longer than its distance from the end
of the snout, not more than once and a half times as long as wide,
broadly in contact with three supraoculars, wider than the supra-
ocular region; frontoparietals relatively large, larger than pre-
frontals, forming a suture one third the length of the interparietal;
latter much longer than wide, not enclosed by the parietals, which
are large, their greatest length more than twice their greatest width.
Nasal very distinctly divided, the anterior and posterior parts
of about equal area; no postnasal; anterior loreal large, not higher
than posterior loreal, their upper and lower edges forming prac-
tically parallel lines anteriorly; posterior loreal trapezoidal; two
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 461
presuboculars, the anterior much the larger; a small quadrangular
preocular; seven superciliaries, the anterior largest; four postsub-
oculars; seven upper labials, four anterior to the subocular, of
which the third is largesl ; seventh labial about once and a half the
area of the sixth, forming a broad suture with the upper secondary
temporal; the single primary temporal is rectangular, less than one
third the size of the upper secondary but about two thirds the size
of the lower secondary; tertiary temporal narrow, entering ear; the
seventh labial followed by an elongate postlabial which enters the
ear; above this another smaller scale; two preauricular lobules;
five lower labials, last largest and followed by an elongate scale;
mental has same extent as rostral on labial border; postmental
single, wide; three pairs of chinshields, the second widest; the
third chinshield followed by two scales, a postgenial elongated
longitudinally, and a scale bordering the inner margin of the post-
genial, which is much wider than long; lower eyelid with four en-
larged opaque scales, separated from the subocular by (usually)
three series of small scales; most of the palpebral scales form sutures
with superciliaries; two well-developed pairs of nuchals, the an-
terior much the largest; 28 scales around neck behind the ear; 25
around more constricted part of the neck; 30 scales behind arm, and
24 rows around middle of body; 14 about tail just posterior to anus;
six scales border the anus anteriorly, median pair enlarged, with
Two smaller scales on each side, the outer overlapping the inner;
subcaudal scales widened, 80 from anus to tip (the last seven are
regenerated but differ but little from other scales) ; the median
series of >cales on back are slightly wider than the lateral scales;
usually two or three minute pits on the scales on sides of neck and
on anterior part of body; on the posthumeral and postfemoral
region the pits are usually more numerous.
The limbs are short and frail ; when adpressed they fail to meet ;
lamellar formula of fingers: 5; 8; 10; 10: .V, of toe 5; 9; 11; 14;
7; a fairly well-developed wrist tubercle; palm with scattered larger
tubercles, the largest at the base of the inner toe; terminal lamellae
(scales) not tightly bound about claws; sole of foot short, the heel
with four plates; scales about ear. 14; scales from occiput to above
anus, 61.
Color. Above generally bronze-brown, each scale with a some-
what darker area, but not forming distinct dark lines; head dark
black-brown; dorsolateral line of a light yellowish-brown begins
on the rostral, follows sides of head, then passes onto the second
462
The University Science Bulletin
8-
o
go
E3
<D
to
03
U.S.N.M.
30213
9
go
O — i
1^ CI
LO
-f
11
9.2
12.5
7.2
15.6
20.4
7.3
43
Brit. M.
Type
CO CO
LO CN 05
C5 — I
■ LO — •
i-H <N
U.S.N.M.
30089
9
t — i
• •* O 1-H "*
ffl tN i-h
CN CO CO lo
ococNtOLOor-o
-< -H rt C) ■*
U.S.N.M.
46682
ci mm
CO-CH-Hf-HTfO-HOJ—ir^-faiCOCR
io ffl fi h o*-- ih ^h^h co
|c*-.
I^ CO
IN lo
• OJ
-H Ol 00
CO 00
E.H.T.
1688
CO 00 O "I*
LO -H H
LO
OS 00 H CO <N CO co — <
U.S.N.M.
39098
9
oo co lo m
* - . .
-h CI O O CO OS OS 00 O lo (N t- CO CI
CI LO rH .-H CO rH ^h^H CO
A.M.N.H.
19270
yg-
C) to •*
C) LO CO CO
■* — 1
co
t- t» co
LO CI
1-H t* 441 CO
i-l — I CN
£
3
03
s
u
o>
-
0
01
J3
M
a
oi
O
a
01
>
0
-*-
+j
3
0
d
w
_0>
13
L.
o
o
43
3
o
a
L.
C3
0)
O
43
3
O
a
CO
01
>>
CD
o
43
3
O
d
CO
'5
-a
01
"3
+3
b
0
-a
03
01
-C
0
1
is
>>
■a
o
Xi
**~
o
-a
+3
■3
'%
'5
43
d
<
ill
_0
O
pH
b
.0
"3
0)
o
43
43
CO
01
be
d
o
d
'3
M
p
'3
o
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
463
scale row, later involving the edges of second and third and then
onto the third row where it continues to the tail, covering about
two thirds the width of a single scale row; below this a brown
stripe begins on nasal, follows back along head involving eye and
upper part of ear, continuing along the sides to the base of the
tail; this is about two and one half scales wide; it is bordered be-
low by a light line beginning near the tip of snout which follows
lower edge of the labials, then curves up slightly over the posterior
part of the labials, leaving a dark area along the lower edge; it
involves the lower third of the ear, then passes along the side of
body and base of tail, interrupted by insertion of hind leg; below
this a narrow brownish line, about same color as the deep lateral
brown stripe; below this the scales are ash to silver gray with
darker brown areas on the adjoining row; chin lighter, but flecked
with gray; under side of tail brownish; limbs brown, with some
silver flecks; toes with silver blotches on each dorsal lamella;
median preanal scales light. (Tail blue in young.)
Measurements of Eumeces brevirostris Giinther (Totalco V. C.)
Collection.
Number. .
Sex
Total length. . .
Snout to vent . .
Snout to foreleg.
Tail
Length of head.
Width of head . .
Width of body . .
Anal tail width .
Foreleg
Hind leg
Longest toe. . . .
Axilla to groin. .
T.-S.
_\-.sr,
yg-
T.-S.
2.-.SS
yg-
T.-S.
2584
yg-
T.-S.
2589
yg-
T.-S.
2583
?
T.-S.
25.S0
9
T.-S.
2581
&
T.-S.
2575
9
T.-S.
2577
9
67
28
31
74.5
31.5
87.5
35
122
50
53
53
56
56
10.2
n
11
12
15.7
16
15.5
17
16
39
5.2
6
43
5.8
52.5
5.8
72
7.3
7.4
8
8
8.3
4.3
5
5
5
7
7
7.3
7.2
7.8
4.2
5
5
5.2
7.3
8
7.2
8.8
8
2.6
3
3
3
5
4.8
5
5
5
6.4
7.5
6.4
6.8
11
11
11
11
11
9
9.8
10
10.3
15
15.2
16
15. S
15
3.8
4 3
4
4
5 7
5 6
5.4
5.4
5.7
16
16
16
18.5
31
33
31.2
33
34
T.-S.
2574
9
144
58
16.7
86
S.2
7.2
7.2
5.2
11
16.2
5.8
35 2
Variation: Specimens occurring in various localities in Mexico
differ rather distinctly from the typical form. Unfortunately large
series are wanting from all known localities except Totalco, V. C,
from which place a series of 19 specimens is available. When
sufficient material is at hand it is highly probable that certain of
4<i4
The University Science Bulletin
these will profitably be separated as species or subspecies. With
limited material it seems unwise to do so.
The following key will show the variation from the typical form:
A. Interparietal not enclosed by parietals.
B. Interparietal nol in contact with the frontal; frontal wider than supraocular
region.
C. Larger (maximum size 70 mm.); dorsolateral and lateral lines distinct or
more or less obscured posteriori}-; dorsolateral lines separated by four scale
rows and edges of adjacent rows; lateral brown stripe about width of two
and one half scale rows; 24 scale rows. Oaxaca specimens, typical.
CC. Smaller (maximum size 58 mm.).
D. Lateral line from third labial passes through ear, involving all but
upper edge; dorsolateral line becoming dimmer and tending to widen
to the second scale row rather than to fourth, and is then separated
from its fellow by less than four scale rows; 22-24 scale rows. Totalco,
V. C. (19 specimens).
DD. Either lower secondary temporal or tertiary temporal wanting; lateral
line on posterior labials not distinct beyond ear, and involving only
part of lower edge; dorsolateral line less than one scale row wide,
separated by four whole rows, and edges of adjacent rows; lateral
brown stripe covering width, of two and one half scale rows. Traces
of darker lines low on sides producing the effect of dotted lighter
lines. Specimen from Jalisco (La Cumbre de los Arrastrados, Talpa,
Mascota) (1 examined).
BB. Frontal anil interparietal in contact; the frontal distinctly narrower than the
supraocular region; dorsolateral stripes very distinct on body and on one third of
tail, following the second and third scale rows, separated by two whole and two
half scale rows; lateral line from snout to foreleg, involving only iowe'- edge of
ear; 24 scale rows. Specimen, Ruma Hidalgo, Oaxaca (A.M.N.H. No. 19270).
AA. Interparietal inclosed by parietals; 24 scale rows; dorsolateral line nearly one and one
half scale rows wide and separated throughout by four scale rows and edges of adjoin-
ing rows; lateral brown stripe about width of one and one half scale rows, covering all
the fifth row and edges of the adjoining rows; lateral line wide on posterior labials, in-
volving three fourths of ear, and is fairly distinct as far as the forearm, but on side is
very dim or lost in ventrolateral coloration. (Primary temporal fused to upper sec-
ondary in one specimen.) Tertiary temporal absent. Specimens, Coyote, Durango
(Field '■>); Sierra de Juanoaatlan, La Liguna, Jalisco (U.S.N.M. 1).
Fig. 77. Eumeces brevirostiis (Giinther). A.M.N.H. No. 19270, Oaxaca.
A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head length, 7.6
mm.; width, 7 mm.
Taylor: The Genus Evmeces 465
From the table of measurements and the key, it will be noted that
the specimens from the more southern localities are somewhat
larger, and have slightly longer limbs. In the series of 19 speci-
mens collected by Hobart Smith and myself at Totalco, Vera Cruz,
the largest specimen measures only 58.5 millimeters.
The variation in scalation observed in the series of 23 specimens
examined is as follows: Scale rows about neck behind ear, 27 to
29; about narrow part of the neck, 23 to 26, the numbers 26 and
l'.") about equal, each of the lesser numbers appearing once; scales
around the middle of body, 22 to 24, the number 22 occurring six
times, 23, four times and 24, thirteen times; scales from parietals
to above anus, 57 to 63, the number 59, twice, 60, three times, 61,
three times, 62, nine times, 63, six times. Upper labials 7-7, save
one with 6-7; the scales about the ear are usually 15, the number
occurring in 8 specimens on both sides, and 15-14 occurring 13 times.
One specimen had 15-16, another 14-13. No variation is observable
in the supraoculars and postmental; the postnasal is invariably
absent ; the superciliaries are usually six or seven, the higher num-
ber appearing most frequently.
A single specimen has an abnormally small interparietal, permit-
ting the parietals to form a union behind it. The frontonasal is
invariably broader than long, touching the first loreal. The fronto-
nasal forms a suture with the frontal in four cases; in 19 they are
separated by the junction of the prefrontals; three supraoculars
touch the frontal in all save three specimens, and in those, third
excluded by a minute distance. The lamellae under the fourth
toe vary between 11 and 14, the number 11 occurring 5 times;
12, eighteen times; 13, thirteen times, and 14, ten times; presub-
oculars two; postsuboculars three to five, three occurring 27 times;
four, 15 times; five, once. The lower secondary temporal is oc-
casionally wanting (fused with the tertiary). Occasionally the
tertiary is separated from the nuchal by a small scale.
Remarks. The specimens from near Totalco, V. C, were ob-
tained near the highway in a barren field, covered in part by an
old lava flow. The specimen- were found under lava rock. They
appeared to be very numerous in this locality, as the series of 19
was obtained in about three hours' collecting. Many that were
seen escaped. No other species of Eumeces was obtained in this
locality.
One of the specimens in the U. S. National Museum, No. 3021 3.
contains disintegrating eggs, with partially developed embryos
30—1123
466 The University Science Bulletin
The uterine walls have rotted and the eggs with the embryos are
loose in the body cavity. The embryos show no pigmentation.
A second specimen, U.S.N.M., No. 30089, has four much older
embryos, 26 mm. in length, which show some markings. Here, too,
the uterine walls have rotted and the young are floating in the
semiliquid yolk mass in the body cavity.
Distribution. As here considered the species ranges from Du-
rango and Jalisco to the south and east, reaching to Vera Cruz and
Oaxaca. It appears to be confined largely if not wholly to the
high plateau region.
Certain specimens in foreign museums have not been studied;
nor have I included the locality records since it seems likely that
more than one recognized species is identified under that name.
(See Fig. 76 for distributional map.)
Locality records:
Oaxaca: ''Oaxaca" (type locality; type Brit. M. 1, Salle Coll.); (Bocourt.
M.H.N.P. 1, Salle) (M.N.H.P. 2); La Parada (U.S.N.M. 1, Nelson and
Goldman Coll.); Tehuantepec (U.S.N.M. 2, Sumichrast Coll.).
Vera Cruz: Orizaba (U.S.N.M. 2, Sumichrast Coll.); Totalco (Taylor-Smith
19, Taylor-Smith Coll.).
Durango: Coyote (Field 3).
Jalisco: La Cumbre de los Arrastrados, Talpa, Mascota (Brit. Mus. 6, Buller
Coll.) (Senckb. 4, Buller Coll.) (Taylor 1. Buller Coll.) ; Sierra de Juanocat-
lan, La Laguna (U.S.N.M. 1).
Eumeces indubitus Taylor
(Plate 42; Figs. 70, 78)
SYNONYMY
1933. Eumeces indubitus Taylor. Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull., XXI, 1933, pp. 257-267, pis. 24,
25, fig. (type description; type locality, Mexico-Cuernavaca highway, 40 miles southeast
Mexico City [kilometer 63], near Cuernavaca, Morelos).
History. The specimens on which this species is based were col-
lected in pine forest in the high mountains between Mexico City and
Cuernavaca, July 0, 1932, at an elevation of about 10,000 feet.
The species was again encountered August 5 and 6, 1932, in western
Mexico (state), near Asuncion, in pine forest at an elevation of
about 9,000 feet, and in the state of Michoacan near Zitacuaro, in
a similar habitat. The specimens seemed very common in the pine
forest, but the distribution was not uniform, as no specimens were
found in several similar, near-by localities. In one near-by place
it was apparently wholly replaced by copei.
Diagnosis. A medium-sized, robust species; four supraoculars,
the three anterior in contact with the frontal; the parietals enclosing
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 467
a small interparietal; one postmental; no postnasal; the subcaudals
distinctly widened; seven upper labials; seven superciliaries ; the
seventh upper labial broadly in contact with the upper secondary
temporal; primary temporal small, widely separated from the small
lower secondary; 24 scale rows about middle of body; 57 to 61 scales
from occiput to above anus. Limits moderately large, but failing to
touch, even in young, when adpressed. Color above, olive to olive-
brown, with a short dorsolateral light line from rostral, the line
disappearing on the shoulder; a narrow labial light line terminating
at ear; no median light line or forking lines on the head; no lateral
line beyond ear.
Description of the type I adult male). Portion of rostral visible
above equal to about half the size of the frontonasal; supranasals
large, broadly in contact; frontonasal hexagonal, forming sutures
with loreals. and narrowly in contact with the frontal, forming its
longest sutures with prefrontals; latter narrowly separated, forming
sutures with first superciliary, both loreals and the anterior supra-
ocular; frontal longer than its distance from the end of the snout,
obtusely angular anteriorly, somewhat rounded posteriorly, some-
what narrowed in the middle, and only a little wider in the anterior
part than in the posterior; four supraoculars, the first longer than
wide, with an area scarcely less than the fourth, the three anterior
bordering the frontal; frontoparietals much larger than prefrontal-.
their common suture less than half their length; interparietal short
and broad, enclosed behind by the parietals, which are more than
twice as long as their greatest width; two pairs of nuchals, the
anterior pair somewhat the larger.
Nasal of moderate size, divided, the anterior part not as large as
the posterior part with nostril; anterior loreal distinctly higher than
long, higher than the posterior, which is considerably longer than
high; seven superciliaries, the anterior less than one and one half
times the size of the second; two subequal presuboculars; four
postsuboculars; primary temporal less than one fourth the size of
the upper secondary temporal; latter very broadly in contact with
the seventh labial, the suture more than half its length; -even upper
labials, four preceding the subocular, which is low and elongate;
seventh nearly double the size of the sixth, and separated from the
ear by a pair of small postlabials; tertiary temporal (the lower
secondary presumably wanting) -mall; ear surrounded by 16 scales;
the ear opening no larger than the first upper labial; six lower
labials, the last elongate; mental large, deep, with a distinctly
468
The University Science Bulletin
Fig. 78. Eumeces indubitus Taylor. E.H.T. and H.M.S. No. 1727. (1)
Lateral view of head; (2) dorsal view of head. Actual head length, 10mm.
(Certain differences in scalation from the type shown.)
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 469
larger labial border than rostral; one azygous postmental; three
pairs of chinshields, only one pair in contact; the postgenial large,
bordered on its anterior inner edge by a scale wider than long; eye
small; the lower eyelid with four or five enlarged opaque scales,
separated from the suboculars by at least three rows of granules;
two or three median palpebral scales directly in contact with supcr-
ciliaries, others separated by small granular scales.
Scales on the dorsal surface and sides about equal in size; 24
rows about the middle of the body; 29 rows about neck behind ear;
30 about the constricted portion of the neck; 30 about body in
axillary region; 15 rows about the base of the tail; 57 scales from
occiput to above the anus; scales under the tail two and one half
to three times as broad as long; median preanal scales large, broad,
with two small, scarcely differentiated scales on each side, the outer
Males overlapping inner; lateral postanal scale not or scarcely
differentiated; scales behind ear, about insertion of arm and in
axillary region, on posterior side of femur, behind insertion of hind
limbs, and along side of anus, with distinct pits; two small auricular
lobules.
Legs moderately large, separated when adpressed by a length of
three or four scales; a very small area of granular, axillary scales;
wrist tubercle flat, well differentiated; several larger rounded tu-
bercles on palm, mixed with smaller tubercles; lamellar formula
for fingers: 5; 8; 11; 10; 7. Heel bounded by five large, flattened,
tubercular scales, contiguous with or overlapping one or two dif-
ferentiated tubercles on sole; lamellar formula for toes: 5; 9; 11;
13; 9. Terminal lamellae (scales) on toes not tightly bound about
claws; no intercalated series of scales along the side of the fourth
toe.
Color in life. Above, light olive-brown, the head somewhat darker
brown; darker flecks in the median part of each scale, more promi-
nent posteriorly and tending to form dotted darker lines; a dorso-
lateral light line bordered on its inner edge with darker, begins on
rostral and continues on the side of the head and neck but loses its
identity on the shoulder; the two median scale rows are a shade
darker than the two adjoining rows on each side; beginning on the
side of the head is a dark blackish-brown stripe, the color not uni-
form, each scale with light bronze areas, the black concentrated on
the anterior part of the scale and tending to form an indistinct line
on each scale row; a cream line beginning on the rostral passes along
the lower edge of the first four labials, and through the middle of
470
The University Science Bulletin
the last three, the edges of the line clearly demarcated, terminating
in the lower anterior corner of the ear; below the dark lateral stripe
the ground color is grayish and the scales have darker areas forming
two or three very indistinct dotted lines; lower labials light, bor-
dered with darker; chin, lower side of neck and breast, light, a few
of the scales with darker flecks; hind legs darker than forelegs, each
scale with lighter flecking; tail bluish-gray above, lavender-blue
below; lamellae under toes dark.
Variation. The table, giving data from a part of the series avail-
able, shows the principal variation of this species as regards meas-
urements and scale variation.
The number of scale rows is 24 save in two cases where there are
but 22 rows; the number of upper labials is constantly seven; one
specimen shows the third and fourth partially fused on one side.
Only a single specimen shows the parietals separated, and this only
Measurements am:
scale
counl
s of Eumeces indubitus
Taylor
Number
3593
c?
1731
1671
9
1725
1728
9
1673
&
3598
9
1697
9
3600
9
1724
yg-
1696
Sex
yg.
Snout to vent
66
10S
22
64
62
64
105
20
64
63.5
58
54
41
66
14
37
57
13
32
Tail
47
Snout to fore limb
20.5
19
18
20
18
19
12
Axilla to groin
37
36
38
40
43
39
34
31
28
23
19
Width of head...
11
10. s
10
10
9
9.8
8.4
8.2
7
6
Length of head
12
10. s
9.5
10
9.3
9.5
8.6
9.1
7
7
Width of body..
13
12
12
13
12
12
10
10
S
7
6
Foreleg
15
20.2
24
13
19
24
12.2
17
24
12
IS
24
12
18
24
14
19
24
11
15
24
12
15
24
9.5
12
24
8.5
11
22
8
Hind leg
10
Scale rows, body
22
Scales occiput to above
anus
57
7
56
7
59
59
61
7
60
7
59
58
7
59
7
59
7
59
7
Supraoculars
4
2
4
2
4
2
4
3
4
2
4
2
4
2
4
2
4
2 J 2
4
2
4
Nuchals pairs
2
Postmentals
1
0
7
1
0
7
1
0
7
1
0
7
1
0
7
1
0
7
1
0
7
1
0
7
1
0
7
1
0
7
1
Postnasals
0
Largest labial
7
Front onsal touch
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
yes
no
yes
no
no
Seventh labial touch
upper sec. temporal
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
Supraoculars touch
frontal
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3-2
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 471
very narrowly. Scales about the ear vary from 15 to 18; the num-
bers 15 and 16 arc common; the higher numbers rarely occur. The
scales from occiput to above anus vary from 57 to 61, 59 being twice
as frequent as the other numbers. One postmental and no postnasal
seem to be invariable characters. The seventh labial is invariably
the largest, frequently double the size of the sixth; subdigital
lamellae under fourth toe, 11-14, 12 and 13 being the most usual
numbers. The number of the supraoculars is invariable. The tem-
porals are surprisingly stable in character.
The ground color varies in shade from darker to lighter. In
younger specimens the color on the dark lateral stripe may be uni-
formly black. The character of the light lines does not vary, and
is identical in the very young (31 mm.) and adults. In the young
the tail is a bright blue, and this color is usually retained by the
adults, but with blackish or gray flecks breaking the uniformity.
The head in the young is never black. The dotted dark lines on
dorsal scales are more distinct in some specimens than in others.
Hi marks. The relationship of this species is with Eumeces dugesii,
despite the very striking difference in the character of the scales of
the top of the head. It shows a parallel development with that
which has taken place in the Lynxe group. Furcirostris with three
supraoculars stands to lynxe as dugesii does to indubitus. However,
it appears that in the two latter, the differential characters have
become completely stabilized.
This new form may readily be separated from Eumeces dugesii
by the character of four supraoculars, three touching the frontal,
instead of three supraoculars, with only two touching the frontal.
The contrast of color between the dorsal surface and the sides is
much more pronounced in dugesii than in indubitus; the former
often becomes yellowish-bronze, and even silvery above. In all the
specimens examined, thirty-three in all. there is no evidence that
the characters separating the two forms overlap or intergrade in any
manner.
The species is more distantly related to Eumeces brevirostris
Giinther as suggested by the presence of a large seventh labial which
makes a suture with the upper secondary temporal.
Sd tar a- is known, it is a high mountain form, as all specimens
taken were found in the mountains in pine forest, under rocks or
logs.
The food of this species, judged by stomach contents, consists
wholly of small insects. An examination of the reproductive organs
472 The University Science Bulletin
gave no clue as to whether the form is oviparous or ovoviviparous,
since neither the ovaries nor uteri contained developing eggs. It is
highly probable, however, that this, like its close relative, dugesii,
is ovoviviparous.
A single paratype (No. 1672) wras presented to the Instituto de
Biologia in Mexico City.
Distribution. The present known distribution includes the states
of Morelos, Mexico, and eastern Michoacan in the high mountains,
probably largely confined to the pine region in the high mountains
at elevations of 8,000 to 12,000 feet, (See Fig. 76 for distributional
map. )
Locality records:
Morelos: Near Cuernavaea (kilometer 63), Mexico City-Cuernavaca high-
way (type locality, Taylor-Smith Coll. 10) (Inst. Biol. 1).
Mexico: Near Asuncion, western Mexico (Taylor-Smith Coll. 20).
Michoacan : 15 miles southeast of Zitacuaro, eastern Michoacan (Taylor-
Smith 2).
Eumeces dugesii Thominot
(Plate 43; Figs. 76, 79)
SYNONYMY
1883. Eumeces (Plestiodon) Dugesii Thominot. Bull. Soc. Philo. de Paris. (7), VII, (1882-
1883), 1883, pp. 138, 139 (type description; type locality, "Province Guanajuato"
[Mexico], collected by A. Duges) ; Duges, La Naturaleza, VI, (1882-1884), Nov. 4,
1883, pp. 361, 362, lam. 9, figs. 1-7 (r. description of the species from other material
from type locality; full-length figure, hand colored); Cope, Prnc. Amer. Phil. Soc,
XXII, Jan. to Oct.. 1885, pp. 167-194 (key characters); Giinther, Biol. Cent. -Amer.,
Oct., 1885, p. 32; Cope, Bull. U. S. Nat, Mus., No. 32, 1887, p. 46 (gives Michoacan,
and Zacualtapan [Morelos] as localities); Duges, La Naturaleza, (2), II, 1894, p. 485;
? Herrera, Cat. Col. Rept. Batr. Mus. Nac, 1895, p. 24, Apatzingan, Michoacan; and
Ed. 2d, 1904, p. 24; Cope, Ann. Rept. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1898, (1900), p. 630 (Key).
1887. Eumeces brevirostris (part.) Boulenger. Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., 1887, p. 379.
?1900. Eumeces triaspis Cope. Ann. Kept. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1898, (1900), p. 1232 (Nomen
nudum).
History. This form was first discovered by Alfredo Duges in
Guanajuato, in 1882 or 1883. One specimen was sent to the Paris
Museum, and in 1883 it was made the type of a new species named
.dugesii in honor of its discoverer. In the same year, Nov., 1883,
Duges published a description of the species under the same name
(attributing the name to Thominot) , but stating that he had not
seen the type description. He published a plate (hand colored),
giving a full-length dorsal view, and several figures, all of which
are rather inaccurate. In this paper, Duges recorded the fact that
the species is "viviparous." The contribution is based on other than
the type material. I have examined the specimens, three from
Tanganciquaro and Patamban, collected by Dr. Octavius Navarro,
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 473
and now a part of the Alfredo Duges Museum Collection, in Guana-
juato. Guanajuato, Mexico.
Boulenger (1887) placed the species as a synonym of Eumeces
brevirostris Giinther. Cope (1900), however, failed to follow this
disposition of the form, but continued to recognize it as a distinct
species. In this same work he published the name Eumeces triaspis
as an inhabitant of the " Austrocddental" district, a district includ-
ing the range of this species. It appears to be a nomen nudum, since
I can discover no evidence that such a name with description was
ever previously published. The name triaspis (three shields) is
presumably suggested by the three supraocular scales. The other
species having the three shields is furcirostris and this is listed on the
preceding page; dugesii is omitted; so it would appear that this
species was intended. Two specimens of the species are in the
United States National Museum.
Careful drawings of a specimen from Stanford University, to-
gether with drawings of other related Mexican species, were sent
to Dr. F. Angel, Museum d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, for com-
parison with the type. Concerning the drawing of the Stanford
Museum specimen, he states that the figure corresponds exactly to
the characters of Eumeces dugesii Thominot, the only difference
being that the type of dugesii has two pairs of nuchals instead of
three. (In the drawing sent there are three nuchals on one side;
on the other the third scale is partially segmented.)
Diag?wsis. A medium-sized species characterized by dorsolateral
light lines, tending to become obsolete in adults, and the absence of
a median line or bifurcating lines on the middle of head. Three
supraocular scales, the two anterior broadly in contact with the
frontal; the interparietal broad, with the parietals forming a broad
suture behind it; two pairs of nuchals (normally), the anterior
pair larger; a small primary temporal, separated from the lower
secondary temporal by the greatly enlarged seventh labial, which
forms a suture with the upper secondary temporal; a member of
the Bri rirostris group. The species is ovoviviparous.
Description of species (from No. 26154 U. S. Nat. Mus. Col-
lected by Duges, Guanajuato, Mexico). The portion of the rostral
visible above of moderate size, forming a very obtuse angle; supra-
nasals elongate, diagonal, twice as long as wide, forming a common
suture less than their width in length; frontonasal wider than long,
touching loreal (on one side abnormally separated from loreal i ;
prefrontals large, making equal sutures with the two loreals. and
474
The University Science Bclletin
forming a very short, common suture medially, separating frontal
from frontonasal; frontal very large anteriorly, broadly in contact
with the anterior superciliary (perhaps abnormally) ; three supra-
oculars, the anterior large, triangular, the two anterior forming
sutures with the frontal; frontoparietals about the size of the pre-
frontals, forming a moderate median suture; interparietal small,
distinctly less than half the length of the frontal; parietals large,
broad, forming a considerable suture behind interparietal ; two pairs
of large nuclials; nasal very small, divided, the suture with the first
labial longer than that with the rostral; nostril directed strongly
forward; no postnasal; two Ioreals; the anterior but very little
Fig. 79. Eumeccs dugesii Thominot. Stanford U. No. 3842 ; Michoacan,
Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B. dorsal view of head. Actual head
length, 6.5 mm.; width, 5.5 mm. Young.
higher than posterior; latter generally rectangular, but little longer
than high, narrowly in contact with second labial, but in contact the
entire length of third; five or six superciliaries, anterior largest; two
small postoculars; a small primary temporal, separated from the
small lower secondary temporal by the suture of the seventh labial
with the large upper secondary temporal; the tertiary temporal is
small, elongate, very narrowly separated from the auricular lobules.
Seven upper labials, the fourth smallest, the last much the largest;
the subocular labial is low, only slightly higher than second or third;
palpebral series largely in contact with superciliaries; four rather
large plates on lower eyelid, separated from the subocular by two
irregular rows of granules; five lower labials anterior to large
posterior, which is followed by a smaller scale hidden under seventh
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 475
upper labial; seventh upper labial separated from ear by two small
postlabials and a single very small scale; mental relatively small, its
labial border of scarcely greater extent than that of rostral; post-
mental single, somewha! rounded anteriorly; three typical pairs of
chinshields, the anterior pair forming a broad suture, the second
pair separated by a single pair of scales; last pair followed by an
elongate postgenial scale which is bordered on its anterior medial
border by a scale wider than long.
Eye small, the diameter of orbit less than its distance from the
nostril; ear small, nearly round, with two distinct lobules; ear
surrounded by about 15 scales; median scale rows on neck wider
than on back; 30 scale rows around the neck behind ear; 24 on
narrow part of neck; 30 about body behind arm; 24 about middle
of body; scales larger dorsally than ventrally or laterally; the
axillary scries are dropped out at a distance from axilla not ex-
ceeding length of arm to wrist ; limbs moderately well developed,
when adpressed separated by about 5 millimeters; palm with
numerous (about 8) large, rounded tubercles, with numerous other
smaller granules; four large heel plates, all in contact; sole with
scattered large granules and numerous small ones; 12 lamellae under
longest toe; dorsal and ventral lamellae of toes in contact, without
intervening scales save occasionally at base; anus bordered anteriorly
by six scales; the median preanals well differentiated, much wider
than long; the outer preanal scales overlapping inner; lateral post-
anal scale somewhat enlarged in males, but otherwise not differenti-
ated; scales bordering anus behind strongly pigmented; subcaudal
series much widened I especially large on regenerated portion); no
small granular scutes posterior to the insertion of hind limb; a few
small granular scales in axilla.
( olor. Above on head and body, gray-olive, the head slightly
brownish; the dorsolateral line begins on the tip of rostral, passes
to neck on the second scale row; it shortly begins to encroach on
the third row and after passing shoulder occupies the third row en-
tirely; posteriorly the upper edges of the fourth row are involved;
the line becomes gradually dimmer posteriorly and can be distin-
guished from the ground color with difficulty; a brown line begins
on side of snout, passes through eye, along side of neck and side of
the body; the brown color is not solid, but the scale- arc rather
uniformly flecked with the grayish ground color; this color extends
on tail as far as the regenerated part; a lateral light line begins on
snout and passes over labials and through the lower (due of the
476
The University Science Bulletin
ear to above arm, where it becomes dim or obsolete on the side;
below this, each scale, of the next four or five rows, with a darker
area, these forming indistinct, dotted, brown lines; these, low on side,
gradually merge into the general drab-slate ventral coloration, the
scales of which show some darker areas, and form very indistinct
lines. The labials, both upper and lower, show brown markings;
the sutures of the lower labials are almost entirely brown; chin-
shields creamy-gray, with numerous brown spots along sutures;
arms and legs dark brown, heavily flecked with silver-gray; fingers
and toes more or less barred with same color ; unregenerated portion
of tail with larger dark areas on scales, those on side very large and
strongly pronounced, those on underside more distinct than dorsally ;
preanals only slightly lighter than ventral abdominal region.
Measurements of Eumcces dugesii Thominot
Museum .
Number*.
Type
U.S.N.M.
26154
U.S.N.M.
26153
Stanford
3842
Snout to vent
Snout to forelimb
Snout to auricular opening .
Snout to eye
Eye to nostril
Head width, greatest
Head length
Axilla to groin
Foreleg
Hind leg
Greatest body width
Postanal tail width
Longest toe
65
8
9 +
67
21
12
4.3
3 . 5
0
10.2
39
15.5
21
10
6
7.2
58.6
19.5
9.5
4
3.1
8
S.6
36
12
16
9.5
6
6
38
12
7
2.8
2
5.5
6.5
20
7
10.2
5
3.3
3.5
* The type and Nos. 2G154, 20153 are from Guanajuato, Mexico; 3842 is from Michoacan.
Variation. A second specimen (U.S.N.M. No. 26153) has the
frontonasal forming a slight suture with the frontal and touching
both (instead of a single) loreals; the frontal is proportionally less
wide anteriorly and touches only one superciliary. Other dorsal
head scales practically the same in shape and proportions, and the
lateral head scales, especially those of the temporal region, identical
with the described specimen save that the subocular is slightly
smaller.
The color above is lighter than the described specimen, bluish or
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 477
greenish-gray, from which the dorsolateral line can be distinguished
with difficulty on the body, although prominent anteriorly from
shoulder to snout; on the head these light lines are edged above by
brown lines which continue some distance on the neck; the brown
stripe on side of body is less distinct, the brown color forming very
indistinct dotted lines; the lateral line from head to arm is very
distinct, but very dim or wanting on sides of body; the light areas
on the lower labials form distinct rounded spots which are somewhat
more distinct than in the described specimen. Scales on the back
show very dim darker areas, those of the median rows slightly more
pronounced, forming very dim dotted lines from rump onto the
tail. The number of scales from the parietals to above the anus is
slightly higher (60 as opposed to 56 in the described specimen).
The subdigital lamellae are 11-11, instead of 12-12. The limbs are
separated when adpressed by a slightly greater distance.
In a young specimen (Stanford No. 3842) the dorsolateral cream
line reaches only halfway between head and shoulder, and the lateral
line reaches only to the forearm. The limbs in the young are sepa-
rated when adpressed, by a small distance. Eighty-six widened
subcaudal scales on the under surface of the tail (complete). In a
young specimen in the Alfredo Duges Museum, the lateral line ap-
pears to continue to near the groin, but the older specimens show
the lateral reaching only to the arm.
All the specimens agree on the characters of the supraoculars,
temporals, scale rows, labials, and parietals. The frontonasal
touches the frontal in one, and is separated in two specimens; in
one specimen on one side the first loreal is excluded from contact
with the frontonasal; superciliaries, 6-6 or 6-5.
Remarks. As observed elsewhere, this species is closely related
to indubitus, from which it differs only in the details of coloration
and the presence of three instead of four supraoculars. There is no
evidence that the territories occupied by these forms overlap.
As pointed out by Duges (1885) this species is ovoviviparous
("viviparous"). Little else than this is known of the habits of the
species.
Distribution. The species is certainly known to occur in the.
states of Michoacan and Guanajuato. Duges' record for Chiapas
may be questioned. It is a high mountain form, and probably does
not occur in the lowland .part of Michoacan. (See Fig. 76 for dis-
tributional map.)
478 The University Science Bulletin
Locality records:
Guanajuato: "Province de Guanajuato (Mexique)" (M.H.N.P. 1, type);
Guanajuato, Mexico (U.S.N.M. 2, Duges Coll.).
Michoacan: Michoacan (Stanford 1, Duges Coll.); "Tanganziquaro et Patam-
ban" (Alfredo Duges Mus. 3, Navarro Coll.).
Uncertain or questionable localities: Chiapas (Duges, 1894); Zacualtipan
(Cope, 1887).
f Eumeces colimensis Taylor
(Plate 40, Fig. 3 ; Figs. 76, 80)
SYNONYMY
1!)35. Eumeces colimensis Taylor. Field Mus. Nat. Hist., Zool. Sen, XX, May 15, 1935,
pp. 77-80, fig. 7.
Diagnosis. A medium-sized species belonging to the Brevirostris
group, characterized by broad dorsolateral light lines originating on
the rostral and continuing to tail, and a lateral light line, probably
distinct in young but dim or obsolete in adult; no median line and
no bifurcating lines on head. One postmental; no postnasal; frontal
in contact with interparietal; parietals enclosing the interparietal;
seven upper labials, last the largest, forming a suture with the upper
secondary temporal; primary temporal wanting (possibly abnor-
mally fused with the upper secondary) ; lower secondary and terti-
ary temporals present; ear of normal size; limbs well developed,
strongly overlapping when adpressed.
Description of type (No. 1649, Field Museum of Natural History;
Colima, Mexico; collector unknown; adult female). Portion of the
rostral visible above small, much less than one half the size of the
frontoparietal; supranasals large, of much greater length than the
nasals, forming a median suture; frontonasal much broader than
long, touching laterally the anterior loreal, forming broad sutures
posteriorly with the prefrontals, in contact with the frontal at the
attenuated anterior end; prefrontals narrowly separated, quadran-
gular in shape, the side touching frontal the longest, also forming
unequal sutures with the frontonasal, second loreal, first supraocular,
first loreal and first superciliary, the varying lengths of the sutures
in the order named; frontal very long (.5 mm.), one and one third
times its distance from end of snout, posteriorly narrowed and
bluntly pointed, in contact with the interparietal; frontal in con-
tact with the first, second and third supraoculars on the left side,
with the second and third only on the right side. Frontoparietals
one and one half times as long as broad, separated, their posterior
ends forming a notch in the anterior part of the parietals; latter
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces
479
very broad, strongly truncate behind, enclosing the interparietal,
forming a rather narrow mutual suture; interparietal rather narrow,
elongate; two pairs of nuchals, the first very broad and deep, the
second pair very much smaller.
P'ig. 80. Eumt r< s colirrn nsis Taylor. F.M.N.H. Xo. 1649; type, Colima,
Colima, Mexico. A. lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual
head length. 10.7 mm.; width. 9.7 mm. [Courtesy, Field Museum of Nat-
ural History.]
Nasal distinctly divided, the nostril behind the line of the rostro-
labial suture; the anterior part of nasal larger than the posterior
part; no postnasal; first loreal distinctly higher than the second
loreal; latter much longer than high, in contact with the second and
third labial-; two presuboculars, the anterior much the largest, some-
what pentagonal in shape; four postsuboculars, the upper very
large, but not to be mistaken for the missing primary temporal; six
superciliaries, anterior the largest, the last next in size; eye small,
480 The University Science Bulletin
distinctly less than its distance from the nostril; three or four
median upper palpebral scales forming sutures with the superciliar-
ies; a relatively large, wedge-shaped preocular, followed by a small
scale on upper eyelid; two small postsuboculars; four or five large,
vertically placed, opaque scales on lower eyelid, separated from
the subocular by two irregular rows of tubercular scales, somewhat
larger than is typical for the genus. Primary temporal wanting
(perhaps fused abnormally with the upper secondary temporal) ;
the upper secondary temporal broadly in contact with the sixth and
seventh labials, more than twice as long as its greatest width ; lower
secondary temporal of moderate size, somewhat fan-shaped; terti-
ary temporal elongated, not entering ear, but in contact above with
the upper secondary. Seven upper labials, four preceding the sub-
ocular, of which the first is highest, fourth the smallest; seventh
labial largest of the series, but not conspicuously larger than sixth,
separated from the ear by two superimposed pairs of postlabial
scales, the anterior the largest; two very inconspicuous ear lobules;
six well-defined lower labials, the last followed by a smaller scale
that may be considered as a seventh. The mental has practically
the same extent on the labial border as the rostral; postmental large,
single; three typical pairs of chinshields, the third followed by a
relatively short postgenial, which is bordered on the anterior mesial
side by a scale wider than long.
Scales on back about equal to those of lateral and ventral regions,
forming parallel lines, save behind and above arm; postauricular
scales relatively large, 18 around ear; 30 scales about neck behind
ear; 27 about constricted part of neck; 32 in axillary region; 28
rows about middle of body; 19 at base of tail; subcaudal series
distinctly widened; median preanal scales enlarged, with two smaller
scales lateral to these, the outer scales overlapping the inner; an
elongate scale at each outer posterior corner of the anus, not other-
wise differentiated.
Limbs well developed, overlapping the length of the foot with
toes when adpressed. A well-developed outer wrist scale; a group
of large conical tubercles in middle part of palm; basal lamellae
more or less conical; lamellar formula for fingers: 6-9-11-12-8.
Three large, thickened, somewhat conical scales at heel; basal la-
mellae strongly tubercular; two enlarged conical tubercles on sole;
lamellar formula of toes: 6-9-13-16-11. Eighteen scales about in-
sertion of hind limb; twelve about insertion of arm. A series of
small granular scales in axilla. Lateral nuchal scales usually with
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces M
two pits; scales in posthumeral and postfemoral regions, in the post-
axillary region and behind the insertion of hind leg with more
numerous pits.
Color (specimen apparently somewhat discolored by preserva-
tives). Above brown-olive, each scale with a darker area, forming
six indistinct dotted lines; head more brownish, followed by a
brownish streak beginning in the nuchal region, continuing back
about a centimeter on neck; small darker areas on prefrontals,
supraoculars and parietals; no "bifurcating" lines on head and no
median stripe; broad dorsolateral light lines, beginning on the
snout, continue on sides of head and body to tail, covering parts of
the third and fourth scale rows, separated from each other by four
whole and two half scale rows; the dark spots on the scales
bordering the light stripe more pronounced than elsewhere; a broad
labial stripe begins on rostral, follows lower part of labials through
lower half of ear; beyond this, it can scarcely be distinguished from
the coloration of the side; a broad band of brown beginning an-
terior to the eye continues along the side to some distance on the
tail, covering two whole and two half rows of scales; lower labials,
chin, throat and breast cream color; under side of limbs, anal scales
and along a median line on subcaudals, lighter; limbs above gener-
ally dark brown, with lighter brown areas on the scales, continuing
on toes, giving them a slightly cross-barred appearance; abdomen
and lower part of sides somewhat lead color (due to preservative),
each scale with a darker area.
Measurements oj tin typt of Eumeces colimensis Taylor
mm. mm.
Total length 134 Length of head 10.7
Tail (regenerated) 69 Foreleg 18
Snout to foreleg 23.2 Hind leg 26
Snout to car 13.5 Longest toe 11
Snout to eye 5 Width of body 11.3
Axilla to jxroin 33 Snout to vent 65
Width of head 9.7
/.'< murks. This species may be differentiated from all other mem-
bers of this group by the greater development of the limbs, which
overlap in the adult a distance equal to the entire length of the
foot. In the absence of the primary temporal it agrees with dicei,
but differs markedly in the character of the lower eyelid, the pres-
ence of a lower secondary temporal, and in a much larger size as
well as in the greatly increased number of scale rows about the
body. Whether the contact between the frontal and interparietal
31—1123
482 The University Science Bulletin
and the lack of a primary temporal are normal conditions can only
be determined when a series of specimens are available for com-
parison.
So far as I am able to learn, the collector is unknown.
Distribution and locality records. The single specimen known is
from Colima (presumably the town), Colima, Mexico. (See fig. 76
for distributional map.)
Eumeces dicei Ruthven and Gaige
(Figs. 76, 81)
SYNONYMY
1933. Eumeces dicei Ruthven and Gaige. Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. Univ. Michigan, No. 260,
Apr. 3, 1933, pp. 1-3 (type description; type locality, Marmolejo, Tamaulipas, Mexico).
History. The species was first discovered at Marmolejo, Tamauli-
pas, during the first part of the month of August (1-10), 1930, by
Dr. Lee R. Dice of the University of Michigan, for whom the species
was named. It is known only from the type, which is No. 69253,
Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan.
Diagnosis. A small species, with a narrow dorsolateral light line,
but lacking a lateral line and a median line bifurcating on the head;
no primary temporal; no lower secondary temporal; tertiary tem-
poral present; sixth and seventh upper labials much enlarged, form-
ing sutures with the large, upper secondary temporal; four supra-
oculars, three broadly in contact with the frontal; first labial much
larger than the three succeeding labials; no postnasal; one post-
mental; scales in 22 rows about the middle of the body; parietals
not enclosing the interparietal.
Description of the type. Body slender, the habitus similar to
Eumeces egregius; head rather elongate, narrow on top; rostral
moderately large, separated from frontonasal by the supranasals;
frontonasal about as long as broad, separated from the frontal by
a minute distance, but in contact narrowly with the anterior loreal;
prefrontals large, pentagonal, in contact mesially at a single point,
touching two loreals, the first superciliary and the first supraocular;
frontal sharply pointed anteriorly, peculiar in being constricted just
posterior to the middle, behind which it widens, forming a lateral
angle, rounded posteriorly; frontoparietals generally, rectangular,
forming a moderate median suture about one third their length;
interparietal slightly shorter than the frontal, but nearly as wide at
the widest point, not enclosed by the parietals; latter large, bordered
on the side by the elongate upper secondary temporal and the larg-
est, most posterior of the postsuboculars; two pairs of well-differ-
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
483
entiated nuchals; four supraoculars, the first and last of about equal
size, the third forming an angle between the frontal and the fronto-
parietal; nasal divided, the anterior moiety larger than the super-
ficial part of the posterior; nostril pierced behind the rostro-labial
suture; no postnasal; anterior loreal very distinctly higher than the
posterior, higher than wide; posterior loreal relatively small, equal
to or of only slightly greater surface area than anterior, distinctly
longer than high, bordering second and third labials; seven super-
ciliaries, first not greatly larger than the second; two presuboculars;
three postsuboculars, the posterior very large proportionally; eye
Fig. 81. Eumeces dicei Ruthven and Gaige. Mich. U. No. 69253; Mar-
molejo, Tamaulipas, Mexico. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of
head. Actual head length, 6.5 mm.; width, 5.5 mm.
small, the long axis of the orbit less than its distance from the
nostril; two tiny postoculars; one small preocular; medial palpebrals
touching superciliaries; anterior and posterior palpebrals separated
from superciliaries by small intercalated granules ; lower eyelid with
the upper series of plates not or scarcely larger than some in the
second row; only two rows between lower palpebrals and the sub-
ocular. Primary temporal absent (or fused completely with the
upper secondary) ; lower secondary temporal absent; tertiary tem-
poral proportionally larger than usual in the genus, entering auric-
ular opening. Seven upper labials, the sixth smaller than the
greatly enlarged seventh, but both forming sutures with the upper
secondary temporal; four labials preceding the subocular labial, of
484 The University Science Bulletin
which the first is distinctly the largest; seventh labial separated
from the auricular opening by two minute postlabials.
Ear small, surrounded by eleven scales; one or two small lobules
border anterior margin; the intercalated axillary scale rows short,
the one between the seventh and eighth rows dropped in the midbody
region so the count slightly anterior to the middle is 24 scale rows
instead of 22 rows, which cover the latter half of the body; scales
on the back not or scarcely larger than laterals or ventrals; 62
scales in a row from parietals to above anus; median row of scales
under tail (which is missing save for a bit of the proximal portion)
not or only moderately widened apparently; six preanal scales, the
two median somewhat enlarged, the outermost smallest, the outer
scales overlapping the inner; no differentiated lateral postanal scale
I female) ; mental large, its labial border greater than that of rostral;
a single undivided postmental; three pairs of chmshields, first form-
ing a suture, the two succeeding separated; third pair followed by an
elongate postgenial, bordered on its inner anterior edge by a scale
broader than long; six lower labials. Limbs small, separated by 18
.rales when adpressed on the sides of the body; the length of the
hind limb contained four and one fourth times in body length; arm
with a prominent thickened scale on the outer edge of wrist ; three
enlarged granules on the palm; lamellar formula of fingers: 4; 7;
<)• 10 6- 4; S; 9; 10; 6. A greatly enlarged scute at base of heel,
with two .mailer inner scutes near the base of the first toe; lamellar
formula for toes: 5; 8; 10; 12; 7: 5; 7 ; 10; 11 ; 7. No enlarged
granules on sole; only a dorsal and a ventral series of scales on
toes- the terminal scales not bound closely about the claws.
Color Above dark ash-gray, the scales with darker centers which
form *ix rather indistinct, darker, dotted rows on back; rostral and
supranasals cream, with a dorsolateral light line originating on
rostral, passing on outer edge of supraoculars, continuing back on
third and fourth scale rows, and later, beginning at a point some
distance behind shoulder, on fourth alone, growing dim posteriorly,
where it occupies but one half of the fourth scale row; below this
line a dark stripe begins on nasal, passes back above the ear, where
it widens, then narrows to one whole and two half scale rows in
width and passes to tail; below this the scales become gray, some-
what darker than on back, each scale with scattered darker areas
not forming lines; upper labials and region in front and behind
ear, cream; chin and throat cream; upper side of limbs dark; lower
parts light, strongly differentiated; neck, below, cream, but scales
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 4s.">
with darker anas; some scattered light flecks under base of tail;
lateral light line absent on neck and side.
1/. asun mt iits of tin typi of Eurrn a s did i Ruthvt n and Gaigt
mm. mm.
Snout to vent 47.0 Head length to posterior edge
Snoul to forearm 14.3 of interparietal 6.5
Snout to auricular opening 7 ."> Axilla to groin 28.0
Snout to eye 3.1 Foreleg 8.5
Width anterior to ear .">.."> Hind leg 10.5
Adpressed limbs separated 12.0
Rt marks. This species has been tentatively placed in the Brevi-
rostris group and probably represents a very degenerate (special-
ized! member. It agrees in several characters with E. brevirostris
and likewise shows many similarities to egregius, especially in the
character of the temporals* and posterior labials.
In this species the limbs are proportionally smaller and more
widely separated than in forms of brevirostris of equal size exam-
ined. Egregius has the ear opening farther removed from the
seventh labial, with the scales anterior, overlapping and partially
covering the ear opening; the median dorsal scales are wider. Before
a more certain assignment of dicei can be made, larger series of
specimens must be available to furnish data on variation. Nothing
is now known of its habits.
Distribution and locality records. Only the type locality, Mar-
molejo, Tamaulipas, is known. Whether it occupies the coastal
region or is a high mountain form is not known, since the type
locality is intermediate between the two. (See Fig. 76 for distri-
butional map.)
Eumeces ochoterenai Taylor
(Plate 43; Figs. 76, 82)
SYNONYMY
Eumeces ochoterenae Taylor. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XLVI, June 30, 1933, pp. 129-
133 (Fig., lateral and ventral view of head, enlarged; type description; type locality
Mazatlan [\ miles north of Chilpancingo] Guerrero, Mexico). (This name spelled
ochoteranae is a typographical error.)
History. The series of specimens on which this species was
founded was collected in the summer of 1932 by Hobart Smith and
myself in the mountains in the neighborhood of Chilpancingo,
Guerrero, Alex. A total of eleven specimens was obtained. It
appear- to be a high mountain form, and is probably restricted to
elevations above five thousand feet.
* The description of t In- temporals in the type description differs from that given here,
but it is due to different terminology (see diagram showing labeled scales of the genus [fig. 4]
and discussion of temporals [page 71]).
486 The University Science Bulletin
The species was named for Dr. Isaac Ochoterena, director of the
Instituto de Biologia, Chapultepee, D. F., Mexico, a noted Mexican
histologist and botanist.
The type is in the Taylor-Smith collection. Paratype specimens
have been presented to the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Har-
vard, the U. S. National Museum, and the Instituto de Biologia de
Mexico.
Diagnosis. A small, slender species, with limbs small, widely
separated when adpressed; four supraoculars; interparietal not
enclosed; two pairs of nuchals; seven upper labials; postmental
single; no postnasal; primary temporal sometimes in contact with
lower secondary temporal, separating seventh labial from the upper
secondary temporal; scale bordering the inner side of the elongate
postgenial wider than long; subcaudals widened; 22 (24) scale rows.
Blackish or brownish, with a broad dorsolateral light stripe on the
back, running to tail; a lateral line on labials to forearm; a black or
black-brown lateral stripe; no trace of a median light line or fork-
ing lines on the head.
Description of the type. Rostral much wider than high, the por-
tion visible from above less than half the area of the frontonasal;
supranasals normal in size, forming a median suture, touching the
anterior loreals; frontonasal six-sided, forming its longest sutures
with the prefrontals, its shortest with the anterior loreal; prefrontals
wider than long, forming a strong median suture and subequal su-
tures with the first supraocular, first superciliary and the two lo-
reals ; frontal longer than its distance from the tip of the snout, bor-
dered by the three anterior supraoculars; first supraocular equally
as large as fourth, second largest; frontoparietals small, square,
forming a median suture; interparietal .narrow, elongate, not en-
closed behind by the parietals; latter diagonal, twice as long as,
their greatest width, narrowly separated posteriorly; two pairs of
broad nuchals of about equal size.
Nasal small, the anterior part triangular, nearly as large as re-
mainder of scale, including the nostril; no postnasal; anterior loreal
nearly as long as high, distinctly higher than second loreal, which
is about once and one half as long as high; seven-eight superciliar-
ies; two presuboculars, the lower largest; three postsuboculars;
seven upper labials, the first higher than the four succeeding scales;
seventh labial somewhat larger than sixth, separated from the upper
secondary temporal; the primary temporal small, quadrangular,
touching lower secondary, which is fan-shaped; upper secondary
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
487
elongate, once and two thirds as long as its greatest width; tertiary
temporal narrow and elongate, not entering the ear; seventh labial
separated from the ear by two subequal pairs of postlabial scale-;
ear opening small, with one or two very black auricular lobules.
Upper medial palpebral scales not separated from the supereiliaries;
lower eyelid with three enlarged opaque scales separated from the
Fig. 82. Eumeces ochoterenae Taylor. E.H.T. and H.M.S. No. 1015,
typo. A. lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Actual head
length, 7.4 mm.; width, 6 mm.
subocular by two or three rows of small granular scales, six lower
labials, last longest; mental moderate, having a labial border very
slightly longer than the rostral; a single azygous postmental; three
pairs of chinshields, the second pair largest; the third pair followed
by an elongate postgenial bordered internally by a scale broader
than long.
Body scales in 22 rows about the middle, the dorsal scales slightly
larger than laterals or ventrals; scales on neck behind ear, 30 rows;
narrow part of the neck, 23 rows; about base of tail, 15 rows; the
subcaudal scales two and one half to three times as wide as long;
4s,s
The University Science Bulletin
94 scales from anus to tip of tail; from occiput to above anus, 54;
lateral scale rows generally parallel; marginal pits on scales nu-
merous about insertion of arm and leg, but elsewhere dim or want-
ing; two enlarged preanals, with two smaller scales on each side,
border the anus; the outer scales overlapping inner; lateral postanal
scale slightly differentiated.
Palm with several enlarged tubercles, and with many smaller
ones; the wrist tubercle prominent; lamellar formula for fingers:
4; 8; 10; 10; 6; the sole with one or two differentiated scales; the
heel bordered by four flat scales or tubercles; lamellar formula for
toes: 5; 8; 10; 12; 8; the terminal lamellae not tightly bound about
base of claws.
Color. Above blackish to gray-brown, with irregular, minute,
darker flecking; a broad, dorsolateral, light gray-white line origi-
Tables
of measurements
and scale counts of the
type g
eries
Number
Tvpe
1015
1481
c?
1483
9
1480
1012
0*
1013
c?
1482
1014
1484
yg.
1016
yg-
1017
yg-
Sex
Snout to vent
56
53
51 . 5
51.2
51
50.5
50
49.6
26
25.5
23
Tail
91
17.2
30
10.2
Snout to fore limb. . . .
16
16
16.5
16
15.7
16
16
8.9
9
Snout to ear
9
9.4
8.9
9
8.7
8.5
8.5
5.5
5 3
5 2
Axilla to groin
33
30.5
30
29
30
29
33
29
12
12.5
12.2
Width of head
6
7.4
7
8
7
7.5
7
7.5
7
7.3
7
7.7
6.7
7.5
Length of head
7.2
5
5
5.1
Width of body. .
8
S.7
8
9
8
7.8
7
8
4
4
3.8
Foreleg
8.9
10.2
9.8
10.7
9
9.2
9.2
9.2
5.2
4 4
4
Hind leg
14.1
14
13
14.3
13
13
13
13
8
7
5 8
Scale rows
22
23
22
24
22
22
23
23
22
23
22
Interparietal inclosed. .
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
Scales occiput to anus. .
55
54
54
55
56
53
55
54
54
57
55
Upper labials
7
7
7
7
7
-
7
Supraoculars
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Nuchals, pairs
2
o
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Postmentals
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
Largest labial
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
Frontonasal touches
frontal
yes
3
Supraoculars touch
frontal
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Seventh labial touches
upper sec. temporal
no
no
no
yes
no
no
no
yes
yes
yes
yes
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 489
nating on the rostral, passes back over head and along side- and
onto the proximal third of the tail; this line occupies the outer two
thirds of the second scale row, and the inner half of the third (the
color is not clear, but is dirty-looking due to flecking with darker
color); a lateral line begins on the rostral and passes back to near
insertion of foreleg; only the lower edge of the auricular opening is
involved; the color becomes much intensified below the eye and
from there on back is a silvery white; lower labials, chin, and
throat light; abdomen, sides and under limits, grayish or bluish-
gray, flecked with minute darker areas; tail brownish at base, but
distal two thirds of a very deep purplish-blue color, less pronounced
below. Ear lobules black.
Variation. The chief variations are listed in the table. The scales
preceding the ear, between ear and seventh labial are usually as
described, but may be replaced by two elongate ones, or three, with
the upper two uniting. The character of the temporals (the relation
of the seventh labial to the upper secondary temporal) is variable;
they are separated in about half of the specimens and form a com-
mon suture in the other half. The number of subcaudal scales
varies from 84 to 90.
R< marks. This form is apparently related to Eumeces brevi-
rostris, but differs in having a lower average count of scale rows;
smaller and shorter limbs; the much broader dorsolateral lines
(separated by two whole and two half dark-colored scales) ; in the
absence of a lateral light line along the sides of the abdomen; in the
retention of blue color in the tails of adults; and a smaller average
number of scales from parietals to above anus (usually 6 to 8 less i .
This form was first encountered at Mazatlan, near Chilpancingo,
Guerrero. Mexico, June 26, 1932. The specimens were routed from
under stones and leaves and the rotting masses of agave plants. A
few days later, July 1, 1932, several specimens were taken high in
the mountains in pine forest between the villages of Rincon and
Cajones, south of Chilpancingo. These specimens were found
usually in rock ledges and under leaves at the base of large boulders.
A total of eleven specimens was taken. No other species of the
genus was found in our collecting in the state of Guerrero.
Distribution. The species is presumably confined to the Sierra
Madre del Sur, Mexico.
Locality records:
Guerrero: Mazatlan, 4 miles north of Chilpancingo (Taylor-Smith 6); be-
tween Rincon and Cajone-. in n Chilpancingo (Taylor-Smith 5).
490 The University Science Bulletin
EGREGIUS GROUP
This group, comprising the two subspecies of Eumeces egregius,
is characterized as follows: Very small species, oviparous, lacking
all trace of a median line or bifurcating lines on the head; dorso-
lateral and lateral light lines present, either short or extending to
tail. Two pairs of chinshields; three supraoculars; no primary
temporal; superciliary series broken by small postocular; ear open-
ing partly covered by scales; 18-22 scale rows; limbs widely sepa-
rated. Tail pink or orange in young and adult. The species, with
its two subspecies, occupies the -extreme southeastern part of the
United States in Florida, including the outlying islands, and con-
tiguous part of Georgia.
The specialization of this group is such that I can find no well-
defined point of contact with the remaining species of the genus.
It is significant, however, that certain degenerate (specialized)
members of the Brevirostris group approach the Egregius group in
certain characters.
Eumeces egregius (BairdJ
I have found it necessary to recognize two subspecies of this
species, which may be characterized as follows:
A. Four well-defined narrow light lines extending onto tail, the dorsolateral lines
occupying the medial part of the second scale row. separated by two whole and two
half scale rows, from its fellow; the lateral line separated from the dorsolateral by
two whole rows and two half rows of scales; the median scale rows much larger
than adjoining rows Eurru c< - < gn inns egregius (Baird), page 490
AA. Four light lines evident anteriorly, usually widened, the dorsolateral occupying part
of two scale rows, and if continued following the middle of the third row, separated
from its fellow by four whole and two half rows of scales; lateral line usually short,
but if present separated from the dorsolateral line by one whole and two half rows
of scales; the median dorsal scales only slightly larger than adjacent rows.
Eumeces egregius onocrepis (Cope), page 49 7
Eumeces egregius egregius (Baird)
(Plate 31, Fig. 2; Figs. 83, 84)
SYXONYMY
1858. Plestiodon egregius Baird. Proc. Acad. Xat. Sci. Phila., 1858, p. 256 (typ'e descrip-
tion; type locality. Indian Key, Fla. ; collector, G. Wurdemann ; type No. 3128
U.S.N.M.); Stejneger and Barbour, Check List N. Amer. Amph. Rept., 1917, p. 69
(part.) (western Florida and the Florida Keys).
1875. Eumeces egregius Cope. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. I, 1875, p. 45; Davis and Rice,
111. State Lab. Nat, Hist,, Bull. 5, 1883. p. 46; Garman, Bull. Essex Inst,, XVI,
Jan. 9, 1884, p. 15; Boulenger, Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus.. Ill, 1887, p. 381; Cope, Ann.
Rept. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1898 (1900), p. 655, fig. 132 (part.) (complete description;
places E. onocrepis in synonymy); Ditmars, The Reptile Book, 1915, p. 199; Pratt,
Vert. Anim. U. S., 1923, p. 207; Stejneger and Barbour, Check List N. Amer. Amph.
Rept,, 2d Ed., 1923, p. 75 (part.) (western Florida and the Florida Keys); Loveridge,
Copeia, No. 173, Jan. 16, 1930, p. 112 (part.) (variation, Royal Palm Beach); Van
Hyning, Copeia, No. 1, Apr. 3, 1933, p. 5 (part.) (Florida).
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 491
History. The types of this subspecies were collected on Indian
Key by Mr. (i. Wurdemann and were sent to the United States
National Museum where they were described by Spencer F. Baircl
under the name of Plestiodon egregivs. The description is very
brief, and certain of the statements are erroneous (at least in view
of a more modern nomenclature). The type description states:
"One post-nasal plate; post-frontal and inter-nasals separated by a
post-nasal. Four upper labials. Ears very small. Two central
dorsal rows largest. Body cylindrical. Color reddish ash, with two
or three white lines on each side, margined with dusky, sometimes
a third; all these along the centers of single rows of scales. Upper
lateral lines separated by two plain rows. Body encircled by about
22 rows of scales."
The statement, "one post-nasal" refers no doubt to the anterior
loreal. since a postnasal is absent; likewise the statement "four
upper labials" is incorrect, as seven upper labials are present in both
cotypes normally.
Diagnosis. One of the smallest species of the genUs, characterized
by a pair of narrow dorsolateral lines and a pair of lateral lines
complete to tail; tail rose or orange-colored. Three supraoculars;
parietals usually not enclosing interparietal; superciliary series in-
terrupted posteriorly by an enlarged postocular; no postnasal; two
postmentals; two pairs of chinshields; scale bordering enlarged post-
genial wider than long; last labial broadly in contact with the upper
secondary temporal; anterior temporal wanting; a small postlabial;
tertiary temporal separated from ear by two large scales, the last
of the series overlapping auricular opening; median scale rows wider
than adjoining rows.
Description of subspecies (from U.S.N.M. No. 61692. Big Pine
Key, Monroe Co., Florida). Portion of rostral visible above, tri-
angular, more than half as large as the frontonasal; supranasals
larger than nasals, forming a strong median suture; frontonasal
moderate, broadly in contact with the anterior loreal, forming a
suture with the frontal; prefrontals separated, forming equal sutures
with the frontal, first superciliary, posterior loreal, and frontonasal,
not in contact with the first supraocular; frontal narrow, elongate,
its length much greater than its distance from the end of the snout,
in contact laterally with two supraoculars and the first superciliary;
frontoparietals larger than the prefrontals, forming a broad median
suture; interparietal large, larger than a frontoparietal, not enclosed
by the parietals; latter large, typical; two pairs of nuchals, of equal
size.
492 The University Science Bulletin
Nasal small, divided by a suture; the nostril pierced somewhat
back of the rostrolabial suture; anterior loreal much higher than
wide, higher than posterior loreal; latter subrectangular, once and
two thirds as long as high; two presuboculars; a small preocular,
followed by one large and one or two small granular scales; six
superciliaries, the enlarged postocular entering the series and sepa-
rating the last superciliary from the series; the anterior superciliary
very large, touching the frontal; three supraoculars, the anterior
very large, triangular; three postsuboculars, the upper much the
largest; anterior temporal missing; upper secondary very large,
broadly in contact with sixth and seventh labials; lower secondary
temporal wanting (or occupying place of the tertiary temporal) ; the
Fio. 83. Eumeces egregius egregius (Baird). U.S.N .M. No. 61692; Big
Pine Key, Florida. A, lateral view of head; B, dorsal view of head. Ac-
tual head length, 7.2 mm.; width, 6 mm.
tertiary temporal not strongly differentiated and not in contact with
the upper secondary; a small postlabial separated from ear by the
lower end of an elongated scale which overhangs the ear and partly
conceals the opening. Four equal-sized anterior labials precede the
subocular, which is large, and much elongated; sixth and seventh
labials large, of nearly equal size, or the seventh largest. The eye
small, its length two and one third times its distance from tip of
snout; upper palpebral series of scales forming sutures with the
superciliaries the greater part of its length. Enlarged scales on
lower eyelid separated from the subocular by about two rows of
granules. (Lower eyelid not shown in fig. 83.)
Five lower labials; mental large, with a labial border much greater
than that of rostral; two postmentals, the second very large pro-
portionally; only two pairs of chinshields, the first pair in contact,
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 493
the second pair separated by three scales; postgenials Large, bordered
on medial side by a scale wider than long.
Ear opening small, surrounded by 10-12 scales. Scale rows on
the side- parallel, the two median dorsal rows distinctly widened;
scales around neck behind ear. 26; about narrow pari of neck 27;
about axillary region, 28; about middle of body. 22; the intercalated
rows in axilla drop out before a distance equal to the length of the
arm is reached; lateral and ventral scales about equal in size, both
smaller than median dorsals; subcaudals widened; vent bordered
anteriorly by six scales, the median scales enlarged, the outer ones
-mail, overlapping the inner scales; about 13 scales around insertion
of forelimb; outer wrist scale well developed; palm with three en-
larged granules; lamellar formula for fingers: 5; 8; 11; 11; 7. An
area of small granular scales in the axilla extending somewhat above
insertion of arm. About 14 scales around insertion of leg; heel
bordered by four larger padlike scales, the posterior not in contact
medially; one or two larger tubercular scales on sole; outer half of
foot with imbricating scales; inner scales tubercular. Lamellar
formula for toes: 5; 8; 10; 14; 8; terminal lamellae not tightly
bound about claws; no intercalated scales between dorsal and ven-
tral lamellae.
Color. Above, medially, brownish-gray, the scales flecked with
darker color, this occupying two thirds of the median scale row<;
dorsolateral white line beginning on the snout, widening on the pre-
frontals, then continuing back on the sides of head and body, fol-
lowing the middle of the second scale row, the inner border of which
is brown, leaving the dorsolateral white stripe bordered by a brown
stripe above; a lateral dark stripe along the sides occupying outer
part of second scale row, the third, fourth and part of fifth, the
color not uniform, the scales with grayish white dots forming two
very indistinct lighter lines; lateral light line begins on rostral,
passes along lower edge of first four labials (the upper edges of
which are dark), then widens somewhat, passing back to upper part
of ear, leaving a dark line on lower part of the posterior labials;
the line then continues directly behind ear and along the sides onto
the tail, following the middle of the fifth scale row; below the lateral
line there is a narrow dark line which merges into the gray color
of lower lateral region; chin, throat and abdomen dirty white; tail
somewhat yellowish-brown, probably orange in life. The white lines
continue on the tail to a point where regeneration has replaced
original tail (probably continuing half length of tail normally i. A
494
The University Science Bulletin
_t-.
'3
IB
<»
to
Ss
s-
•a
£
o
CO
o
tO
tj< to "5 00 ■"*
CM m CO '0 tO (--. Oi (M to
if t- r-> CM i-H
>-h r-
Sto
C5
*
COOOCOCOtOCDOOCM"*
■* tO -H CM ^H
feH <N
*
H* © CO
-41 CB i-i
<*l
iO
oo i-h to
M.C.Z.
6152
*
■* ■* <N
hH CO i-H
CO t— O i-H IO
*-<
<t CM
=3
CD
iO OJ
CO f~ CD N 00 i-h iO
i-h CM -h
si
UN
<5
*
OS CM to
■44 U5 TH
to
to r~ oo cm to
3S
02 CO
*
O i-h to
tO to iH
iO
IN CO to
cc'co
*
C>1 OS CD
tO CO i-h
to
oo co to
i-H
£
a
3
—
H-
t-
4.
-
-
c
>
0
3
0
'3
b
-
"l
;-
C
C
*J
3
0
'3
5
o
-a
ca
a
■a
i«-i
o
-C
-a
03
OJ
J3
"o
.3
+->
u
a
1
6
X
FH
0
fa
b
■2
-a
fr
OJ
o
X
a,
b
C
c
fa
o
>
a
CD
cd
—
£
—
>,
J
11
fa
*
>'
/""N
OJ
O
M
0J
fa
-*rf'
bt
C<]
w
CO
"
0J
a
o
O
E
O
00
-
03
l*E
3
—
O
■
H
X*
J3
i-
03
-
—
aJ
u
13
rn
o-a
fa
3Q
>>
i
M
c
c
s
OJ
u
ji
a
HH
CQ
•
CU
o
OH
as
nco
'J
cu
cnZfe
* H-
„
o
J
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 495
dim sublateral line is evident on tail. A second regenerated portion
of tail is forked.
Variations. The color characters of the specimens of this sub-
species examined vary somewhat in shade and somewhat in the
amount of darker pigment, hut agree in the essential markings.
The narrow dorsolateral light lines are of uniform width, separated
by two whole scale rows, and two half scale rows, the lines extend-
ing onto the tail a greater or lesser distance; the lateral light line
is separated from the dorsolateral by two whole scale rows, and two
half rows on the sides of the body.
The scales vary somewhat hut the two median rows are very
distinctly larger than adjoining rows and the scales under the tail
appear to have a smaller transverse length and greater longitudinal
width than the related form, onocrepis.
The scales from parietals to above vent vary between 64 and 69,
the average being 65.5. The number of scales about the body is
20 or 22, the former number occurring four times, the latter five
times, the variation not bearing any definite relation to geographical
distribution.
The number of labials is likewise variable, either six or seven be-
ing present; the former number is present in five specimens, the
latter in four, the variation apparently having no relation to dis-
tribution. The lower labials are usually five, although there are
six present in two specimens; the nuchals are two-two in all save
the specimen from southern Georgia, where only one pair is present.
The scales following, however, are enlarged; three supraoculars are
invariably present; the frontonasal and frontal are in contact in
seven specimens (separate in the types). The postmentals are
invariably two; only two pairs of chinshields. The last upper
labial is usually largest, but in certain specimens the last two are
of nearly equal size. The number of lamellae under the fourth toe
varies from 10-14.
The markings on the back are often bronzy, with darker and
lighter flecks, sometimes showing strong metallic reflections. The
part bordering the dorsal light lines is darker than elsewhere. The
lateral dark stripe is likewise mixed with bronze and black flecks
very similar to the dorsal coloration, save that the darker and
lighter parts are often more pronounced. The lateral line is much
wider on the labials, and frequently passes to the upper part of ear,
then begins on the lower part of ear behind, leaving a break in the
continuity of the line. If the abdomen is light, the lateral line may
496 The University Science Bulletin
merge somewhat in the lateral abdominal color. On the island
forms, however, it is usually quite distinct.
Remarks. The reestablishment of the two forms of Eumeces
egregius has been difficult because of inadequate material. When
Cope described onocrepis he probably had not examined the types
of egregius. Compared with the type description they seemed wholly
unlike. In his work on the species in the Crocodilians, Lizards, etc.
(1900), he probably examined the types, which, if they were as they
are today, might resemble onocrepis in many scale characters, the
color and markings now being wholly obliterated.
I am convinced that originally two entirely distinct species were
in existence, one probably developed by isolation on an island or
islands but which now, due to the union of this land with the con-
tinent, has tended to spread over the territory occupied by the
other form. The southern form is the typical egregius; the typical
onocrepis, that of the western part of the peninsula. It is obvious
that the two forms at present overlap in their distribution in the
central and eastern parts. I am not wholly certain from my ex-
amination of the material available that there is actual intergrada-
tion. Unfortunately I have had no large series from a single lo-
cality; and it is possible that the variations in a single locality may
be greater than I now believe possible. At best an examination of
a few specimens at a time, and these from various collections, miti-
gate against the construction of an accurate picture of the material.
I am certain that the wisest course is to separate the two forms as
subspecies and leave the final disposition to some worker who can
segregate much new, well-preserved material from all parts of the
two ranges. Then and only then can the true status of the two
forms be determined. Certainly nothing can be gained by leaving
them in their present status, when they may be worthy of specific
rank, as is suggested by the fact that certain egregius egregius ap-
pear to be present in the northeastern part of the range of egregius
onocrepis.
Distribution and locality records. (See Fig. 84 for distributional
map.)
Florida :
Monroe Co.: Indian key (U.S.N.M. 2, types, No. 3127, collected by G.
Wurdemann); Tortugas (M.C.Z. 1); Key West (M.C.Z. 2); Big Pine
Key (U.S.N.M. 1).
Alachua Co.: (Mich. 1).
Duval Co.: Dinsmore (A.M.N.H. 1).
Georgia: Charlton Co.: Sardis Church (Univ. Rochester, N. Y. 1).
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 497
Eumeces egregius onocrepis (Cope)
(Plate 31, Fig. 1; Fig. $4)
SYNONYMY
1ST1. Plistodon onocrepis Cope. Second and Third Rept. Peabody Acad. Sci., 1S71, pp.
82, 83 (type description; type locality, Dummet's Plantation, Florida; Mr. Maynard
collector; type originally in the museum of the Peabody Academy of Sciences. Present
location unknown).
1875. Eumeces onocrepis Cope. Bull. I". S. Nat. Mus., No. I, 1875. p. 45; Davis and Rice,
111. State Lab. Nat. Hist., Bull., No. 5, 1883, p. 4fi ; Carman, Bull. Essex Inst., XVI,
1884, p. 15; Boulenger, Cat. Liz. Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 380; Cope, Ann. Rept.
U. S. Nat. Mus., 189S (1900), p. 655, fig. 132 (part.) (description; places E. onocrepis
in synonymy of egregius); Stejneger and Barbour, Check List X. Amer. Amph. Rept.,
2d Ed., 1923, p. 75 (part-): Loveridge, Copeia, No. 173, Jan. 10, 1930. p. 112
(part.: variation); Van Hyning, Copeia, No. 1. Apr. 3, 1933, p. 5 (part.) (Fla.);
Stejneger and Barbour, Check List N. Amer. Amph. Rept., 3d Ed., 1933, pp. 80, 81
(part.).
History. In 1871 Cope described Plistodon onocrepis, the descrip-
tion based on a specimen collected by Mr. Maynard, for the Pea-
body Academy of Science, at Dummet's Plantation, Florida. I have
been unable to discover in what part of Florida this locality occurs.
The description is rather brief and seems to be in error in two
points. The statement: "superciliaries only three" should probably
read "supraoculars only three." The statement: "eight superior
labials" should probably be "seven superior labials," since it is
probable that he counted the rather large postlabial as the eighth.
Later, Cope (1900) placed onocrepis in the synonymy of egregius.
Just why he did this is not wholly clear, since no comment is offered.
I doubt that Cope ever compared the two forms directly. I regard
it likely that when Cope was writing the account of egregius (1900)
the original type of onocrepis had been lost; and the types of
egregius (if they were as I find them at the present time) were in
such a state as to hide all characters of coloration.
The material available for the study of this form has not been
sufficient to obtain a clear picture of the range of the form, or to
understand clearly the meaning of the variations that obtain.
From the specimens available it seems certain that onocrepis is
confined to the mainland of Florida.
Diagnosis. Similar to egregius egregius, but with the dorsolateral
lines usually short, somewhat widened; if continuous, separated on
back by four whole rows and two half rows of scales, the median
-cale rows not strongly enlarged. Labials six or seven; two post-
mentals; no postnasal; two pairs of chinshields; three supraoculars;
tail pink or orange in life.
Description of subspecies (from California Academy of Science,
32—1123
498 The University Science Bulletin
No. 17992, Fruitland Park, Fla.; C. Brimley, collector). Portion of
rostral visible above less than half the size of the frontonasal; supra-
nasals rather small, forming a median suture; frontoparietal much
larger than a prefrontal, in contact with the anterior loreal and
narrowly with the frontal; prefrontals smaller than the fronto-
parietals, the sutures with the frontonasal and frontal largest, those
with first superciliaries and loreals subequal; frontal longer than
its distance from the end of the snout, touching two supraoculars
(apparently a little shorter and wider than in egregius) ; fronto-
parietals longer than wide, in contact medially ; interparietal larger
than frontoparietals, not enclosed by the parietals; latter about
twice as long as wide; two pairs of nuchals; nasal small, divided;
anterior loreal much higher than posterior loreal; latter nearly rec-
tangular; two presuboculars; three supraoculars; seven supercili-
aries, the anterior relatively very large, the series broken by the
upper, enlarged postocular which separates the sixth from seventh
superciliary; a small preocular, followed by a few granules; three
postsuboculars; primary temporal wanting. Upper secondary tem-
poral large, subrectangular, broadly in contact with the sixth and
seventh labials; the lower secondary absent; tertiary temporal small,
separated from ear by two scales; seven upper labials, four preced-
ing the subocular, of which the first of the series is largest; sub-
ocular low, elongated, twice as long as high; the sixth and seventh
upper labials of about equal size; one postlabial, separated from
the minute ear by a large scale that partially overlies the auricular
opening.
Mental large, followed by two postmentals; two pairs of chin-
shields, the anterior pair in contact; second pair followed by an
enlarged postgenial, bordered internally by a scale longer than wide
(on one side this scale is fused to the postgenial and the adjoining
scale is wider than long) ; lower labials, five-six.
Eye small; the upper median palpebrals in contact with the su-
perciliaries; lower lid with four enlarged plates, separated from the
subocular by two or three rows of granules; ear minute, surrounded
by eight or nine scales; scales on body in parallel series; the dorsals
not strongly enlarged, the median dorsal rows only a little larger
than those on sides ; 24 scales about neck behind ear ; 22 on narrower
part of neck; 24 in axillary region; 20 about the middle of body.
Subcaudal scales much widened, short (longitudinally). Six pre-
anals, the median pair much enlarged, the outer scales small, over-
lapping the inner scales; no differentiated lateral postanal scale.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 499
Area of small scales in axilla much less than in described specimen
of egregius; none behind insertion of hind leg; outer wrist tubercle
not strongly defined; a few enlarged scales on palm behind origin
of lingers. Lamellar formula for fingers: 4; 8; 11; 10; 7. Heel
bordered by four or five huge scales; outer half of foot covered with
large imbricate scales; inner half granular. Lamellar formula for
toes: 5; 7; 11; 14; 8.
Pits on the scales dim tor wanting). In egregius these are usually
well defined in region on side of neck, behind axilla, and in the post-
humeral and post femoral regions.
Adpressed limbs widely separated even in youngest specimens; a
separation of 18 mm. in largest specimens, to 4 mm. in smallest ex-
amined, when limbs are adpressed.
Color in alcohol. Above, brown, with the color growing lighter
posteriorly, becoming yellowish-orange on the base of the tail
(greater part of tail missing) ; dorsolateral line beginning on rostral
i which is practically all whitish I continues back, as a somewhat
discontinuous, much widened line to the back of the prefrontal.
Here it narrows and continues back on side of head and shoulder
where it moves from the second to the third row of scales. It can
be traced some distance on the back; it is separated from its fellow
by four whole rows and two part rows of scales. The lateral line
begins on rostral, continues nearly straight back to ear, the edges
irregular; behind ear it can be traced to above axilla where it be-
comes lost ; below brownish-yellow or yellow-flesh ; the lower part
of tail orange.
Variation. The color varies considerably. The dorsal ground
color is usually brown, but may be light grayish with dark flecks.
The dorsolateral line in typical western and central Florida speci-
mens is widened on the shoulders, occupying parts of two scale rows
on the region above arm, and then tending to disappear farther back,
even in younger specimens; if it does not disappear it follows as an
indistinct narrow line along the middle of the third scale row.
Occasional specimens show the line somewhat narrow on the anterior
part. In most of the specimens there is no discernible darker line
following the dorsolateral or at most extending only a short distance
on neck. The tails of all specimens show evidence of having been
pink or orange in life. Sometimes the dorsal pigment forms more or
less distinct dotted lines which may continue on the tail.
Variation in scalation is no greater than is usual in the genus.
The scales from parietal to above vent vary from GO to 67, the
500
The University Science Bulletin
>H
to
z8
_H
CM
o
r~
■*
IO
i-O
OS
Tt<
c-o
TO
^*
rt
a53
P
iO
•o
IO
■*
IO
<* CD
00
CO
,-j
_
■*
to
t~
—
■*
CO
iO
'-'
CM
^
aog
P
CM
IH
*C*
to
00
o
_
CM
0)
>o
to
oo
_H
•*
■*
r~
^H
CM
*— 1
teg
p
CM
■<*<
CM
Tf
02 CN
o
CO
CM
CM
Tt<
to
t^
CO
■*
■<05
».:*-
U-
iO
■H
CM
cu
IO
IO
Tf
t^
»o
t^
oo
<N
■*
o
1*
00
I— (
CM
T~i
U
«?§
"^
p
GO
«5
<h CO
o
■*
■*
CO
oo
CO
iO
!-.
>o
CO
U
Zoi
O
rig
8
p
IO
*-;
"*
2oo
CO
to
IO
CO
t^
t^
t^
■*
iO
Cx
w
oq3
P
CO
93
£io
■*
■ *
to
»o
to
oo
o
00
CM
iO
g
iO
Tt
T-H
co
*~"t
^
tag
o
P
CM
X
CM
CM
C
s
r~
CO
CO
oc
oc
»0
to
s
ccg
CD
p
s-
~
CM
St*
oc
•*
to
to
to
0C
c
>tf
iO
<t>
>o
tt
1—
CO
s
P
t
1
a
c
1
c
T
• #
5 «■
c
0.
>
c
u
C
"c
cS
"o
61
a
C
1 ~
X
bj
3 G.
CO
S-C
4£
-*^
s
-c
a.
cu
c
_
c
•r
c
C
M
c
c
^
c
oc
1
£
a
►J
C
£
C
aT
a
5
'3>
o
CD
a
3
_0)
"3
T3
C
3
.a
3
<
o
to
o
O
fe«iS
3-S"3
Clih -
* ; «
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
501
higher numbers being present in the females, the average for all
being 62.6. The number of scale rows about body is 18-22; the
number 18 occurring once (Royal Palm Beach), 22 occurring once
(Lake Co., Fla. ) {fide Charles Burt I and 20 in all other counts (26).
The upper labials are six or seven; the arrangement 6-6 occurs seven
times; 7-7. eight times; and 6-7, four times, in nineteen specimens
counted; the lower labials are 5, four occurring once. The scales
around ear vary from eight to eleven, 8 occurring eight times; 9,
thirteen times; ](). ten times, and 11, twice. The nuchals show two
exceptions to the normal two pairs; in one the formula is 2-3; in
one 2-1. The postmentals and chinshields appear to be invariable
and the postna-al is always absent. Frequently the last two labials
are subequal. The superciliaries are either seven or eight, the latter
number being most frequent ; two specimens have nine. The frontal
is in contact with the frontonasal in all but a single specimen.
Lamellae under the fourth toe vary from 13 to 17, the lower num-
bers being of most frequent occurrence. The supraoculars are three
save in one specimen from Petersburg, Fla.. which has four. The
anterior superciliary rarely touches frontal.
Distribution. This form seems to be widely distributed in penin-
sular Florida. It occurs from coast to coast, east to west. It ap-
Fig. 84. Distribution of Eumeces egregvus egregius (Baird), and
E. e. onocrepis (Cope), in Florida.
502 The University Science Bulletin
pears to overlap the territory occupied by egregius in the east. How-
ever, no typical egregius have been taken in the western part of
Florida and no typical onocrepis have been taken in the keys.
AYhether the forms intergrade can only be positively determined by
much larger series of specimens than are at present available; the
probabilities are that they do, but my observations seem to show
that the possibility of intergradation is not beyond doubt. Future
study may warrant specific recognition.
Locality records:
Florida (A.M.N.H. 1):
Lake Co.: (U.S.N.M. 3) (A.M.N.H. 1) (M.C.Z. 3); Tavares (U.S.N.M.
2); Fruitland Park (C.A.S. 1) (Cornell 1).
Polk Co.: Aubumdale (U.S.N.M.4).
Dade Co.: Lemon City (U.S.N.M. 3).
Brevard Co.: Georgiana (U.S.N. M. 4) (M.C.Z. 1).
Pinelas Co.: St. Petersburg (M.C.Z. 3) (Cornell 4).
Hernando Co.: Croom (M.C.Z. 1).
Volusia Co.: Volusia (M.C.Z. 1).
Palm Beach Co.: Royal Palm Beach (M.C.Z. 1).
Taylor: The Gents Eumeces 503
A N N ( >TATE I ) B I B LI ( K 1 R APH Y
Aubot. Charles C. 1S6S. Geology of New Jersey.
Lists Plistodon striatus on p. 801.
188S. The pine tree lizard. Pop. Sci. Monthly. XXXIV, pp. 162-171.
Notes given on the habits of the blue-tailed skink, with a figure.
Am., Kknst. 1930. Beitrasie zur Lurch- und Kreichtierfauna Kwangsi's; 5,
Eidechsen. Sitz. Ber. Ges. Naturf. Pr. Berlin, 1930, pp. 326-331.
Aldrovandi, Ulyssis. 1645. De Quadrupedibus Digitatis Oviparis. Libri II.
Liber primus, 1645. pp. 589-692, numerous unnumbered plates. Bononiae,
Nicolai Tebaldini.
Plate page 660, Lacerta Cyprius scincoides with the description and data
pp. 661-663. This plate and description is primarily the "type"' of Scincus
cyprius Cuvier.
Allard, H. A. 1909. Notes on some salamanders and lizards of north Georgia.
Science. XXX. pp. 122-124.
Notes on Eumeces fast-nil us.
Allen, J. A. 1870. Notes on Massachusetts reptiles and batrachians. Proc.
Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., XIII, pp. 260-263.
Records Plestiodon fasciatus.
Anderson, John. 1871. On two saurian genera, Eurylepis and Plocederma
Blyth, with a description of a new species of Mabouia, Fitzinger. Proc.
Asiatic Soc. Bengal, 1871, pp. 186-187.
Gives a complete description of Mabouia taeniolata (Blyth) from the
Salt Range, Punjab. The type description of Mabouia blythiana is given,
based on a specimen purchased from a Bokhara merchant who stated that
he obtained it at Amritzur.
1892. On a small collection of mammals, reptiles and batrachians from
Barbary. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1892. pp. 3-24.
Eu mi as- schneiderii (Daudin) listed from Duirat, Tunisia.
1896. A contribution to the herpetology of Arabia, with a preliminary
list of the reptiles and batrachians of Egypt. London, 1896, pp. 1-122.
/• nieces schneiderii listed from Marsa Matru and Maryut District,
Egypt, on p. 104.
1898. Zoology of Egypt. Reptilia and Batrachia. London (Bernard
Quaritch), 1898, pp. i-lxi, 1-371, pis. I-L.
An excellent account is given of Eumeces schneiderii. Specimens are
listed from Marsa Matru (about 150 miles west of Alexandria) and from
the Maryut District. An excellent figure in color is given (pi. XNY.)
Annandale, Nelson. 1905. Contributions to Oriental herpetology III. Notes
on the Oriental lizards in the Indian Museum, with a list of species
recorded from British India and Ceylon. Part II. Journ. Asiatic Soc.
Bengal, May 1905, I (new series). No. 5, pp. 139-152.
Lists specimens of Eumeces blythianus from Punjab?, Afridi District
(p. 150) ; I in niolatus from Punjab Salt Range; scutatus from several locali-
ties; and scli in ill, rii.
Anontmoi s. 1917. Animal and plant life of Oklahoma. Oklahoma Geol.
Surv. Circ, 6. 1917. pp. 1-68 (Reptiles, pp. 34-35).
Eumeces obsoletus and fasciatus noted as occurring in Oklahoma.
Atkinson, D. A. 1902. The reptiles of Alleghenv county, Pennsylvania.
Annals Carnegie Mus., I. 1901-1902. pp. 145-156.
Records Eumeces fasciatus.
Atsatt. Sarah Rogers. 1913. The reptiles of the San Jacinto area, of southern
California. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., XII. pp. 31-50.
Lists Eumeces skiltonianus and mentions a doubtful specimen of E.
gilberti.
504 The University Science Bulletin
Babcock, Harold L. 1930. New England lizard records. Bull. Boston Soc.
Nat. Hist., No. 57, 1930, pp. 9-12.
Gives records for Eumeces fasciatus.
Bailey, Vernon. 1905. Biological survey of Texas. North Amer. Fauna, No.
25, 1905, pp. 1-222 (reptiles, pp. 38-51).
E. brevilineatus, guttulatus, obsoletus and quinquelineatus listed from
Texas.
Baird. Spencer F. 1850. Revision of the North American Tailed-Batrachia,
with descriptions of new genera and species. Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila..
(2), I, 1847-1850, pp. 281-294.
Contains the type description of Plestiodon anthracinus; the type lo-
cality is North mountain, near Carlyle, Pa.
1857. Report of the reptiles collected on the survey (No. 3). Expl.
Surv. R. R. Route Pacific Ocean, Zool., Rept., N, Pt. 4, 1853-1856, pp. 16-20,
pis. 17, 18, 23, 24.
Plate 24, fig. 2, is of Plestiodon septentrionalis Baird. Plestiodon gut-
tulatus reported from "Upper Arkansas." This latter possibly refers to the
Arkansas river rather than to the state. Plestiodon skiltonianm is also
mentioned. In a footnote to the title page is a statement that No. 4 was
published in 1859. while Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were published in 1857.
1858. Description of new genera and species of North American lizards
in the museum of Smithsonian Institution. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.,
1858, pp. 253-256.
This important paper contains the brief type descriptions of Plestiodon
egregius, Indian Key, Florida, G. Wurdemann, type No. 3128; Plestiodon
inornatus, Sand Hills of Platte (Neb.), Lt. Warren and Doctor Hayden,
type No. 3110; Plestiodon leptogrammus, Platte River Valley (Neb.), Lt.
Warren, Doctor Hayden, type No. 3119; Plestiodon septentrionalis, Minne-
sota and Nebraska, Rev. S. W. Manney, type No. 1356; and Plestiodon
tetragrammus, Lower Rio Grande (Matamoros, Tamaulipas, Mex.), Doctor
Berlandier and Lt. Couch, type No. 3124; types in IT. S. N. M.
1859. Report upon the reptiles of the route. Expl. Surv. R. R. Route
Pacific Ocean, Zool., Rept., X, Pt. 4, 1859, pp. 38-45, pis. 25-27.
Plestiodon obsoletus listed from "Coal Creek, Arkansas," B. Mollhausen,
and Plestiodon jasciatus from "Fort Smith."
1859a. Reptiles of the boundary. U. S. Mex. Bound. Surv. under
Col. W. H. Emory, II, Pt. 2, 1859, pp. 1-25, pis. 1-41.
Lists Plestiodon guttulatus with figures 20-28, plate 24; Plestiodon ob-
soletus with figures 9-16, plate 25; and Plestiodon tetragrammus.
Baird, Spencer F., and Girard, Charles. 1852. Characteristics of some new
reptiles in the museum of the Smithsonian Institution. Proc. Acad. Nat.
Sci. Phila., 1852, pp. 68-70.
Contains the type description of Plestiodon Skiltonianus ; type locality
Oregon.
1852a. Characteristics of some new reptiles in the museum of Smith-
sonian Institution. Second part. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1852, pp.
125-128.
Contains the type description of Plestiodon obsoletum. The type locality
is given as "Valley of the Rio San Pedro of the Rio Grande del Norte."
Rio San Pedro is now Devil's river.
Barbour, Thomas. 1909. Notes on amphibia and reptilia from eastern Asia.
Proc. New England Zool. Club, IV, 1909, pp. 53-78.
1914. Notes on some reptiles from Sinai and Svria. Proc. New Eng-
land Zool. Club, V, pp. 73-92.
Describes specimens of Eumeces schneiderii syriacus (Boettger) from
Petra. Arabia.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 505
1917. A mosl regrettable tangle of names. Occ. Papers Mus. Zool.
Univ. Mich., No. 41. Sept. 12. 1917. pp. 1-9.
Concerns the date of publication of certain descriptions of Japanese
species of Eurni c< s.
Bastide, I.. 1S77. Reptiles du Japon. Mem. Soc. d'Ethnogr., Sess. 1877:
Revue Orientale ft Americaine, Paris, 1S77.
Bbddard, Fimnk E. 1905. A contribution to the knowledge of the encephalic
arterial system in Sauropsida. Prof. Zool. Soc. London, 1905. II, pp. 59-70,
figs. 16-21.
Brain of Eumeces algeriensis discussed on page 61, with a figure (text
tiix. 16) on page 62.
1907. Contributions to the knowledge of systematic arrangement and
anatomy of certain genera and >pecies of Squamata. Proc. Zool. Soc
London. 1907, pp. 35-6N
Notes on internal anatomy.
Beyer. George S. 1900. Louisiana herpetologv. Proc. La. Soc. Naturalists,
1S97-1S99. pp. 25-46.
Lists Eurru c< s fasciatus.
Bishop. Sherman C. 1918. Notes on lizards of New York. Copeia, No. 54..
1918, pp. 35-36.
Gives records of Eumeces aiilhracinus and notes that the record of
Leiolopisma laU rah from New York was based on a specimen of E. an-
thracinus.
1926. Records of some amphibians and reptiles from Kentucky.
Copeia. No. 152. 1926. pp. 118-120.
Record- Eumec: s fascial us from Breathitt county, Kentucky.
Blanchard. Frank N. 1922. The amphibians and reptiles of western Ten-
nessee. Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich., No. 117, 1922. pp. 1-18.
Notes on Plestiodon fascial us. Two of the specimens listed from near
Henry are laticeps.
1923. The amphibians and reptiles of Dickinson county, Iowa. Univ.
Iowa Studies Nat. Hist.. N„ No. 2, pp. 19-26.
E. s< pli ntrionalis is listed.
1924. A collection of amphibians and reptiles from southeastern Mis-
souri and southern Illinois. Papers Mich. Acad. Sci. Arts Letters, IV, 1924,
pp. 533-541.
Notes on Eumeces fasciatus. Nos. 58738 and 58737 are laticeps.
1925. A collection of amphibians and reptiles from southern Indiana
and adjacent Kentuckv. Papers Mich. Acad. Sci. Arts Letters, V, 1925,
pp. 367-388.
Localities given for Eumeces fasciatus.
1928. Amphibians and reptiles of Douglas Lake region in northern
Michigan. Copeia, No. 167, June 28, pp. 42-51.
Locality records given for Eumeces fasciatus.
Blanford, W. T. 1875. Journ. Asiatic Soc. Bengal, NLIY (n.s.), Pt. II, No. 3.
pp. 191-196.
Lists Eumeces taeniolatus on the Forsyth Mission.
1876. An account of the journeys of the Persian Boundary Commis-
sion 1870-71-72. Zoology and geology, VII, pp. 1-516.
On page 387 are given interesting data on Eumeces pavimentatus
Geoff .-DeFilippi. with the following locality records: Pishin, Baluchistan;
Sarjan, southwest of Karman, southern Persia; and near Niriz, east of
Shiraz, 4.000-6.000 feet.
1879. Second Yarkand Mission Report, Reptilia and Amphibia. Cal-
cutta, 4to. pp. 1-26. pis. 1-2. (1878?)
Reports and describes a large specimen of Eumeces taeniolatus from
Chakoti. on the road from Mari to Srinagar, in Kashmir (p. 19).
506 The University Science Bulletin
Blatchley, W. S. 1891. Notes on the reptiles and batrachians of Vigo
county, Indiana. Journ. Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist., XIV, 1891, pp. 22-35.
Eumeces jasciatus listed.
Bleekek, P. 1858. Reptilien van Japan. Natuurk. Tijdschr. Nederland.
Indie. XVI, 1858, pp. 204-205.
Lists Plestiodon quinquelineatus (= Eumeces latiscutatus) from Japan
(p. 204).
Blyth, E. 1854. Notices and descriptions of various reptiles, new or little-
known. Journ. Asiatic Soc. Bengal, XXII, pp. 639-655.
Contains the type description of Plestiodon quadrilineatum, collected
by J. C. Bowring in China, presumably Hongkong.
— 1854. Report of the curator, Zoological Department, for September.
Journ. Asiatic Soc. Bengal, XXIII, pp. 739-740.
The type description of the genus Eurylepis, and the type species,
taeniolatus; described from a specimen from the Salt Range, Punjab, col-
lected by W. Theobald.
Bocourt, F. 1879. Recherches Zoologiques pour servir a l'histoire de le
Faune de l'Amerique Central et du Mexique; Etudes sur les Reptiles et
les Batracien.s. Miss. S'ci. Mex. et Amer. Cent., Partie Troisieme (Paris,
1870), Livraison VI, pp. 361-440, pis. 21-22, 22A, 22B, 22C, 22D.
This livraison contains descriptions and figures of several species of
Eumeces. The type description of Eumeces capito (pi. 22D, figs. 8, 8a,
8b, 8c), with the type locality as "la cote oriental des Etats-Unis," ap-
pears; also of Eumeces obtusirostris (page 423, pi. 22D, figs. 1, la, lb), the
"type description" in Tableau synoptique, the type locality Texas ; Eumeces
hallowelli (pi. 22E, figs. 7, 7a), California; Eumeces callicephalus (pi. 22D,
figs. 2, 2a, 2b, 2c, and pi. 22E, fig. 2), "Guanajuato Mexique."
Aside from the tvpe descriptions are given descriptions of E. brevirostris
(pi. 22A, figs. 7, 7a,' 7b, and pi. 22E, fig. la); E. lynxe (pi. 22E, figs. 9, 9a,
9b, 9c, 9d) ; E. laticeps (pi. 22D, figs. 6, 6a, 6b) ; E. quinquelineatus (pi.
22E, figs. 10, 10a, 10b, 10c) ; E. skiltonianus (pi. 22A, figs. 3, 3a, 3b, and pi.
22E, fig. 3). Eumeces sinensis, E. Japonicus, E. sum-ichrasti and E. pulchra
are noted.
1881. Ibid. Livraison VII. pp. 441-488, pis. 22E, 22F, 22G, 22H. 221,
22J.
Contains a complete description of Eumeces obtusirostris, whose type
description must be considered as appearing in the preceding livraison, as
well as figures of the same. Eumeces obsoletus (pi. 22A, figs. 4, 4a, and pi.
22D, fig. 4) is also described.
Boettger, Oscar. 1873. Die Reptilien und Amphibien Marokkos und der
Canaren. Abh. Senckenb. Nat. Ges., IX, 1873, pp. 121-170 (also issued as
a separate, 1874, 4to, pp. 1-71, pi.).
Eumeces pavimentatus (non Geoff roy) redescribed from Morocco, p.
140 (Separate, p. 20).
■ 1874. Reptilien von Marokko und von den Canarischen Inseln - 1.
Uebersicht der von den Herrn Dr. C. von Fritsch und Dr. J. J. Rein im
Jahre 1872 in Marokko gesammelten Reptilien. Abh. Senckenb. Nat. Ges.,
IX, 1874, pp. 121-170, pi. 1 (with appendix, op. cit., XI, 1877, p. 1, footnote).
1879. Reptilien und Amphibien Japan. Offenbach. Ver. Naturk., 17-
18, Bericht Mitth., 1878, p. 8.
Lists Eumeces (Plestiodon) japonicus, p. 4.
1880. Die Reptilien und Amphibien von Syrien, Palaestina und Cy-
pern. Ber. Senckenb. Nat. Ges.. 1879-80, pp. 132-219, pis. Ill and IV.
1881. Liste der von Herrn Dr. W. Kobelt in der Prov. Oran, Algerien
gesammelten Kreichthiere. Ber. Senckenb. Nat. Ges., 1880-1881, pp. 144-147.
Lists Eumeces pavimentatus.
Taylor: 'I'm Genus Eumeces 507
1883. Die Reptilien und Amphibien von Marokko II. Abh. Senckenb.
Xat. Ges.. XIII, 1S83. pp. 93-146. pi. 1. (Also author's s< parate, 1883, pp.
1-54.)
Discusses Eumeces pavimentatus algeriensis Peters and gives locality
records, p. 120 (separate, p. 28, mentioned, p. 52); also Eumeces pavimen-
tatus syriaca, "type description," p. 120 (separate, p. 28).
1885. Liste der von Hrn. Dr. W. Kobelt in Algerien und Tunisien
gesammelten Kreichthiere. Appendix to W. Kobelt, Reiseerrinerungen aus
Algerien und Tunis. Frankfurt M. 1885, 8vo, pp. 457-475.
Practically a repetition of data in previous paper of 1881.
1885n. Materialen zur herpetologischen Fauna von China I. Offen-
bach. Ver. Xaturk. 24-25 Bericht., 1882-1884, pp. 115-170.
The Mabouia chinensis listed and described (p. 144) is Eumeces elegans
Boul. in part.
1S86. Die Reptilien und Amphibien des Talysch-Gebietes. In Radde,
Fauna und Flora des S. W. Caspi-Gebietes, Leipzig.
Eumeces pavirru ntatus listed on p. 57.
1888. Aufzahlung einiger neu ervorbener Reptilien und Batrachier aus
Ost-Asien. Ber. Senckenb. Naturf. Ges., 1888, pp. 187-190.
Eumeces marginatus listed from O-shima, Liukiu-Inselen, p. 188.
lSSSo. Die Reptilien und Batrachier Transkaspiens. Zool. Jahrb. III.
Syst. (1SSS), pp. 871-972.
h'uiin C( x sckm idt rii listed on p. 918.
1892. Wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der Reise Dr. Jean Valentine im
Sommer 1890. I, Kreichentiere der Kauk asuslander. Ber. Senckenb. Naturf.
Ges.. 1892, pp. 131-163.
Reports Eumeces schneiderii from Posten Bartas, p. 147.
1892a. Liste von Kreichthieren und Lurchen aus dem tropischen Asien
u. aus Papuasien. Offenb. Ver. Xaturk.. 1887-1891. pp. 65-164.
Lists Eumeces elegans Boul. (p. 102) from Cambodia (Cambodga), with
the statement, "jung, neu fur Cambodga.-'
1S93. Katalog der Reptilien-Sammlung im Senckenbergischen Natur-
forschenden Gesellschaft in Frankfurt am Main. Frankfurt, Teil I. pp. i-x,
1-140.
Xumerous species listed.
1894. Materialen zur herpetologischen fauna von China III. Ber.
Senckenb. Naturf. Ges., pp. 129-152. pi. 2.
Gives locality records for certain Chinese species — Eumeces elegans
(Chapu. near Xingpo) and Eumeces chinensis (pp. 136 and 144).
1895. Xeue Frosche und Schlangen von den Liukiu-Inseln. Jahresb.
Offenb. Ver. Xaturk., 36, 1895, pp. 101-117.
Eumeces marginatus is reported from several localities.
1899. Reptilia et Batrachia. in Radde, Die Sammhmgendes Kaukasi-
schen Museums (Museum Caucasicum).
Lists Eumeces schneiderii on p. 282.
Bocert. Charles M. 1930. An annotated list of the amphibians and reptiles
of Los Angeles countv, California. Bull. South. Calif. Acad. Sci.. XXIX,
1930. Pt. 1. pp. 3-14.
Lisrs Eumeces skiltordanus.
Bond. Haklet D. 1931. Some amphibians and reptiles of Monan<ralia countv.
West Virginia. Copeia. 1931. Xo. 2. July 20, pp. 53-54.
Eumeces fasciatus listed (p. 54) as rare.
Boring. Alice M. 1932. A list, of Fukien Amphibia and reptiles. First Ann.
Re]>. M. B. A. C, 1932. pp. 99-124.
Eumeces chim nsis and E. elegans listed with locality records.
508 The University Science Bulletin
Boring, Alice M., Liu, Cheng-Chao, Shit- Ch'ux Chow. 1932. Handbook
of North China Amphibia and reptiles. Handbook 3, Peking Nat. Hist.
Bull., Aug., 1932, pp. 1-64.
Eumeces pekinensis listed and figure given, on p. 58.
Boulencer, George Albert. 1883. Descriptions of new species of lizards and
frogs collected bv Herr A. Forrer in Mexico. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., (5),
XI, May 1883, pp. 342-344.
Eumeces bocourti is described as new from Presidio. This name being
preoccupied, it was changed by Boulenger to Eumeces humilis (Cat. Liz.
Brit. Mus., Ill, 1887, p. 377).
1887. Catalogue of the lizards in the British Museum of Natural
History. Second Edition. London, III, pp. i-xii, 1-575, pis. I-XL.
Treats of 31 species of the genus Eumeces.
1889. On the reptiles and batrachians obtained in Marocco by M.
Henry Vau.cher. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., (6), III, 1889, pp. 303-307.
1890. Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Reptiles
and Batrachians. London, 8vo, 1890, pp. i-xviii, 1-541. 142 figs.
Treats of the four Indian species, Eumeces scutatus (Theobald),
Eumeces taeniolatus (Blyth), Eumeces blythianus (Anderson) and Eumeces
schneiderii (Daudin) (pp. 218-219).
1890a. First report on the additions to the lizard collection in the
British Museum. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1890, pp. 77-85.
Lists the type of Eumeces xanthi, and Eumeces brevilineatus is men-
tioned from Texas.
1891. Notes on Transcaspian reptiles. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1891,
pp. 628-633.
Eumeces scutatus (Theobald) is redescribed from specimens from Puli
Hatun. Transcaspia.
1892. Descriptions of new reptiles and batrachians from the Loo Choo
Islands. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., (6). X, 1892, pp. 302-304.
Eumeces marginatus is reported from Okinawa.
1893. Reptilia and Batrachia. Zool. Record, 1893, pp. 1-38.
Notes that Platypholis is preoccupied by Boulenger, 1890. Makes
Eumeces rovirosac a synonym of lynxe (erroneously).
1894. Second report on additions to the lizard collection in the Na-
tural History Museum. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1894, pp. 722-736.
Eumeces schwartzii Fisch. listed from "West Indies (Christiana Mus)."
1895. Reptiles and batrachians of Barbarv. Trans. Zool. Soc. London,
1895, pp. 93-165.
Locality records for Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin) in Tunis are given.
1898. List of species new, or previously unrepresented, of which speci-
mens have been added to the collections since 1894. Proc. Zool. Soc.
London, 1898, pp. 912-924.
Eumeces blythianus (Anderson) is listed from Afridi country, Green
Coll.
1899. On a collection of reptiles and batrachians made by Mr. J. D.
Latouche in N. W. Fukien, China. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1899, pp.
159-172, pis. XVI-XIX.
Eumeces elegans listed.
Brady, Maurice. 1927. Notes on the reptiles and Amphibia of the Dismal
Swamp. Copeia, No. 162, 1927, pp. 26-29.
Records eggs of Eumeces jasciatus.
Brimley, C. S. 1905. Notes on the food and feeding habits of some American
reptiles. Journ. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc, XXX, 1905, pp. 149-155.
Eumeces fasciatus is discussed.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 509
1926. Revised key and lisi of the amphibians and reptiles of North
Carolina. Journ. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc, XLII, Nos. 1-2. 1926, pp. 75-93.
Eumeces anthracinus listed from Pisgah Forest; also E. jasciatus.
Brown. Ahtihk Erwin. 1902. A collection of reptiles and batrachians from
Borneo and the Loo Choo Islands. Proc. Acad. Xat. Sci. Phila., 1902,
pp. 175-1S6.
Reports Eumeces marginatum from Ooshima and Okinawa.
1903. Texas reptiles and their faunal relations. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci.
Phila.. 1903, pp. 543-558.
Lists Texas species of Eumeces.
1904. Post-glacial Nearctic centers of dispersal of reptiles. Proc. Acad.
Nat. Sci. Phila.. 1904, pp. 464-474.
Eumeces is placed in the Lower Sonoran Zone.
' 1908. Generic types of Nearctic Reptilia and Amphibia. Proc. Acad.
Nat. Sci. Phila., 1908, pp. 112-127.
Erroneously states that the name Eumeces cannot be used for this genus.
Bumpus, H. C. 1885. Reptiles and batrachians of Rhode Island. Random
Notes on Natural History. Providence, R. I., Vol. II, No. 2, p. 13.
Burnett. W. L. 1932. A new skink for Colorado. Copeia, 1932, No. 1, Apr.,
p. 37.
Reports E. jasciatus from Fort Collins (=2?. multivirgatus) .
Burt, Charles E. 1927. An annotated list of the reptiles and amphibians of
Rilev countv. Kansas. Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich., No. 189, 1927,
pp. i-9.
Eumeces obsoletus and guttulatus listed. Expresses the opinion that
the latter is the young of the former.
1928. Insect food of Kansas lizards, with notes on feeding habits.
Journ. Kansas Ent. Soc. I. No. 3, 1928. pp. 50-68.
Food habits of the Kansas Eumeces.
1928a. Lizards of Kansas. Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis, XXVI, No. 1,
1928. pp. 1-81. distributional maps.
Discusses Kansas species of Eumeces with maps showing their distribu-
tion in the state. The following species are treated: anthracinus, Jasciatus,
multivirgatus, obsoletus, and septentrionalis. Eumeces guttulatus is placed
as a synonym of obsoletus.
1929. A key to the species of lizards definitely reported from Kansas.
Privately printed, pp. 1-2.
List Eumeces species of Kansas.
1929a. The svnonvmv. variation and distribution of the Sonoran Skink,
Eumeces obsoletus (Baird and Girard). Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. Univ.
Mich.. No. 201. June 17, 1929.
Excellent notes given on Eumeces obsoletus. Identification of two
specimens mentioned by Cope are incorrect. No. 9231 is Eumeces calli-
cephalus, from Gila river, Arizona, and No. 3162 is E. obsoletus, from
Matamoros, Mexico.
1932. Elimination of Eumeces fascial us from the Colorado faunal list.
Copeia, 1932, No. 2, July 1, p. 104.
Eumeces jasciatus Burnett = E. multivirgatus.
1933. A collection of amphibians and reptiles from southern Missouri
Amer. Midland Naturalist, XIV. Mar. 1933, Xo. 2. pp. 170-173.
Eumeces jasciatus? from Mountain View, Howell county, is listed.
1933<7. Some distributional and ecological records of Kansas reptiles.
Trans. Kans. Acad. Sci.. 1933, Vol. 36. pp. 186-20S.
Records anthracinus, jasciatus, obsoletus and septentrionalis.
510 The University Science Bulletin
Burt, Charles E., and Burt, May Danheim. 1929. A collection of amphibi-
ans and reptiles from the Mississippi Valley, with field observations. Amer.
Mus. Nov., No. 381, pp. 1-14.
Eumeces obsoletus reported from Marion county, Kansas; E. septen-
trionalis from near Kearney, Neb.; E. fasciatus from Leesville, La.
1929a. Field notes and locality records on a collection of amphibians
and reptiles, chiefly from the western half of the United States. Journ.
Wash. Acad. Sci., NIX, pp. 42S-460.
Eumeces obsoletus recorded from Haddam, Washington county, Kansas.
Cahn, Alvin R. 1929. The herpetologv of Waukesha county, Wisconsin.
Copeia, 1929, No. 170, April, pp. 4-8.
Lists Eumeces fasciatus as "rare."
Calabresi, En rica. 1923. Mission Zoologica del Dr. E. Festa in Cirenaica.
Boll, dei Mus. Zool. Anat. Comp. Univ. Torino, XXXVII (n.s.), N. 7,
pp. 1-28.
Reports collections of Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin) at Bengasi and
Tobvuk.
Camp, Charles Lewis. 1916. The subspecies of Sceloporus occidentalis, with
description of a new form from the Sierra Nevada, and systematic notes on
other California lizards. Univ. Calif. Zool., XVII, 1916, pp. 63-74.
The author erroneously refers Eumeces gilberti Van Denburgh to the
synonymy of E. skiltonianus.
1923. Classification of the lizards. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist.,
NLVIII, Art. XL 1923. pp. 289-435, figs. 1-112.
Notes on skull bones.
Cantor, Theodore. 1842. General features of Chusan, with remarks on the
fauna and flora of that island. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., (1), IX.
Type description given of Tiliqua rujo-guttata.
Catesby, Marc. 1751-1754. The natural history of Carolina, Florida, and the
Bahama Islands. London, 1751 and 1754, 2 vols., folio, col. pis. 1-120.
Lacertu cauda cat nth a, which is figured in Vol. II, pi. 67, is the basis of
Linnaeus' Lacertu fasciata.
A Latin and German edition published in Nuremburg bears the title
"Piscium et Serpentium imagines quas Marcus Catesby tradidit 1750-1777,"
in 2 vols., folio, pis. 1-109.
Chang, Mangven L. Y. 1932. Notes on a collection of reptiles from Szechuan.
Cont, Biol. Lab. Sci. Soc. China, VIII. Zool. Ser., No. 2, pp. 9-95, fig. 4.
Gives a complete description of Eumeces < U gans, and list,? the form from
Chung kiang, and Kiating in Szechwan.
Cockerell, T. D. A. 1896. Reptiles and batrachians of Mesilla Valley, New*
Mexico. Amer. Nat., Apr. 1896. pp. 325-327.
Eumeces obsoletus mentioned on p. 326, with no more data than that
they were not rare near the college near Las Cruces.
1927. The zoologv of Colorado. Univ. Colo. Semicent. Series (Denver,
Colo.). Vol. III. 1927, pp. 1-262.
Mentions Eumeces multivirgatus and obsoletus.
Cocteau. 1837. Tabl. Synopt. Seine.
Euprt pis de Catesby mentioned.
Conant, Roger. 1930. Field notes of a collecting trip. Bull. Antivenin Inst,
of Amer.. IV, No. 3, 1930, pp. 60-64.
. Lists locality records for Eumeces fasciatus. Certain of these refer to
other species.
Cook, Lorenzo. 1930. Notes on an Arizona elegans occidentalis. Copeia,
Dec. 1930, No. 4. p. 158.
E. skiltonianus mentioned from near the International Boundary Monu-
ment. No. 258.
Taylor: The Genus Eume< i - 511
Cope, Edward D. 1861. On the Reptilia of Sombrero and Bermuda. Proc.
Phila. Acad. Nat. Sci., Oct.. 1861, pp. 312-314.
( )n page 320 is given the type description of Plestiodon longirostris
(U.S.N.M. 4737) from Bermuda.'
1S65. Third contribution to the herpetology of tropical America. Proc.
Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.. 1865. pp. 185-198.
Plistodon li/iu; is reported from "Tableland and Southern Mountains
[of Mexico]."'
1866. On the Reptilia and Batrachia of the Sonoran province of the
Nearctic region. Proc. Acad. Xat. Sci. Phila., 1866, pp. 300-314.
Lists Plistodon obsoletus and guttulatus.
1866a. Fifth contribution to the herpetology of tropical America.
Proc. Acad. Xat. Sci. Phila., 1866, pp. 317-323.
Contains the type description of Eumeccs sumichrasti. The type \\ is
collected by Sumichrast, at "Orizava," Mexico.
1871. Catalogue of reptilia and batrachia obtained by C. J. Maynard
in Florida. 2,1 and 3d Rept. Peabody Acad. Sci., 1871, pp. 82-85.
Type description of Plistodon onocrepis from Dummets plantation,
Florida, is included. The Plistodon lineatus listed is probably a lapsus
for qvinquelineatus.
1S75. Checklist of North American batrachians and reptiles. Bull.
('. S. Xat. Mus.. Xo. 1. 1875. pp. 1-104.
The North American species listed are as follows (pp. 44-45); Eumcces
septentrionalis, egregius, tetragrammus, anthracinus, onocrepis, inornatus,
multivirgatus, leptogramnvus, obsoletus, guttulatus, skiltonianus, fasciatus
and longirostris.
■ 1877. On some new and little known reptiles and fishes from the
Austroriparian Region. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc, XVII, June 1877-June
1878. pp. 63-68.
Eumeces anthracinus variety (,= E. pluvialis Cope) is reported, and
Eumeces striatus (probably a lapsus for fasciatus) is listed from Volusia,
Florida.
1880. On the zoological position of Texas. Bull. U. S. Xat. Mus..
Xo. 17. 1880. pp. 1-52.
Type descriptions are given of Eumeces epipleurotis from the north-
ern boundary of Texas and from X'ebraska, pp. 40-41 ; Eumcces pachyurus
from near Dallas, Tex.; and Eumeces pluvialis (footnote to p. 19) from
near Mobile. Ala. E. obsoletus is reported from Helotes, Tex. Specimens
from Douglas county. Kansas, are described and variation noted. Eurru
brevilineatus is noted from Helotes creek, 20 miles northwest of San
Antonio, Tex., and Eumcces fasciatus is listed with a statement that
Eumeces erythrocephalus, quinquelineatus and fasciatus are forms of the
same species, according to Professor Baird.
1883. X'otes on the geographical distribution of Batrachia and Reptilia
in western North America. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1SS3, pp. 10-35.
Gives locality records for Eumeccs skiltonianus.
1885. Twelfth contribution to the herpetology of tropical America.
Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc. XXII, pp. 167-194.
Lists Eumeces brevirostris, E. dugesi, E. schwarzei (sic). E. lynxe, E.
sumichrasti and E. callict phalus, giving key characters. Describes as new
Eumeces furcirostris (from Jalapa).
1885a. A contribution to the herpetology of Mexico. Proc. Amer.
Philos. Soc. XXII, pp. 379-HI4.
Describes Eumeces brevirostris var. from either the Valley of Mexico
or the adjacent one of Toluca. This is Eumeces copei Taylor. Mentions
also E. furcirostris from Jalapa (p. 380). which is the type locality.
512 The University Science Bulletin
1887. Catalogue of the reptiles and batraehians of Central America
and Mexico. Bull. U. S. Nat, Mus., 32, 1887, pp. 1-96.
Lists Eumeces brevirostris, giving the published locality records. The
locality "Valleys of Mexico or Toluca" is in reference to specimens of
Eumeces co-pel Taylor. E. bocourti, E. dugesi, E. schwartzei, E. lynxe,
E. sumichrasti, E. callicephalus and E. jurcirostris are listed. E. obsolctus
is reported from the city of Chihuahua.
1892. The osteology of the Lacertilia. Proc, Amer. Philos. Soc,
XXX, Apr. 1892, No. 138, pp. 185-220, pis. 2-6.
The osteology of Eumeces obsoletus and jasciatus is discussed, pp.
213-215.
1892a, The Batrachia and Reptilia of northwestern Texas. Proc. Acad.
Nat. Sci. Phila., 1892. pp. 331-336.
Reports Eumeces obsoletus from Big Spring, Texas.
1896. The geographic distribution of Batrachia and Reptilia in North
America. Amer. Nat., 1896, pp. 886-902; Dec, 1896, pp. 1003-1026.
Discusses the distribution of the several known species of Eumeces in
America.
1900. Crocodilians, lizards and snakes of North America. Rept. U. S.
Nat. Mus., 1898, pp. xi-xviii, 155-1270. pis. 1-36, text figs. 1-347.
Pages 624-665 deal with the genus Eumeces of the United States, with
keys including the Mexican species. Fourteen American species are de-
scribed, with three new varieties: Eumeces quinquelineatus polygrammus,
from Colonel's Island, Ga. ; E. skUtonianus ambly grammus from Fort
Humboldt, Calif.; and E. sklltonianus brevipes from Fresno, Cal.
Corrington, Julian D. 1927. Field notes on some amphibians and reptiles
from Biloxi. Miss. Copeia, 1927, No. 165. pp. 98-102.
Records Eumeces jasciatus as common.
■ 1929. Herpetologv of the Columbia, South Carolina, region. Copeia,
No. 172, 1929, pp. 58-83.
Notes on Eumeces jasciatus.
Cotjes, Elliot. 1875. Synopsis of the reptiles and batraehians of Arizona
with critical and field notes, with an extensive synonymy. Rept. Geog. &
Geol. Expl. Surv. west 100th Merid., under Lt. Wheeler, V, Zoology, pp.
585-633, pis. XVT-XXV.
Eumeces obsoletus listed.
Cotjes, Elliot, and Yarrow, H. C. 1878. Notes on the herpetology of
Dakota and Montana. Bull. U. S. Geol. & Geog. Surveys Terr., IV, No.
1, 1878, pp. 259-291.
Lists Eumeces septentrionalis on page 278.
1878. Notes on the natural history of Fort Macon, N. C, and vicinity.
No. 4. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1878, pp. 21-28.
Eumeces jasciatus listed.
Cr\gin F. W. 1880. A preliminary catalogue of Kansas reptiles and batraeh-
ians. Trans. Kans. Acad. Sci., VII. 1879-1880. pp. 112-119.
Mentions Eumeces septentrionalis from Neosho Falls; E. obsoletus,
Douglas county; E. guttulatus, Manhattan; and E. jasciatus, Fort Riley.
1880a. Supplementary list comprising species now known as extralimital
but more or less likelv to be found in Kansas. Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci.,
VII, 1879-1880, pp. 119-120.
Lists Eumeces multivirgatus, leptogrammus, and inornatus.
1885. Second contribution to the herpetology of- Kansas with observa-
tions on the Kansas fauna. Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci., IX, 1883-1884, pp.
136-140.
E. jasciatus listed, and E. multivirgatus reported from Neosho Falls, p.
138. This latter is probably septentrionalis.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 513
1885a. Recent additions to the list of Kansas reptiles and batrachians,
with further notes < u species previously reported. Bull. Washburn College
Lab. Nat. Eist., I. 1885. No. 3, pp. 10(M03.
Reports Eumeces multivirgatus and E. jasciatus. Virtually the same
data given as the preceding paper presents.
CYvikij. Georges. 1829. Regne Animal. 2d Edition. II., 3d Ed. ''Griffiths,"
1831.
Type description of Scincus cyprius, p. 62.
Czernov. S. 1926. Sur la connaisance de la herpetologique d'Armenie et de
la contree du Nakhiczevan. Bull. Sci. de l'Inst. Expl. Reg. du Caucase du
Nord, V. 1926, pp. 63-72.
Eumeces sclniciili ri reported from the Caucasus.
D.ubextox, Louis-Jeax-Marie. 1784. Les Quadrupedes Ovipares, et les Ser-
pens. Vol. II of l"Encyclop. Method.
Mentions Lezard a queue bleue and Le lezard strie.
Datjdin, F. M. 1802. Historie Naturelle des Reptiles. Vols. I-VIII. Vol. IV
(1802-1803).
Type description given of Scincus schm idi Hi, p. 291. Treats of Scincus
quinqueUneatus (p. 272, pi. LV, fig. 1); Scincus laticeps (p. 301); and
Scincus tristatus (p. 292), with descriptions and discussion.
David, Abmand. 1872. Journal d'un voyage dans le Centre de la Chine et
dans le Thibet Oriental. Nouv. Arch. Hist. Nat. Paris, VIII, Bull., 1872, pp.
3-137.
Mentions Eumeces quadrilineatus.
1875. Journal de mon Troisieme Voyage d 'Exploration dans l'Empire
Chinois, I and II. Paris.
Mentions Eumeces quadrilineatus.
Davis. X. S.. and Rice, F. L. 1883. List of the Batrachia and Reptilia of Illi-
nois. Bull. Chicago Acad. Sci.. I, No. 3, 1883, pp. 23-32.
Records Eumeces obsoletus from central and southern Illinois. These
are very doubtful records. Also E. jasciatus.
1883a. North American Batrachia and Reptilia found east of the Mis-
sissippi river. Illinois State Lab. Nat. Hist. Bull., V, 1883, pp. 1-64.
Lists the following species with short descriptions: septentrionalis, eejre-
gius, onocrepis, anthracinus and jasciatus. The record of E. obsoletus for
Illinois (Forbes) is probably incorrect.
Deckert, Richard. 1918. A list of reptiles from Jacksonville, Fla. Copeia,
No. 54, pp. 30-33.
Lists Plestiodon jasciatus.
DeKay. James E. 1842. Zoology of New York, or the New York fauna,
Part 3. Reptilia and Amphibia. Albany, 1842, pp. 1-98, pis. 1-23.
Scincus jasciatus described with figure (pi. 8, fig. 17). Notes on extra-
limital species are given.
DbringkNj K. M. 1901. [Materials for the herpetology of S. W. Transcaspia
and the neighborhood of Trebizond]. Russian text. Ann. Mus. St.
Petersb.. VI. pp. 84-111.
1905. [A note on lizards and snakes from the Transcaspian province].
Russian text. Proc. St. Petersburg Naturalists Soc, XXXVI, Pt. 1.
E. scutatus listed from Andera, Transcaspia.
De Stefaxo. G. 1903. I Sauri del Quercv appartenenti alia collezione Ros-
signol. Atti. Mus. Milan. XLII. pp. 382-417, pis. IX, X.
Plestiodon cadurcensis Filhol. (fossil).
Ditmars. R. L. 1903. Observations on lacertilians. Ann. Rept. N. Y. Zoo].
Soc. for 1903. VIII, pp. 146-160.
Notes on incubation of eggs in Eumeces quinqueUneatus.
33—1123
514 The University Science Bulletin
— 1915. The reptile book. Doubleday, Page Co.. 1915, pp. 1-472.
Treats in detail many American species. The following appear: Eumeces
multivirgatus, quinquelineatus, leptogrammus, obsoletus, skiltonianus, gil-
bcrti, septentrionalis, egregius, anthracinus, tetragrammus, pluvialis, pachy-
urus, brevilineatus and gut tula t us. Several species are figured.
Doederlein, L. 1881. Die Liu-Kiu Insel Amami Oshima. Mitth. Deutsch
Ost-Asiens Ges., Ill (1880-1884), pp. 140-156.
Also issued as a separate in Yokohama, according to Stejneger, Bull.
U. S. Nat. Mus., 58, p. 535.
Reports Eumeces quinquelineatus from Amami Oshima.
Doumergue, F. 1901. Essai sur la faune Erpetologique de l'Oranie, avec des
tableaux analytiques et des notions pour la determination de tons les
Reptiles et Batraciens du Maroc, de PAlgerie et de la Tunisie. Bull. Soc.
Geogr. Archeol. Oran, XIX-XXI, 1899-1901, 27 pis. (Also separately
issued, pp. 1-404.)
Gives Eumeces algeriensis meridionalis (pi. XVI, fig. 3) from Prov.
Oran and Morocco.
Dondorff. 1798. Zoologische Beitrage, III, p. 120, No. 24, and p. 122, No. 40.
Laccrta quinquelineata and Lacerta fasciata.
Duges, Alfredo. 1870. Catalogo de animales Vertebrados observados en la
Republica Mexicana. La Naturaleza, I, 1869-1870, pp. 137-145.
Lists Plesthiodon (sic) quinquelineatum. Agujilla, Salamanquesa and
Zetzaucoatl, given as the common names.
1884. Dos reptiles de Mexico. La Naturaleza, (1), VI, 1882-1884, pp.
359-362, pi. IX, fig. la.
Redescribes Eumeces dugesii Thominot from new material in his own
collection. The species is figured in colors at natural size.
1889. Francisco Hernandez, La Naturaleza, (2), I, pp. 282-288.
Duges states that the native name Tetzauhcoatl published by Hernandez
in "Nova Plantarum, animalium, etc.," Rome, MDCLI, for a Mexican
lizard, refers to Eumeces lynxe.
1891. "Eumeces altamirani A. Dug." La Naturaleza, (2) I, 1887-1890,
pp. 485-486, pi. XXII.
Describes as new Eumeces altamirani from "Las regiones calidas del
Estado de Michoacan. He also proposes the generic designation Platy-
pholis for the species.
1897. "Eumeces rovirosae A. Dug." La Naturaleza, (2), II, 1897, pp.
298-299, pi. XIII.
Eumeces rovirosae is described as new from "Mineral de Santa Fe,
Chiapas." This is a young specimen of Eumeces sumichrasti Cope.
1897a. Lista de algunos reptiles y batracios de Tabasco y Chiapas.
La Naturaleza, (2), II, pp. 375-377.
Lists Eumeces rovirosae from the type locality.
1897b. Reptiles y batracios de los E. U. Mexicanos. La Naturaleza,
(2), II, 1896, pp. 497-485.
Eumeces altamirani listed from Apatzingan (Michoacan), presumably
the type locality, the specimen referred to being the type and the only
specimen known; E. dugesi, from Chiapas, Tanganciquaro, Patamban; E.
rovirosae, from the type locality; E. lynxe, from Guanajuato; Plesthiodon
(sic) callicephalum, from several localities.
Dtjmeril, Aug. Notice Historique sur la Menagerie des Reptiles du Museum
d'Histoire Naturelle. Arch, du Museum, VII. pp. 193-319.
Plestiodon aldrovandii listed on p. 219.
Dtjmeril, A. M. C, and Bibron, G. 1839. Erpetologie general ou Histoire
Naturelle complete des Reptiles, V, 1830, pp. 1-855..
Of the three species which Wiegmann placed in his Eumeces, these
authors choose a type, Scincus punctatus, and place the form Scincus
pavimentaius as presumably the type of a new subgenus, Plestiodon. This
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 515
form is treated under the name Plestiodon aldrovandii. Four other forms
are recognized: P. laticeps, sinensis, quinquelineatum and pulchrum.
Dumkril. M. C, and Dumkril, Arc. 1851. Catalogue Methodique de la
Collection des Reptiles du Museum d'Histoire Naturelle de Paris. Paris,
1851, pp. 1-224.
The following species arc included: Plestiodon aldrovandii, Plestiodon
laticeps, P. sinense, P. quinquelineatum, P. ■pulchrum.
Dunn. Emmet Reid. 1915. List of the amphibians and reptiles observed in
the summers ot 1912, 1913 and 1914 in Nelson countv, Virginia. Copeia,
No. is. May 15, 1915, pp. 5-7.
1917. Reptile and amphibian collections from the North Carolina
mountains, with special reference to salamanders. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat.
Hist.. XXXVII, 1917, pp. 593-634, pis. LVII-LXI.
Gives records of Plestiodon quinquelineatum.
— 1918. A preliminary list of reptiles and amphibians of Virginia.
Copeia, No. 53, 1918, pp. 16-27.
Locality records for Plestiodon jasciatus.
1920. Some reptiles and amphibians from Virginia. North Carolina.
Tennessee and Alabama. Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, XXXIII, 1920, pp.
129-138.
Locality records for Plestiodon jasciatus.
1933. A new lizard from Nicaragua. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XL VI,
Mar. 24, 1933, pp. 67-68.
Eumcccs managuae is described as new from a specimen collected on the
aviation field at Managua, Nicaragua, by James H. Ivy.
Dunn, Emmet Reid. and Emlen, John T., 1932. Reptiles and amphibians
from Honduras. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., LXXXIV, Mar. 22, 1932,
pp. 21-32.
Eumeces schmidti is described as new from specimens collected at Tela,
Honduras, by J. A. G. Rehn.
Dury, Ralph. 1933. Notes on some Kentucky amphibians and reptiles. Bull.
Baker-Hunt Foundation Museum. Williams Natural Hist. Collection, No.
1, Nov.. 1933, pp. 1-22.
Lists Eumeces jasciatus and Eumeces laticeps.
Dwigubxski. I. 1932. Opyt Estestvennov estorinv vseh Jevotnye Rocciskoy
Emperii. Pt. III. 1832.
On page 15 (fig. 4) is given Scincus officinalis (non Laurenti).
Eichwald, Ed. 1S39. De dubus novis amphibiorum speciebus. Bull. Soc.
Imp. Xaturalistes Moscow, II. 1839, pp. 303-307.
The type description of Euprepis princeps appears. The type locality
is "In ora caspia occidentali, ad montes praesertim Talyschenses."
1851. Naturhistorische Bemerkungen iiber Algiers und den Atlas.
Nouv. Mem. Soc. Nat. Moscow, (2). IX. 1851. pp. 414-444.
Plestiodon aldrovandii given on p. 137.
Ellis, Max M. 1917. Amphibians and reptiles of the Douglas Lake (Michi-
gan) region. 19th Rept. Mich. Acad. Sci.. 1917, pp. 45-63.
Eumeces quinquelineatus listed.
Ellis. Max M., and Henderson, Junius. 1913. The Amphibia and Reptilia
of Colorado. Part I. Univ. Colo. Studies. X, No. 2. 1913, pp. 39-130.
pis. 1-8.
Lists Colorado species of Eumeces. A doubtful figure of E. obsoletus is
given on pi. 3 (figs. 15-16). This appears to be E. multivirgatus.
Elpatjewsky. V. S.. and Sabanejbw, I,. L. 1906. Zur horpetologischen
Fauna des Russischen Ergiinzungen Reichs. Zool. Jahrb. Jena, Abt. f.
Syst., XXIV, pp. 247-264, pi. 2.
E. latiscutatus is given on p. 255 (Taf. 18, fig. 3) from Sinus S-tae
Olgae, S-ti Vladimir, Sinus Imperator in Siberia Orient. The identifica-
tion is not certain.
516 The University Science Bulletin
^ i> 1Q9Q T i<tf of Idaho reptiles and amphibians in the
ER^io^^o^Tu^°\l^ie^ Kept. Board Trustees State
Historical Soc. Idaho, 1927-1928 pp. 31-33.
Lists Eumeces skiltonianus from southwestern Idaho.
t- t w IQ^I Preliminary report of reptiles from \aoshan, Kwangai,
China Bui DeptBioL Coll. ScL, Sun Yatsen Univ. May 1931 PP 1-154
Eumeces\Mnen^ described at length, with records oi rte collection at
Loshiang and Kutchen.
Fkrr.ri Perez Fernando. 1886. Catalogue of animals collected by the
^rap£l and exploring commission of the Republic of Mexico. Part
III Reptiles. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., IX, 1886, pp. 182-199.
Lists Eumeces jurcirostris from Puebla.
Filifpi F de 1864. Riassunto del Catalogo degli Animah Vertebral! delle
F pS^ncie caucasiche e delle Persia accidental Att. Soc. Ital. Be. Nat.,
VII Riun. Straord. a Biella, 1864, Sept., pp. 184-186.
_Jl865. Note di un viaggio in Persia nel 1862. Milano, 1865.
Mentions Plestiodon aldrovandu, p. 354.
^ t? isqs Notp on a specimen of the rare scincoid lizard, Eumeces
ItaSJLM2^«^E ifridico.ntry; wj* exhibH.cn of the type
specimen Proc. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 1898, pp. 189-190.
FmrHFR J G 1884. Herpetologische Bemerkungen. Abh Geb Naturw.
SJ'Natm Ver. Hamburg, VIII, Heft 2, pp. 1-6, pi. VII, figs la-Id.
Eumeces ^llwartzei is described as new from a specimen accidentally
carried to Hamburg in a load of dyewood from "Laguna , de Term nos
(Campeche Bai)," Mexico. The species is figured on plate VII, figs. la-Id.
. 1886 Abh. Naturw. Ver. Hamburg, IX, 1866, pp. 51-57, pis. 1-lli.
Fischer, Joh. von. 1881. Die Tupfen Echse Plestiodon aldrovandu Wagl.
in der Gefangschaft. Zool. Gart., No. 10, 1881, pp. 297-308.
1887. Friichte fressent, in Humboldt (Dammer), 1887, Heit 1, pp.
24-25.
Plestiodon aldrovandu mentioned.
Fitzinger L I 1826. Verzeichniss der im K. K. Zoologisch Museum zu
win befindlichen. In Neue Classification der Reptihen. Wien, 1826,
PP. 1-66, pi. 1. . . ,. , oo r0
Lists Mabouia quinquelineata, pp. *6, ai.
. . 1843 Svstema Reptilium. 1843, pp. 1-106.
Lacerla quinquelineata Linne designated as the type of Plestiodon
Ftowfr Stanley S 1896. Notes on a collection of reptiles and batrachians
made in the Malay Peninsula in 1895-'96, with a list of the species re-
corded from that region. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1896, pp. 856-914, pis.
^Eume^ehinensis reported as doubtful from the Malay Peninsula.
1933 Notes on the recent reptiles and amphibians of Egypt with a
list of the species recorded from that kingdom. Proc. Zool. Soc. London,
Sept. 20, 1933, pp. 735-851. 1 map
Gives notes on Eumeces schneideni, pp. /87-78S.
Force Edith R 1930. The reptiles and amphibians of Tulsa county, Okla-
homa and vicinity. Copeia, 1930, No. 2, pp. 25-39.
Eunices septentrionalis, obsolete, anthracinus and fascials are listed.
Fowler, Henry W. 1906. The amphibians and reptiles of New Jersey.
Ann. Rept. New Jersey State Museum. 1906. Pt. II. pp. 25-250.
Notes on Eumeces fasciatus.
1915. Cold-blooded vertebrates from Florida, the West Indies^ C osta
Rica and eastern Bra.il. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., LXVII, 1915, pp.
244-269.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 517
Reports Eumeces longirostris from Ducking Stool, Bermuda, and
Eumeces jasciatus from Key West.
1925. Records of amphibians and reptiles for Delaware, Maryland and
Virginia. I. Delaware. II. Maryland. Copeia, No. 145, 1925, pp. 57-64.
Lists l'h si u nil in jasciatus.
Fritze. Adolph. 1892. Die Fauna von Yezo im Vergleich zur Fauna des
ubrigon Japan. Mitth. Deutsch. Ost-Asiens Ges., V, 1889-1892.
Lists Eumeces quinquelineatus from Yezo.
1894. Die Fauna der Liu-Kiu-Insel Okinawa (Japan). Zool. Jahrb.
Syst., VII, 1894, pp. 852-926. (Also issued as a separate with pagination
1-77.)
The specimens of Eumeces murtjuiatus from Yezo are doubtless E.
latiscutatus.
Gadow. Hans. 1905. Distribution of Mexican amphibians and reptiles. Proc.
Zool. Soc. London, 1905, pp. 191-244.
Lists Eumeces fuscirostris (sic) from Nevada de Colima (this is prob-
ably a lapsus for E. brevirostris, which is listed from the same locality
and elevation [7,000 ft.]) and E. lynxe (also spelled lynce) from Nevada
de Colima and Omilteme. These records are doubtful for the latter species.
Ganneth, Henry. 1904. List of altitudes in Mexico. Bull. International
Bur. Amer. Repubs., Sept., 1904.
Garman, H. 1894. A preliminary list of the vertebrate animals of Kentucky.
Bull. Essex Inst., XXVI, 1894,' pp. 1-63.
Eumeces anthracinus listed as probably occurring in the state; E.
jasciatus reported as common.
Garman, Samuel. 1884. North American reptiles and batrachians. A list
of species occurring north of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, with references.
Bull. Essex Inst., XVI, 1884, pp. 1-46.
Lists under the genus Eumeces 18 species. He includes (with question
mark) ? Diploglossus millepunctatus O'Shaug. from N. W. North America.
1885. Reptiles of Bermuda. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 25, 1885,
Pt. 4, pp. 285-303.
Gives a detailed description, and reviews the history of Eumeces
longirostris Cope.
1887. Reptiles and batrachians from Texas and Mexico. Bull. Essex
Inst., XIX, pp. 119-138.
Eumeces lynxe reported from Mountains of Alvarez (San Luis Potosi),
Mexico.
Gee, N. Gist. 1930. A contribution toward a preliminary list of reptiles
recorded from China. Bull. Dept. Biol. Yenching Univ., I, 1929-1930,
pp. 53-84.
Many locality records given from other publications.
Geoffrot Saint-Hillaire, Etienne [also Geoffroy, Isidore and Audouin, V.]
1827. Reptiles in Savigny, Description of Egypt, 1802-1830? pp. 115-184.
The reptile part was published as follows: pp. 115-120, Etienne Geoff-
roy Saint-Hillaire; pp. 121-160, Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hillaire ; pp. 161-184,
V. Audouin. This work gives very good plates of two species: pi. Ill,
fig. 3, of Scincus Schneider ii, and pi. IV, fig. 4, of Scincus pavimentatus.
Geokgi, J. G. 1800. Geographisch-Physikalische und Naturhistorische Be-
schreibung des Russischen Reiches. T. 3, B. VI. 1803. Bisher bekannt
gewordene Thierarten Konigsberg, 1800.
Mentions Lacerta scincus (non Linnaeus).
Gervais. P. 1836. Enumeration de quelque especes de Reptiles provenant
de Barbaric Ann. Sci. Nat., (2), VI, 1836, pp. 308-313.
Scincus (Plestiodon) cyprius (non Cuvier) listed, p. 309.
1848. Sur les Animaux Vertebres de l'Algerie. Ann. Sci. Nat., (3),
X. 1848, pp. 204-205.
518 The University Science Bulletin
Gibbs, Morris., Notestein, F. N., and Clark, H. L. 1905. A preliminary-
list of the amphibians and reptiles of Michigan. 7th Ann. Rept. Mich.
Acad. Sci., 1905, pp. 109-110.
Lists Eumeces jasciatus.
Gilliams, Jacob. 1818. Description of two new species of Linnaean Lacerta.
Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila, Vol. I, Pt. II, 1818, pp. 460-462, pi. XVIII,
fig- 2. .
Type description of Scincus erythrocephalus. The type locality is
Maryland. Type collected by James Keech. The figure is poor.
Gloyd, H. K. 1928. The amphibians and reptiles of Franklin county, Kan-
sas. Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci., 1928, pp. 115-141.
Data given on the habits of Eumeces obsoletus, anthracinus and
jasciatus.
1932. The herpetological fauna of the Pigeon Lake region, Miami
countv, Kansas. Papers Mich. Acad. Sci. Arts Letters, XV, 1931, pp. 389-
409, map 3, pis. XXX-XXXII.
Gmelin, Jean-Frederic. 1788. Systema naturae Ed. 13, 1788.
Lacerta quinquelineata and Lacerta fasciata given.
Godet, D. T. L. I860. Bermuda. 1860.
Discusses the Bermuda lizards on p. 251. Mentions Scincus jasciatus and
Scincus ocellatus presumably as occurring in Bermuda.
Goode, G. Brown. 1877. A preliminary catalogue of the reptiles, fishes and
leptocardians of the Bermudas, with the description of four species of fishes
believed to be new. Amer. Journ. Sci., (3), July to Dec, 1877, pp. 289-298.
Eumeces longirostris listed, p. 290.
Graenicher, S. 1911. Some records of Wisconsin lizards. Bull. Wise. Nat.
Hist. Soc, IX, pp. 78-81.
Discusses the occurrence of Eumeces septentrionalis in Wisconsin, and
gives numerous records. Eumeces quinquelineatus is reported from various
localities.
Grant, Chapman. 1927. The blue tailed skink of Kansas, Eumeces guttulatus.
Copeia, No. 164, July-Sept., 1927, pp. 67-69.
An interesting account of a young specimen of E. obsoletus.
Gravenhorst, J. L. C. 1851. Uber die im Zoologischen Museum der Uni-
versitat Breslau befmdlichen Wirtelschleichen (Pseudosaura) Kriippol-
fiissler (Brachypoda) und einige andere denselben verwandte Reptilien, aus
den Ziinften der Schleichen und Dickziingled. Nova. Acta Akad. Leop.
Carol., XXIII, 1851, I, pp. 350-354, pi. XXXV.
Under the name Plestiodon quinquelineatus four specimens are discussed.
No. 1 appears to be E. inexpectatus, while the other three specimens are
said to be from Mexico. The descriptions are such that the species cannot
be definitely determined. The Euprepes amantus Gravenhorst (from
Surinam) is not Eumeces.
Gray, J. E. 1831. A svnopsis of the species of class Reptilia. Appendix in
Griffith's Cuvier's Animal Kingdom, IX. 1831, pp. 1-110.
Lists Tiliqua cyprinus Cuv. from Egypt. The description states "Scales
smooth, tail longer than the body, brown, with a pale line on each side."
Tiliqua quinquelineatus and bicolor are also listed.
1838. Catalogue of the slender-tongued Saurians, with descriptions of
many new genera and species. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., (1), II, 287-293.
Brief type description of Eumeces chinensi?.
1845. Catalogue of the specimens of lizards in the collection of the
British Museum. 1845, pp. 1-xxviii, 1-289.
Type description of Plestiodon Bellii, from an unknown locality, given;
also are listed P. laticeps, quinquclincatum, pulchrum, chinensis and auratus,
pp. 90-92.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 519
Green. Jacob. ISIS. Description of several species of North American am-
phibia, accompanied with observations. Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., I,
Pt. 2, Aug., 1818, pp. 348-359, pi. XVI, fig. 2.
Lacerta quinquelineatus is described, with a figure which cannot be
identified. This appears to be of a specimen of E. inexpectatus. The
Laa rta fasciata listed is a specimen of Sccloporus undulatus.
Grinnell, Joseph. 190S. The biota of the San Bernardino mountains. Univ.
Calif. Publ. Zool, V, No. 1, 1908, pp. 1-170. pis. 1-24. (Reptiles pp.
160-170).
Reports Eumeces skiltonianus and refers a doubtful specimen to E.
gilbi Hi.
Grinnell, Joseph, and Camp, Charles Lewis. 1917. A distributional list of
the amphibians and reptiles of California. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., XVII,
July 11, 1917. pp. 127-20S. 14 text figs.
Gives the distribution of Eumeces skiltonianus, based on previous records.
Gbinnell, Joseph, Dixon. Joseph, and Linsdale, Jean M. 1930. Vertebrate
natural history of a section of northern California through the Lassen Peak
n -ion. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., 35, 1930. pp. 1-594, 181 text figs.
Eumeces skiltonianus habitat records given, p. 148.
Grinnell, Joseph, and Grinnell H. W. 1907. The reptiles of Los Angeles
county. California. Throop Inst. Bull., No. XXXV, 1907, pp. 1-64.
Gives a detailed account of Eumeces skiltonianus, p. 35, fig. 12.
Gbinnell, Joseph, and Storfr, Tract Irwin. 1921. Reptiles and amphibians
of Yosemite National Park, in Hall's Handbook of Yosemite National Park.
Putnam, 1921, pp. 175-182.
Lists Eumeces skiltonianus (=E. gilberti) .
1924. Animal life in the Yosemite. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley, Cal.,
1924. xviii + 752 pp., pis. i-lx, figs. 1-65, maps.
Discusses Eumeces skiltonianus, regarding E. gilberti a synonym.
Guichenot, A. 1850. Exploration Scientifique d 1'Algerie pendent les Annees
1S40-1842. Reptiles. Paris. 1850. 4to. 130 pp.. 4 pis.
? Plestiodon aldrovandii mentioned (p. 17).
Guillet. C. 1902. Note on the blue-tailed lizard. Ottawa Naturalist, XVI,
p. 239.
Records Eumeces jasciatus from Ontario. Canada.
GrrLLrvER. George. 1875. Observations on the sizes and shapes of the red
corpuscles of vertebrates. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1875, pp. 474-495.
On page 488 is given the diameter of the corpuscles of Plestiodon
1 1
auratus. The largest diameter is- — — of an inch, the smallest, .
1455 2400
Guxther. Albert. 1860. On new reptiles and fishes from Mexico. Proc. Zool.
Soc. London. 1860, pp. 316-322.
Mabouia brevirostris, from Oaxaca, Mexico, is described as new.
1860a. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., 1860, VI. p. 442.
1864. The reptiles of British India. London, pp. i-xxvii, 1-444, pis.
I-XXVL
Treats the species of Eumeces under the generic name of Mabouia.
Mabouia quadrilineata is figured on pi. X (fig. E) ; Mabouia chinensis,
figured on pi. X (fig. F), is Eumeces elegans.
1864a. Report on a collection of reptiles and fishes from Palestine
Proc. Zool. Soc. London. 1864. pp. 488-493.
Lists Plestiodon auratus Schn. from the Dead Sea, p. 489.
1866. Zool. Record. Reptilia. p. 123.
Notes variation in Plistodon aldrovandii.
1885-1902. Biologia Centrali-Americana. Reptilia and Batrachia. 1885-
1902 (part dealing with Eumeces dated Oct.. 1885). pp. i-xx. 1-326. pis. 1-76.
520 The University Science Bulletin
On pp. 32-33 are listed E. lynxe, brevirostris (pi. XXII, fig. B), bocourti
(= humilis) (pi. XXII, fig. C), callicephalus, sumichrasti, dugesii, schwartzei
and jurcirostris.
1888. On a collection of reptiles from China. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist.,
(6), I, pp. 165-172.
Lists Lygosoma elegans (= Eumeces elegans) from mountains near Kiu
Kiang on the "Yantsze" river, China.
1889. Third contribution to our knowledge of reptiles and fishes from
the Upper Yangtsze-Kiang. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., (6) , IV, pp. 218-229.
Eumeces xanthi is described as new from Ichang, China.
1896. Report on the collections of reptiles, batrachians and fishes
made by Messrs. Potanin and Berezowski in the Chinese Provinces Kansu
and Szechwan. Ann. Mus. Zo61. St. Petersbourg, I, 1896, pp. 199-219.
Eumeces quadrilineatus and E. xanthi mentioned.
Hallowell, Edward. 1852. On a new genus and three new species of reptiles
inhabiting North America. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1852, pp. 206-209.
The genus Lamprosaurus, with the type species guttulatus, is described
from a specimen from Fort Fillmore below the Jornada del Muerte, New
Mexico.
1853. Reptiles, in Sitgreaves', Report of an expedition down the
Zuni and Colorado rivers. 1853, pp. 106-147.
Contains a detailed description of Plestiodon obsoletum B. & G. from
near the type locality, and a redescription of Lamprosaurus guttulatus.
1854. Descriptions of new reptiles from California. Proc. Acad. Nat.
Sci. Phila, 1854, pp. 91-97.
Description of Eumeces sp. from a specimen "from Lower California,
near Mojave river, and in San Bernardino Valley." This is evidently
intended for a description of a new species, but the author fails to give a
name. This specimen later forms the type of Eumeces quadrilineatus.
— — 1856. On several new species of reptiles in the collection of the
Academy of Natural Sciences. Proc. Phila. Acad. Nat. Sci, 1856, pp.
153-156.
1856a. Notes on a collection of reptiles from Kansas and Nebraska,
presented to the Academy of Natural Sciences, by Dr. Hammond, U. S. A.
Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila, 1856, pp. 238-253.
Discusses variation in Plestiodon obsoletum.
18566. Notes on the collection of reptiles from the neighborhood of
San Antonio, Tex, recently presented to the Academy of Natural Sciences
by Doctor Heerman. Proc. phila. Acad. Nat. Sci, 1856, pp. 306-310.
Gives the type description of Plestiodon vittigerum. Type locality
stated as "neighborhood of Flint, Mich."
1857. Description of several new North American reptiles. Proc.
Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila, 1857, pp. 215-216.
Type description given of Eumeces multivirgatus from Posa creek, 460
miles west of Fort Riley, Kan. The label on the type specimen actually
reads Pou (or Cow) creek rather than "Posa" creek. Lamprosaurus
guttulatus is referred to the genus Plestiodon.
— ■ 1859. Report upon reptiles of the route. Expl. Surv. for a Route to
Pac. Ocean, Williamson, X, 1853, Pt. IV, Zoology Report, 1859, pp. 1-25,
pis. I-X.
Type description of Eumeces quadrilineatus appears. The type locality
is "Southern part of Upper California, near Mojave river, and in San
Bernardino Valley." PI. IX, fig. 3, gives line drawings of the head.
1860. Notice of some new and rare species of Scincidae in the col-
lection of the Academv of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. Trans. Amer.
Plhlos. Soc, XI (N. S.), pp. 71-82, pis. III-IV.
Reports Eumeces quadrilineatus from Astoria, Columbia river; Plestio-
don harlani (=Euprepes harlani) from Liberia; and Plestiodon sinense?
from Ningpo, China.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 521
1860«. Report upon the Reptilia of the North Pacific exploring ex-
pedition under the command of Captain John Rogers. Proc. Acad. Nat.
Sci. Phila., I860, pp. 480-510.
Separates the Japanese five-lined skink from the American forms under
the name Plestiodon latiscutatus. Plestiodon marginatus is described from
"Ousima," Japan and Loo-Choo Islands, and Eumeces quadrivirgatus (=E.
quadrilineatus Myth) is described as new from Hong-Kong Island.
IfuiLAN, Richard. 1S24. Description of a new species of Scincus. Journ.
Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 4. Pt. 2, 1824, pp. 286-288, pi. XVIII.
Type description of Scincus bicolor is given, with plate XVIII, fig. 1.
This name is doubtless a synonym of E. laticeps.
1829. Genera of North American Reptilia, and a synopsis of the
species. (Continued from Volume V.) Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., VI,
Pt. 1, 1829, pp. 7-38.
Lists Scincus quinquelineatus, crythrocephalus and bicolor, pp. 10-11.
1835. Genera of North American Reptilia, and a synop-is of the
species. Med. Phys. Researches, 1835, pp. 84-161.
Lists Scincus americanus, using Petiver's name (Gazophylacii Naturae
et Artis. 1711, tab. 69, fig. 13) for Eumeces laticeps. Also lists Scincus
bicolor Harlan, Scincus quinquelineatus and Scincus erythrocephalus.
Harper, Francis. 1930. Notes on fishes, amphibians and reptiles of Randolph
county, Georgia. Copeia, 1930, No. 4, Dec, pp. 152-154.
Lists Eumeces fasciatus.
Haltom. William L. 1931. Alabama reptiles. Mus. Paper No. 11, Alabama
Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Alabama, 1931, pp. 1-145, pis. 1-39, text figs. 1-57.
Records the type of Eumeces pluvialis from the type locality with a
copied figure and description. E. fasciatus is listed with numerous localities.
Hartman, F. A. 1906. Food habits of Kansas lizards and batrachians. Trans.
Kan. Acad. Sci, XX, 1906, pp. 225-229.
Eumeces obsoletus and guttulatus discussed.
Hartweg, Norman. 1931. Apparent ovoviviparity in the Mexican skink
Eumeces lynxae Wiegmann. Copeia, 1931, No. 2, p. 61.
Ovoviviparity described in specimens from Guerrero, Hidalgo, Mexico.
Hatta, S. 1913. Zur Tiergeographie von Hokkaido. Zool. Ann. XLIII, pp.
27-36.
Lists Eumeces latiscutatus (sic) from Hokkaido.
Hay, O. P. 1887. A preliminary catalogue of the Amphibia and Reptilia of the
state of Indiana. Journ. Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist., 1887, pp. 59-69.
Gives records for Eumeces fasciatus.
18876. The amphibians and reptiles of Indiana. Indiana State Bd.
of Agri, Ann. Rept, for 1886, XXVIII, pp. 201-223.
Remarks on Eumeces fasciatus.
1892. The batrachians and reptiles of the state of Indiana. 17th Ann.
Rept. Ind. Dept. Geol. & Nat. Resources, 1891, pp. 409-610, pis. 1-3.
Under the name fasciatus are discussed the habits of this species and
those of laticeps.
Hayden, F. V. 1863. On the geologv and natural history of the Upper Mis-
souri. Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc, XII, 1862, pp. 1-218, 4 maps.
Reptiles discussed on pp. 177-178. Leptogrammus, multivirgatus, inor-
natus and septentrionalis listed.
Hediger, H. 1928. Die Tierwelt auf einer Marokkanischen Farm. Blatt. f.
Aquar.-Terr.-kunde, XXXIX, No. 20, 1928.
Eumeces algeriensis is listed from Raba.
Heerman, A. L. 1859. Report upon reptiles of the route No. I. Expl. Surv.
R. R. Route Pac Ocean, 1853, X, Pt. 4, Zoological Rept, 1859, pp. 24-25,
pis. I-X.
Lists the type specimen of Emm ■■( s quadrilim <<•
522 The University Science Bulletin
Hempricht, F. G., and Ehrenberg, C. G. 1899. Symbolae physicae seu
Icones adhuc ineditae corporum naturalium novorum aut minus cognitorum
quae ex itineribus per Lybiam, Egyptias, Nubiam, Dongolem, Syriam,
Arabiam et Habessiniam. . . Zoologica, Berlin, 1899.
Figures Eumeces schneiderii on pi. IV, fig. 4.
Henshaw, Samuel. 1904. Fauna of New England, I. List of Reptiles. Occ.
Papers Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., VII, 1904, pp. 1-13.
Gives records of Eumeces quinquelineatus.
Herrera, Alfonso L. 1895. Catalogo de la eolleccion de reptiles y batracios
del Museo Nacional. Mexico, Imprenta del Museo Nacional, 1895, pp. 1-66.
1904. Catalogo de la eolleccion de reptiles y batracios del Museo
Nacional. Mexico. Imprenta del Museo Nacional, 1904, pp. 1-65.
Exactly the same pagination as first edition save an occasional shift in
the lines. The errata of the first are omitted in the second, the corrections
being made in the text. Lists E. dugesl and fasciatus.
Herrick, C. L., Terry, John, and Herrick, H. N. J. 1899. Notes on a collec-
tion of lizards from New Mexico. Bull. Sci. Lab. Denison Univ., XI, Art.
VI, pp. 117-148.
Notes on Eumeces.
Higley, W. K. 1889. Reptilia and Batrachia of Wisconsin. Trans. Wise.
Acad. Sci. Arts Letters, VII, pp. 156-176.
Lists locality records for Eumeces septentrionalis.
Hilgexdore, F. 1880. Bemerkungen ueber die von ihm in Japan gesammelten
Amphibien nebst Beschreibung zweier neuer Schlangenarten. Sitz. Ges.
Naturf. Freunde Ber., 1880, pp. 111-121.
Eumeces quinquelineatus (=i?. latiscutatus) listed, p. 113.
Hoffmann, C. K. 1890. Eidechsen und Wasserechsen. In H. G. Bronn's
Klassen und Ordnung des Thier-Reichs. . . Vol. 6 (Abt. Ill, Reptilien,
Vol. II), pp. 441-1399, pis. XLIX-CVII, 8 text figs.
On page 1148 is a description of Plestiodon, with notes on the species.
"Lanceolatus" is listed from the Loo Choo Islands! Eumeces is recognized
as a separate genus on pp. 1148-1149.
Hohenacker, Fr. 1831. Notice sur quelques objets d'histoire naturelle des
provinces meridionales du Caucase. Bull. Soc. d'Imp. Nat. de Moscou,
III, 1831, pp. 363-381.
Lacerta scincus (non Linne) mentioned on p. 365.
Hoi.brook, John Edwards. 1838. North American Herpetology. Vol. II, 1838.
A careful description of Scincus erythrocephalm (p. 101), with a full
plate in color (pi. XXII), is given. The specimen figured is in the Philadel-
phia Academy of Natural Sciences collection.
1839. North American herpetology. Vol. Ill, 1839.
Scincus quinquelineatus is discussed and figured in color, with a dorsal
and ventral view, full size (p. 39, pi. VI) ; also Scincus fasciatus (p. 45,
pi. VII).
■ — 1842. North American herpetology. Second Edition, II, 1842.
The following species are discussed: Plestiodon erythroccphalus (pp.
117-120, pi. XVI); Scincus quinquelineatus (pp. 121-125, pi. XVII); Scincus
fasciatus (pp. 126-131, pi. XVIII).
Hora, Sunder Lal. 1923. Reptilia and batrachia of the Salt Range, Punjab.
Rec. Indian Mus., XXV, pp. 369-376.
Lists Eumeces tacniolatus (Blyth) from the Salt Range.
Hoy, P. R. 1883. Catalogue of the cold-blooded vertebrates of Wisconsin I.
Reptiles. Geology of Wise., I, pp. 422-425.
Lists Eumeces septentrionalis.
Hughes, Edward. 1885. Catalogue of the reptiles and amphibians of Franklin
Co. (Ind.). Bull. Brookville Soc. Nat. Hist.. I, pp. 40-45.
Reports Eumeces fasciatus from Brookville, Ind.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 523
Hvktkk. Jiuis. 1S83. Catalogue of reptiles and batrachians, collected in
the state of Missouri. Privately printed price list-
Lists Eumeces quinquelineatus and anthracinus.
Catalogue of reptiles and batrachians found in the vicinity of
Missouri. Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis, Dec. 12, 1893, VI, pp.
1S93.
St. Louis
251-261.
1911.
Herpetology of Missouri. Tian.-. Acad. Sci. St. Louis. XX, pp.
59-274, pis. XYLU-XXTv.
Gives accounts of Eumeces anthracinus and E. quinquelineatus, with
locality records. The old red-headed male from Butler Co. is doubtless
E. latieeps.
1912. Reptiles and batrachians of Laguna Beach. Ann. Rept. Laguna
Marine Lab.. I, 1912, p. 67.
Reports Eumeces skiltonianus.
Hurter, Julius, and Strecker, John K. 1909. Amphibians and reptiles of
Arkansas. Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis, XVIII. 1908-1909, pp. 1-27.
Reports locality records for Plestiodon anthracinus in Missouri, Okla-
homa and Texas, and several for P. quinquelineatus.
Ingoldsbt, Capt. C. M.. and Proctor, Joan B. 1923. Xotes on a collection
of reptilia from Waziristan and the adjoining portion of the N. W. Frontier
Province. Journ. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc, XXIX, pp. 117-130.
Eumeces scutatus reported from Kaur Bridge, Ladha, and Wana, in
northwest India; E. schneiderii from Kirghi, Jandola, Kotkai, Serwekai
and Wana. Discusses variation.
Jan. G. 1857. Cenni sul Museo Civico di Milano ed Indice Sistematico dei
Rettili ed Anfibi. Milan, 1857, pp. 1-61.
Lists Plestiodon latieeps and quinquelineatum from Georgia.
Jerdon. T. C. 1870. Notes on Indian herpetology. Proc. Asiatic Soc. Bengal,
1870. pp. 72-73.
Reports Pleistodon (Eumeces) scutatus from the Alpine Punjab.
Jones. 1859. A naturalist in Bermuda. 1859.
Reports a common lizard as Scincus, related to Scincus jasciatus.
Jordan. David Starr. 1916. A manual of the vertebrates of the United States.
12th edition. 1916.
Lists various species of Eumeces, with key.
Kessler, K. 1878. Puteshestive po Zakavkazskomu Krain v. 1875, g. s. zoolog-
isheskou tselin. Trans. St. Petersb. Nat. Soc, VIII, 1878, Suppl.
Eumeces pavimentatus mentioned p. 177.
King. Willis F. 1932. Arizona records from the vicinity of Mormon Lake
(Arizona). Copeia, 1932, No. 2, p. 99.
Kingman. R. H. 1932. A comparative study of the skull in the genus
Eumeces of the Scincidae (A preliminary paper). Univ. Kans. Sci. Bull.,
XX. pp. 273-295. pis. XXI-XXLV.
Studies in comparative anatomy of the skulls of fascial us, s< ptentrionalis,
latieeps, tetragrammus, chmensis, longirostris, schneiderii pavimentatus,
skiltonuinus and humilis. Excellent figures of the skulls are given.
Kirtland. .Tared Potter. 1838. A catalogue of the birds, reptiles, fishes,
Testacea and Crustacea in Ohio. First Ann. Rept. Ohio Geol. Surv.,
Columbus, 1838.
Scincus quinquelineatus mentioned p. 188.
Klauber, L. M. 1928. A list of the amphibians and reptiles of San Diego
county, California. Bull. Zool. Soc. San Diego, No. 4, pp. 1-8.
Lists Eumeces skiltonianus.
1930. A list of the amphibians and reptiles of San Diego county,
California. Second edition. Bull. Zool. Soc. San Diego, No. 5, 1930. pp. 1-8.
Lists Eumeces skiltonianus.
524 The University Science Bulletin
1934. Annotated list of the amphibians and reptiles of the southern
border of California. Bull. Zool. Soc. San Diego, No. 11, Aug. 15, 1934,
pp. 1-28, 8 figs._
Eumeces skiltonianus.
Klots, Alexander Barrett. 1930. Notes on Amphibia and Lacertilia collected
at Weymouth, N. J. Copeia, No. 173, 1930, pp. 107-111.
Habits of Eumeces Jasciatus in care of eggs.
Knowlton, George F., and Janes, Melvin J. 1934. Distributional and food
habits notes on Utah lizards. Copeia, 1934, No. 1, Apr. 24, pp. 10-12.
Notes on Eumeces skiltonianus.
Kuhl, Heinrich. 1820. Beitrage zur Zoologie und vergleichenden Anatomie.
Frankfort a. M., 1830, pp. 1-213.
Scincus quinquelineatus mentioned on page 128.
Kulagin, N. M. 1890. Kollektsia presmykaiutshihsia dostavlennaia Dok-
torom P. A. Burtsevym iz Ussuriskago Kraia. Bull. Zool. Soc. St. Petersb.
Nat. Soc, LXVII, 1890, Zool. Sec, Vol. VI.
Lacepede. 1788. Histoire naturelle des Quadrupedes ovipares et des serpens.
Vol. I.
Le lizard a queue bleue and Le lezard strie are mentioned on p. 360.
Lallement, C. 1876. Erpetologie de Algerie. Paris, 1876, pp. 1-47. Abridge-
ment of Strauch's Essai.
Lataste, F. 1881. Liste des Vertebres recueillis par M. le Dr. Andre pendant
1'expedition des Chotts. Arch. Miss. Sci., (3), VII, 1881, pp. 398-440.
Latreille, P.-A. 1808. PHistoire naturelle des Reptiles. Vols. I-IV.
Vol. I, p. 248, contains the type description of Lacerta tristata. In
Vol. II, p. 74, is a description of Scincus quinquelineatus.
Linne, Carolus Von. 1758. Systema naturae. Editio Decima, Reformata.
Tom. I, 1758.
The type description of Lacerta fasciata appears, with the type locality
Carolina. Based on an illustration in Catesby.
— ■ 1766. Systema naturae. 12th Ed.
Lacerta jasciata and Lacerta quinquelineata appear. The description
of the latter is the type, and the type locality is given as Carolina.
Linsdale, Jean M. 1927. Amphibians and reptiles of Doniphan county, Kan-
sas. Copeia, No. 164, 1927, pp. 75-81.
Notes on Eumeces jasciatus.
Linsley, J. H. 1843. A catalogue of the reptiles of Connecticut, arranged
according to their natural families. Amer. Journ. Sci. Arts, (1), 46, pp.
37-51.
Records data on the occurrence of Eumeces jasciatus.
Loding, H. P. 1922. A preliminary catalogue of Alabama amphibians and
reptiles. Mus. Paper No. 5, Alabama Mus. Nat. Hist., pp. 1-59.
Reports the species Plestiodon pluvialis (Cope) from the type locality,
Mobile, Alabama. Eumeces jasciatus is also listed.
Loennberg, Einar. 1894. Notes on reptiles and batrachians collected in
Florida in 1892 and 1893. Proc U. S. Nat. Mus., 17, pp. 317-339.
Notes on Eumeces jasciatus, probably mixed with other species.
Lortet, L. 1883. Poissons et Reptiles du Lac de Tiberiade et de quelques
autres parties de la Syrie. Arch. Mus. Hist. Nat. Lyon, III, 1883 (reptiles
and amphibians, pp. 183-189).
Loveridge, Arthur. 1930. On some skinks of the genus Eumeces from North
America. Copeia, 1930, No. 173, Jan. 16, p. 112.
Eumeces egregius is discussed, and E. lagunensis is referred to the
synonymy of E. skiltonianus.
MacCoy, Clinton V. 1931. Key for the identification of New England
amphibia and reptiles. Bull. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., No. 59, 1931, pp.
25-33.
Lists Eumeces jasciatus in key.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 525
McLain, Robert Baied. 1899. Notes on a collection of reptiles from the
western coasl of the United States. Cont. to X. Amer. Herp. Privately
printed, Wheeling, W. Va., Feb. 1899. pp. 1-13.
Discusses Eumeces skiltonianus and presumes that E. lagunensis is a
synonym of the former species (p. 10).
lS99c. Notes on a collection of reptiles, made by C. J. Pierson at
Fort Smith. Ark., with remarks on other eastern reptiles. Cont. to N.
Amer. Herp. Privately printed, 1899, pp. 1-5.
Numerous locality records from various states are given for Eumeces
fasciatus.
Martens, Eduard vox. 1S76. Japanische Reptilien. Verzeichniss der gesam-
melten oder beobachteten Wirbelthiere. Preuss. Exped. Ostasien, Zool.,
I. 1876, pp. 362-410.
Eumeces (Plestiodon) quinquelineatus var. japonicus reported from
Nagasaki, p. 376.
Mearxs, Edgar A. 1898. A study of the vertebrate fauna of the Hudson
highlands with observations on the Mollusca, Crustacea, Lepidoptera and
the flora of the region. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., X, 1898, pp. 103-352
(Reptiles pp. 326-330) .
Notes on the occurrence of Eumeces jasciatus.
Mell, R. 1922. Beitrage zur Fauna Sinica I. Die Vertebraten Siidchinas:
Feldlisten und Feldnoten der Sauger, Vogel, Reptilien. Batrachier. Arch.
Naturg., 88, Jahr 1922, Abt. a, 10 Heft, pp. 1-146 (Rept. and Batr. pp.
100-134).
Gives localities for Eumeces chinensis, elegans and quadrilineatus.
1929. Beitrage zur Fauna Sinica IV. Grundziige einer Okologie der
chinesischen Reptilien und einer herpetologischen Tiergeographie Chinas.
Berlin und Leipzig, 1929, pp. 1-282, figs. 1-34.
Various species of Eumeces mentioned.
1931. The distribution of Chinese reptiles in relation to zoogeographi-
cal boundaries. Lingnan Sci. Journ., 8, 1931, pp. 221-258.
Lists Eumeces pekinensis as endemic in the North China Province, and
xanthi and tungarus (sic) in the West China Province.
Mf.rrem. Blasivs. 1820. Tentamen Systematis Amphibiorum. Marburg, 1820.
Type description given of Scincus cepedii, and Sci7icus quinquelineatus
is mentioned on page 72.
Mertexs. Robert. 1920. Uber die geographischen Formen von Eumeces
schneiderii Daudin. Senckenbergiana, (2), 1920, pp. 176-179.
Recognizes three subspecies of Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin) : algeriensis,
schneiderii and princeps.
1922. Verzeichniss der Typen in der herpetologischen Sammlunsr des
Senckenbergischen Museums. Senckenbergiana, IV. Heft 6, 1922, pp. 162-183.
Lists the type specimen of Eumeces pavimentatus var. syriaca. Type
locality, Sarona bei Jaffa, Syria, No. 6383.
1924. Amphibien und Reptilien aus dem nordlichen Mesopotamien.
Abh. Ber. Mus. Natur-Heimatk. Naturw. Ver. Magdeburg. III. Heft 4. 1924,
pp. 249-390. 1 pi.
Reports Eumeces schneiderii princeps (Eichwald) from Mardin.. with
descriptions of the specimens.
1924<7. Herpetologische Mitteihmgen V. Zweiter Bcitrag zur Kenntniss
der geographischen Formen von Euvxcces schneiderii Daudin. Sencken-
bergiana, VI. II. ft 5-6. 1924. pp. 182-184.
Recognizes three subspecific forms of E. schneiderii: Eumeces schneiderii
pavimentatus Geoffrey, E. s. cyprius Cuvier, E. s. schneiderii Daudin and
E. s. algeriensis Peters.
1926. Ueber einige Eidechsen in gefangenschaft. Blatt. fur Aquar-
Terr.- kunde. Stuttgart. XXXVII. 1926. pp. 1-11 (sep. pag.), 4 figs.
Eumeces latiscutatus discussed, pp. 10-11.
526 The University Science Bulletin
1934. Die Insel Reptilien, ihre Ausbreitung, Variation und Artbildung.
Zoologica, 32, Lieferung 6, Heft 84, 1934, pp. 1-209, pis. 1-6, text figs. 1-9.
Includes discussion of various island forms of Eumeces.
Meyer, Fred, A. A. 1795. Synopsis Reptilium novum ipsorum sistens generum
methodum, nee non gottingensum hujus ordinis animalium enumerationem.
Gottingae 1795, Svo (not seen).
Laccrta quinquelineata listed.
Mikhaii.ovski, M. 1904. [Herpetological fauna of the Transcaspian region.
Material collected near Askhabad in 1903 bv I. V. Vasiliev]. Yearbook
Zool. Mus. Imp. Acad. Sci., St. Petersb., IX, 1904, pp. 39-44.
Eumeces scutatus reported from Transcaspia, Durun near Askhabad,
and Bakharden (p. 41).
Mocqtjard, M. F. 1907. Les Reptiles de l'lndo-Chine. La Revue Coloniale,
July 1906, pp. 1-59.
Lists Eumeces quadrilineatus but gives no specific locality.
Morse, Max. 1904. Batrachians and reptiles of Ohio. Proc. Ohio State Acad.
Sci., IV, Pt. 3, Special Paper No. 9, 1904, pp. 92-144.
Eumeces anthr acinus listed as probably occurring in the state. Records
given for E. quinquelineatus.
Mosauer, Walter. 1932. The amphibians and reptiles of the Guadalupe
Mountains of New Mexico and Texas. Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich.,
No. 246, June 9, 1932, pp. 1-18, pi. 1.
Eumeces obsoletus, E. humilis and E. multivirigatus are reported. The
record for humilis is the first for the United States.
Miller, Baron I. W. 1865. Reisen in den Vereinigten Staaten, Canada und
Mexico. Leipzig, 1865. Three Vols. Vol. Ill, pp. 1-643. (Part III, Die
Wirbelthiere Mexicos, pp. 535-643).
Three Mexican species of Eumeces listed.
Muller, F. 1880. Katalog der in Museum und Universitatskabinet zu Basel
aufgestellten Amphibien und Reptilien nebst Anmerkungen. Verh. Naturf.
Ges. Basel, VI, 1880, pp. 559-709.
Murray, James A. 1884. The vertebrate zoology of Sind. A systematic
account, with descriptions of all the known species of mammals, birds and
reptiles inhabiting the province; observations on their habits, etc. London
and Bombay, 1884. Reptilia and Batrachia, pp. 338-401, 5 pis.
Eumeces taeniolatus (Blyth) described, and reported from Sind, Punjab
and Kashmir (p. 356).
Myers, George S. 1924. Amphibians and reptiles from Wilmington, N. C.
Copeia, No. 131, 1924, pp. 59-62.
Eumeces jasciatus listed.
1925. Synopsis for identification of amphibians and reptiles of Indiana.
Proc. Ind. Acad. Sci., 35, 1925, pp. 277-294.
1930. Amphibians and reptiles observed in the Palisades Interstate
Park, New York and New Jersey. Copeia, No. 173, Jan. 16, 1930, pp.
99-103.
Necker, Walter L. 1934. Contribution to the herpetology of the Smoky
Mountains of Tennessee. Bull. Chicago Acad. S'ci., 5, No. 1, Jan. 26, 1934,
pp. 1-4.
Eumeces jasciatus, mentioned.
Nelson, Edward W. 1921. Natural resources of Lower California. Mem.
Acad. Nat. Sci., XVI, No. 1, pp. 1-171.
Lists Plestiodon skiltonianus lagunensis (pp. 114-115).
Nelson, Julius. 1890. Descriptive catalogue of the vertebrates of New
Jersey. Geol. Surv. New Jersey, II, Pt. 2, 1890, pp. 491-824.
Comments on Eumeces jasciatus.
Netting. Graham. 1926. The occurrence of lizards in Allegheny county
(Pa.). Pittsburg Naturalist, I, Jan.. 1926. p. 7.
Notes on Eumeces jasciatus.
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces 527
1930. The occurrence of lizards in Pennsylvania. Ann. Carnegie Mi;-..
XIX, No. 3. 1930. pp. 169-174.
Eumeces anthracinus and E. fasciatus are discussed and locality records
given.
Nikolski, A. M. 1SS6. Material k poznaniu fanny pozvonochnyc S. V. Persii
i Zakaspiskoi oblasti. [Contribution to the knowledge of the fauna of
vertebrate animals of northeastern Persia and Transcaspia. Russian
Text] Trans. Imp. S'oc. Nat. St. Petersb., XVII, 1886. pp. 379-407. (Rep-
tiles and batrachians, pp. 403-406).
Eupri pis principes mentioned on p. 406.
1899. Reptiles, Amphibies et Poissons recueillis pendent le voyage
de Mr. N. A. Zaroudny en 1898 dans la Perse. [Russian text]. Annuaire
du Musee St. Petersb.. IV. 1899, pp. 375-418, pi. XX.
Contains the tvpe description of Eumeces zarudnyi, with the tvpe
locality Seistan and Kirman in East Persia (pp. 399-400. PI. XX, fig." 4).
Eumeces schneiderii is listed from Gerri Schotur in Chascht-Adno.
18996. Herpetologia turanica A. Fedtschenko Reise in Turkestan.
Zool. Moscow, 1899, 4 to, pp. 1-84, 9 pis.
Eumeces scutatus (p. 42) and Eumeces schneiderii (p. 44) are discussed.
1905. Herpetologia Rossica. Memoirs de l'academie Imperiale des
Sciences de St.-Petersbourg, (VIII), Vol. XVII, No. 1, 1905, pp. 1-517,
pis. 1 and 2.
List- Eumeces scutatus (pp. 184-185) and E. schneiderii (pp. 185-187)
from Transcaucasia, Transcaspia and Turkestan.
1911. Contributions a l'herpetologie de la Boukhara oriental. Ann.
Mus. Zool. Ac. Sci. St. Petersb., XVI, 1911, pp. 271-284.
Eumeces schneiderii noted.
1913. Herpetologia Caucasica. Tiflis. 1913. pp. l-272,pls. 1-2.
Eumeces schneiderii listed (p. 110-111) from Transcaspia.
1915. Faune de la Russie et des pays limitrophes fondee principalement
sur les collections du Musee Zoologique de TAcademie Imperiale. 3 vols.
Vol.1. Chelonia and Sauria, pp. 1-533. with numerous figures.
Discusses Eumeces scutatus, pp. 506-508, figs. 63. 63a. 64; E. latiscutatus,
pp. 508-510; E. schneiderii, pp. 511-513, figs. 65-68; and gives locality records.
Specimens of a skink from Imperator, Olga and St. Vladimir bays on the
Visuri coast of Siberia are doubtfully referred to E. latiscutatus.
Noble, G. K., and Bradley, H. T. 1933. The mating behavior of lizards :
its bearing on the theory of sexual selection. Ann. New York Acad. Sci.,
XXXV. 1933, pp. 25-100.
Xoble. G. K., and Mason. E. R. 1933. Experiments on the brooding habits
of the lizards Eumeces and Ophisaurus. Amer. Mus. Nov.. Xo. 619, May
11, 1933. pp. 1-29.
Brooding habits of Eumeces fasciatus and E. laticeps discussed (pp. 1-19.)
Xoble, G. K.. and Teale. H. K. 1930. The courtship of some iguanid and
teiid lizards. Copeia. 1930. Xo. 2. June, pp. 54-56.
Notes on the courtship of Eumeces fasciatus.
Nutting, C. C. Report of committee on state fauna of Iowa.
Eumeces septentrionalis listed.
Okada, S. 1891. Catalogue of vertebrated animals of Japan. Tokvo, 1891,
pp. 1-125.
Eumeces marginatum (part.) reported (those from Tokyo. Hakona,
Xikko. Awiji and Suwa are to be referred to Eumeces latiscutatus) (p. 70).
1933. On the parallelism between the distribution of lizards and of
anurans in the Japanese Empire. Science Reports Tokyo Univ. Lit. and
Sci.. Sec. B. Vol. I. Xo. 13. Aug. 15. 1933. pp. 145-153. 1 map.
Shows distribute n of the genus Eumeces
528 The University Science Bulletin
1933a. The herpetological fauna in the vicinity of Nikko, Japan.
Science Reports Tokvo Univ. Lit. and Sci., Sec. B, Vol. I, No. 15, Nov. 15,
1933, pp. 159-173, text figs. 1-10.
Eumeces latiscutatus mentioned, p. 172.
Olivier, Ernst. 1894. Herpetolgia algerienne. Mem. Soc. Zool. de France,
1894, pp. 1-36.
Eumeces algeriensis included.
Oppenheimer, C, and Pincusseu, L. 1930. Tabulae biologicae. Junk, VI,
Suppl. II, 1930.
Collected data presented (p. 673) on several species of Eumeces (com-
piled from other writers).
Ortenbtjrger, A. I. 1926. Reptiles and amphibians collected in the Wichita
Mts., Comanche county, Oklahoma. Copeia, No. 155, 1926, pp. 137-138.
Eumeces jasciatus, obsoletus and anthracinus listed.
■ 1926a. A report of the amphibians and reptiles of Oklahoma. Proc.
Okla. Acad. Sci., VI, Pt. I, 1926, pp. 89-100.
Eumeces obsoletus reported from Alfalfa, Comanche, Kay and Tulsa
counties; E,. anthracinus from Comanche, Pushmataha and Tulsa counties;
E. pachyurus from Caddo and Cleveland counties; E. brevilineatus from
Caddo county; and E. jasciatus from numerous localities.
1927. A list of the reptiles and amphibians from the Oklahoma pan-
handle. Copeia, No. 163, April-June, 1927, pp. 46-48.
Eumeces obsoletus listed from Cimarron county.
1929. Reptiles and amphibians from southeastern Oklahoma and south-
western Arkansas. Copeia, No. 170, 1929. pp. 8-12.
Records of Eumeces jasciatus.
1929a. Reptiles and amphibians from northeastern Oklahoma. Copeia,
No. 170. 1929, pp. 26-28.
Locality records for Eumeces jasciatus.
— — 1930. Reptiles and amphibians from Pawnee county, Oklahoma.
Copeia, No. 173, 1930, pp. 94-95.
Eumeces jasciatus and guttulatus listed.
1930a. A key to the lizards and snakes of Oklahoma. Publ. Okla.
Biol. Surv., II, No. 4, 1930, pp. 209-239.
Eumeces obsoletus and jasciatus listed, with figs. 41 and 43 of jasciatus,
and fig. 42 of obsoletus.
Ortenbtjrger, A. I., and Freeman, Beryl. 1930. Notes on some reptiles and
amphibians from western Oklahoma. Publ. Univ. Okla., II, Biol. Surv. No.
4, 1930, pp. 175-188.
Eumeces obsoletus and guttulatus reported.
Over, William H. 1923. Amphibians and reptiles of South Dakota. South
Dakota Geol. and Nat. Hist. Surv. Bull., No. 12 (Bull. Univ. S. Dakota,
Ser. XXIII, 1923, No. 10), pp. 1-34, pis. 1-18.
E. scptentrionalis listed with the statement that the species cannot
regenerate a new tail! E. jasciatus reported from near Vermillion, S. D.
Pallary, P. 1928. S'ur trois petits vertebrates du Maroc: le Xerus getulus,
VEumeces algeriensis et le Lacerta perspicillata. Bull. Soc. Hist. Nat.
Algiers. XIX, 1928, p. 100.
Discusses Eumeces algeriensis.
Patch, Clyde L. A rattlesnake, melano garter snakes, and other reptiles from
Point Pelee, Ontario. Canadian Field Naturalist, XXXIII, pp. 60-61.
Lists Plestiodon jasciatus as common.
1934. Eumeces in Canada. Copeia, 1934, No. 1, Apr. 24, pp. 50-51.
Records E. jasciatus, septentrionalis and skiltonianus.
Pavlov, P. 1932. Listes des Sauriens et Serpens des collections do Musee
Hoang ho Pai ho de Tien Tsin. Publ. Mus. Hoang ho Pai ho, No. 12, pp.
1-27.
Taylor: The Genus Va meces 529
Lists E. latiscutatus, E. chinensis and E. pekinensis from various local-
ities. The record of the first species from Koankia ho Kansou maj- be re-
garded as doubtful.
Pellegrin, Dr. Jaqtjes. 1912. Reptile-; Batraciens et Poissons du Maroc.
(Recolles par le Dr. H. Millet.) Bull. Soc Zool. France, XXXVII, 1912,
pp. 255-264.
Eumeces algeriensis given on pages 256 and 263, from Fedhella, Azem-
monr, and Mogador, collected by Du Gast.
Pebacca, M. G. 1S94. Viaggio del Dr. E. Festa in Palestina nel Libano c.
regione vicine. Rettili ed anfibi. Boll. Mus. Zool. Anat. Comp. Univ.
Torino, IX, 1894, pp. 1-20.
Reports Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin) from Es-Salt and Dscherasch.
Peters. W. 1864. Uber die Eidechsen-familie der Scincoiden, inbesondere
iiber die Schneiderschen, Wiegmann'schen und neue Arten des zoologischen
Museums zu Berlin. Monatsb. Konigl. Preus. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, Jan. 14,
1864. pp. 44-58.
Contains the type descriptions of Eumeces schneiderii algeriensis and
Eumeces quinquelineatus japonicus. Peters points out that the name
Plestiodon is not tenable for these species and reestablishes the name
Eumeces Wiegmann. E. lynxe is correctly placed in the genus Eumeces.
Petiver, Jacob. 1695-1705. Musei petiveriani centuriae X, rariora continentes.
London, 1695-1705, 8 vo.
Gives (vol. 1, pi. 1, figs. 1-2) Lacerta marianus minor cauda caeruh <i
(= Lacerta jasciata Linnaeus).
■ 1702. Gazophvlacii naturae et artis decades. London, 1702, folio,
pis. 1-100.
S. americanusf pi. 69, fig. 13.
Piatt, Jean. 1931. Herpetological report of Morgan countv, Indiana. Proc.
Ind. Acad. Sci., 40. 1930. pp. 361-368.
Lists Plestiodon fasciatus.
Pickens. A. L. 1927. Reptiles of upper South Carolina. Copeia, No. 165,
1927, pp. 110-113.
Records Eumeces fasciatus from Anderson, Abbeyville and Columbia.
Pope, Clifford H. 1929. Notes on the reptiles from Fukien and other
Chinese Provinces. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., LVHI, 1929, pp. 335-487.
Treats E. elegans and E. chinensis, from large series collected b\r him-
self, with excellent data.
Pope. T. E. B. 1928. Wisconsin herpetological notes. Year-book Public Mu-
seum, Milwaukee, VIII, 1928. pp. 177-184.
Eumeces septentrionalis listed from Chippewa Falls, Chippewa county.
■ 1930. Wisconsin herpetological notes. Trans. Wise. Acad. Sci. Arts
Letters, XXV, 1930. pp. 273-284.
Same data on Eumeces as in preceding paper (p. 276) .
1931. Wisconsin herpetological notes. Trans. Wise Acad. Sci. Arts
Letters, XXVI. May 1931, pp. 321-329.
Pope, T. E. B., and Dickinson, W. E. 1928. The amphibians and reptiles of
Wisconsin. Bull. Publ. Mus. Milwaukee, VIII. 1928, No. 1, pp. 1-138, pis.
1-21. text figs. 1-28.
Discusses the distribution of Emmas septentrionalis and fasciatus
within the state of Wisconsin.
Pratt. Henry Sherring. 1923. Vertebrate animals of the United States.
Philadelphia, 1923, pp. 1-420.
Keys for various species of Eumeces are given.
Reed. Hugh D.. and Wright. Albert II. 1909. Tin- vertebrates of Cayuga
Lake basin, X. Y. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc. XLVIII. 1909, pp. 370-459.
Lists Leiolopisma laterale Say from a specimen which proves to be
Eumeces anthracinus. States: One specimen, No. 3550, taken at Caroline,
Apr. 23. 1892. by W. J. Terry and L. A. Fuertes.
34—1123
530 The University Science Bulletin
Rhodes, Samuel N. 1895. Contributions to the zoology of Tennessee, No.
1. Reptiles and amphibiaas. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.. 1895, pp.
376-408.
Lists Eumeces jasciatus.
Rich, E. L. 1920. The development of the skull in the skink Eumeces
quinquelineatus. Joum. Morph., XXXIV, 1920, pp. 119-216, 12 pis.
Embryo and skull development treated.
Roddy, Harry Justin. 1928. Reptiles of Lancaster county and the state of
Pennsylvania. Sci. Press, Lancaster, Pa., 1928, pp. 1-53.
Notes on Eumeces anthracinus, and E. jasciatus.
Ruthven, A. G. 1910. Contributions to the herpetology of Iowa. Proc.
Acad. Sci. Iowa, XVII, 1910, pp. 198-209, fig. 7.
An account of Eumeces septentrionalis, with figure, appears.
■ 1911. The reptiles of Michigan. Mich. Geol. Biol. Surv. Publ. 10,
Biol. Ser. 3, 1911, pp. 79-81.
Records E. jasciatus in Michigan.
1919. Contribution to the herpetology of Iowa III. Occ. Papers Mus.
Zool. Univ. Mich., No. 66. 1919, pp. 1-3. Plcstiodon septentrionalis is
listed from Lake Okoboji, Dickinson county.
Ruthven, Alexander G., and Gaige, Helen Thompson. 1915. The reptiles
and amphibians collected in northwestern Nevada by the Walker-Newcomb
expedition of the University of Michigan. Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. Univ.
Mich., No. 8, 1915, pp. 1-34, pis. 1-5.
Reports, with discussion of variation, five specimens of Eumeces skil-
tonianus from Carlin Peaks, Nevada.
■ ■ 1933. A new skink from Mexico. Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich.,
No. 260, April 3, 1933, pp. 1-3.
The type description of Eumeces dicei appears. The type locality is
Marmolejo, Tamaulipas, Mexico.
Ruthven, Alexander G., Thompson, Crystal, and Gaige, Helen Thompson.
1928. The herpetologv of Michigan. Mich. Handbook Series, No. 3, pp.i-x,
1-230, frontis., 19 pis.,' 52 text figs.
An excellent account appears of Eumeces jasciatus, with a distributional
map of the species within the state.
Sachs, W. B. 1918. Blatt. fur Aquar. und Terr. Kunde, XXIX, 1918, pp.
281-282.
Eumeces schneiderii discussed.
1919. Blatt. fur Aquar. und Terr, kunde, XXX, 1919, pp. 298-299.
Eumeces schneiderii discussed.
Sager, Abram. 1839. On American amphibia. Silliman's Journ., XXXVI, pp.
320-324.
ruder the name Scincus lateralis var. is described Eumeces jasciatus,
with a poor figure. It is stated to be "found, though rarely, in Detroit."
Say, Thomas. 1818. Notes on Professor Green's paper on the amphibia, pub-
lished in the September number of this journal. Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci.
Phila., I, Pt. 2, Oct., 1818, pp. 405-407.
Comments on the identification of Lacerta 5-lineata. Believes it to be a
synonym of Lacerta jasciata.
— 1823. In Long's Account of an expedition from Pittsburgh to the
Rocky Mountains, performed in the years 1819 and '20. H. C. Carey and
I. Lea, Philadelphia, 1823, Vol. 2, pp. i-xcviii, 6-442.
Schmidt. F. G. W. 1926. List of the amphibians and reptiles of Worden
township, Clark Co., Wisconsin. Copeia, No. 154, May 20, 1926, pp. 131-132.
Eumeces septentrionalis listed from Chippewa Falls.
Schmidt, Karl. 1916. Notes on the herpetologv of North Carolina. Journ.
Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc, XXXII, 1916, pp. 33-37.
Lists Plestiodon quinquelineatus.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 531
1919. Contributions to the herpetology of the Belgian Congo based
on the collection of the American Museum Congo expedition, 1909-1915.
Part I. Turtles, crocodiles, lizards and cliamaeleons. Bull. Araer. Mus.
Nat. Hist.. 39, Art. 2. 1919, pp. 385-602.
Notes on distribution and derivatives of Plestiodon.
1922. The amphibians and reptiles of Lower California and the
neighboring islands. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., XLVI, 1922. pp. 607-707.
Lists Eumeces skiltonianus from Todos Santos Is. Regards E. lagunensis
;i synonym.
1924. A list of the amphibians and reptiles collected near Charleston,
S. C. Copeia, No. 132, 1924, pp. 67-G9.
Lists Plestiodon fasciatus.
1927. Notes on Chinese reptiles. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., L1V.
1927, pp. 467-551, pis. XXVIII-XXX, text figs. 1-22.
Treats of four species of Chinese Eumeces. Reestablishes E. pulch* r,
as a good species. Eumeces quadrilineatus is figured (fig. 12).
Schneider. Joann Gottlob. 1799-1801. Historiae Amphibiorum naturalis et
literariae. Fasc. Primus, 1799; Fasc. secundus, 1801; Jena.
The type description of Scincus laticeps appears (Fasc. secundus, p.
189), and Scincus quinquelineatus is mentioned (p. 201).
Severtzoff, X. A. 1873. Vertikalnoe i gorizontalnoe Rasprostranenie Turke-
stanskih Jevotnie. [Fauna of Turkestan] Bull. Soc. Imp. Nat. Moscow,
1873. p. 72.
Shaw, G. 1802. General Zoology. Amphibia. Ill, 1802. Pt. 1.
Brief descriptions of Lacerta quinquelineata and Jasciata appear. The
former is said to have been "described by Doctor Garden," who sent
specimens to Linne (p. 241).
Skilton, Avery J. 1849. Description of two reptiles from Oregon. Amer.
Journ. Sci. Arts (Silliman's Journ.), (2), ATI, May 1849, p. 202.
Mentions that "several skinks resembling S. quinquelineatus were
caught by the Indians for the Missionaries with hair snares." These speci-
mens were sent by Rev. George Gary (or Geary) to the Smithsonian
Institution and became the types of P. skiltonianus.
Smith, Eugene. 1899. The turtles and lizards found in the vicinity of New
York. Proc. Linn. Soc. New York, 1898-1899, No. 11, pp. 11-32.
Xotes on Eumeces fasciatus.
Smith, Hobart M., and Leonard, Arthur B. 1934. Distributional records
of reptiles and amphibians in Oklahoma. Amer. Midi. Nat., XV, No. 2,
1934, pp. 190-196.
Lists Eumeces fasciatus, obsuletus and septentrionalix.
Smith, Malcolm. 1923. On a collection of reptiles and batrachians from the
island of Hainan. Journ. Nat. Hist. Soc. Siam. VI, 1923, pp. 195-212.
1929. Remarks on three rare reptiles from the Indo-Chinese region.
Journ. Siam Soc. Nat. Hist. Suppl., VIII, 1929, pp. 49-50.
Reports Eumeces quadrilineatus from Muak Lek near Korat.
Smith, W. H. 1879. Catalogue of the reptilia and amphibia of Michigan.
Supplement to Sci. News, I, 1879, pp. 1-6.
Eumeces fasciatus listed (pp. 3, 4, 6).
■ 1882. Report on the reptiles and amphibians of Ohio. Rept. Geol.
Surv. Ohio, IV. 1882. Pt. 1. pp. 629-734.
Data on Eumeces quinquelineatus.
Somes, M. P. 1911. Xotes on some Iowa reptiles. Proc. Acad. Sci. Iowa,
XVIII. 1911. pp. 149-154.
Lists E. septentrionalis and E. fasciatus.
Stanley, A. 1914. The collection of Chinese reptiles in the Shanghai Mu-
seum. Journ. X. China Asiat. Soc, XLV, 1914, pp. 21-31.
Lists Eumeces elegans.
532 The University Science Bulletin
Stejneger, Leon hard. 1893. Annotated list of the reptiles and batrachians
collected by the Death Valley expedition in 1891, with descriptions of new
species. The Death Valley expedition Part II. North Amer. Fauna, No.
7, 1893, pp. 159-228.
Gives an account of Eumeces skiltonianus, with locality records.
1898. On a collection of batrachians and reptiles from Formosa and
adjacent islands. Journ. Sci. Coll. Imp. Univ. Tokyo, XII, 1898, pp.
215-225.
Reports Eumeces elegans (p. 220) from Taipa, Formosa, and from the
Pescadores Islands, and E. chinensis from Taipa.
— ■ ■ 1901. Diagnoses of eight new batrachians and reptiles from the Riu
Kiu Archipelago, Japan. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XIV, 1901, pp. 189-191.
Contains the type description of Eumeces kishinouyei from islands of
the Yayeyama group, Riu Kiu Archipelago.
— ■ 1907. Herpetologv of Japan and adjacent territory. Bull. U. S. Nat.
Mus.. LVIII. 1907, pp. i-xx. 1-577, pis. I-XXXV, figs. 1-238.
Contains careful descriptions and figures of Japanese and Chinese forms.
1924. A new Chinese lizard of the genus Eumeces. Journ. Wash.
Acad. Sci., XIV, Oct. 4, 1924, pp. 383-384.
The species Eumeces tunganus is described from Luting Kiao, western
Szechwan. The types were collected by Rev. D. C. Graham.
1924a. Herpetological novelties from China. Occ. Papers Boston Soc.
Nat. Hist., V, July 21, 1924, pp. 119-121.
Contains the type description of Eumeces pekinensis (= Eumeces xanthi
Gunther) . The type locality is Hsin-lung-shan district. Imperial Hunting
Grounds, 65 miles northeast of Peking, Chili Province, China.
1925. Chinese amphibians and reptiles in the United States National
Museum. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., LXVI, 1925, pp. 1-115, 4 text figs.
Treats four species of Chinese Eumeces, with a figure of E. pekinensis.
Stejneger, Leonhard, and Barbour, Thomas. 1917. A check list of North
American amphibians and reptiles. Cambridge, Harvard Univ. Press, 1917,
pp. i-iv. 1-125.
Under the name Plestiodon, 13 species are recognized.
1923. Check list of North American amphibians and reptiles. Cam-
bridge, Harvard Univ. Press, 1923. pp. i-iv, 1-171.
Fourteen species of Eumeces are listed. Eumeces lagunensis is the only
species added over those listed in the 1917 edition. The generic name
Eumeces replaces Plestiodon.
1933. Check list of North American amphibians and reptiles. Cam-
bridge, Harvard Univ. Press, 1933, pp. i-xiv, 1-185.
In this edition Eumeces callicephalus and E. humili-s are added to the
list recognized in the United States, while guttulatus is made a synonym
of obsoletus and E. lagunensis is made a synonym of skiltonianus, leaving
a total of 14 species recognized.
Stephen, Frank. 1921. An annotated list of the amphibians and reptiles of
San Diego countv, California. Trans. San Diego Soc. Nat. Hist.. Ill, 1921,
No. 4, pp. 57-69. '
Lists Eumeces skiltonianus (p. 63).
Stoliczka, F. 1872. Notes on reptiles collected by Surgeon F. Dav in Sind.
Proc. Asiatic Soc. Bengal, XLI. 1872, p. 88.
Lists Eumeces taeniolatus from "right bank of Indus river between
Karachi and Sakkar."
1872rt. Notes on the reptilian and amphibian fauna of Kachh. Proc.
Asiatic Soc. Bengal, XLI, 1872, pp. 75-76.
Eumeces taeniolatus (Blyth) described from specimens collected atUrira,
northwestern Kachh.
18726. Notes on various new or little known Indian lizards. Journ.
Asiatic Soc. Bengal, XLI, 1872, pp. 86-135, pis. 2-5.
Eumeces discussed.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 533
Stone, Witmer. 1903. A collection of reptiles and batrachians from Arkansas,
Indian Territory and western Texas. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1903,
PP. ;>::s-;> iL\
1906. Notes on the reptiles and batrachians of Pennsylvania, New
Jersey and Delaware. Amer. Nat.. XL, 1906, pp. 159-170.
Notes several locality records for Eumeces fasciatus.
1911. On some collections of reptiles and batrachians from the wertern
United States. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.. 1911, pp. 222-232.
/ vmece's obsoletus listed from Carr Canon. Huachuca Mts., Arizona.
Stone. Witmer, and Rehn, .James A. G. 1903. On the terrestrial vertebrates
of portions of southern New Mexico and western Texas. Proc. Acad. Nat.
Sci. Phila., 1903, pp. 16-34.
Eumeces obsoletus listed from Pecos, Texas.
Stores. D. H. 1840. A report on the reptiles of Massachusetts. Boston Jonrn.
Nat. Hist., Ill, 1840, pp. 205-253, pi. I (sep., pp. 1-64).
Gives a good description of Eumeces quinqm Urn at us (sep. p. 19).
Strauch, A. 1862. Essai d'une Erpetologie de l'Algerie. Mem. Acad. Imp.
Sci. St. Petersb.. (7), IV. No. 7. 1862. pp. 1-86.
Lists Plestiodon cyprium (Aldrov.) from Bone, St. Cloud, Le-Sig and
Arzew.
Strecker. John K. 1902. A preliminary report on the reptiles and batrachians
of McLennan county. Trans. Texas Acad. Sci., IV, 1901, Pt. 2, No. 5. pp.
1-7.
Records Eumeces quinquelineatus.
1908. The reptiles and batrachians of Victoria and Refugio counties,
Texas. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XXI, 1908, pp. 47-52.
Lists species of Eumeces: E. quinquelineatus from Victoria county, and
this same species with E. tetragrammus from Refugio county.
1908a. The reptiles and batrachians of McLennan county, Texas.
Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. XXI, Mar. 21, 1908, pp. 69-84.
Eumeces obsoletus reported from McGregor, Texas, and E. quinque-
lineatus from Waco.
19086. Notes on the habits of two Arkansas salamanders, and a list
of the batrachians and reptiles collected at Hot Springs. Proc. Biol. Soc.
Wash., XXI. 1908. pp. 85-90.
Eumeces quinquelineatus listed.
■ 1908c. Notes on the breeding habits of Phrvnosoma cornutum and
other Texas lizards. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash, XXI, July 27, 1908, pp. 165-170.
Notes on Eumeces brevilineatus and E. fasciatus.
1909. Contributions to Texas herpetologv. Notes on the herpetologv
of Burnett county. Texas. Baylor Univ. Bull.. XII. No. 1. Jan., 1909. pp. 1-9.
A good account of Eumeces brevilineatus, with records for obsoletus and
tetragrammus.
1909a. Contributions to Texas herpetologv. Reptiles and amphibians
collected in Brewster countv, Texas. Baylor Univ. Bull., XII, No. 1, Jan.,
1909. pp. 11-16.
Reports Eumeces brevilineatus and E. tetragrammus. This last specimen
proves to be E. septentrionalis obtusdrostris Bocourt. Reports seeing
obsoletus.
1910. Notes on the fauna of northwestern Texas. Notes on the fauna
of a portion of the canyon region of northwestern Texas. Baylor L'niv.
Bull., XIII. Nos. 4 & 5, 1910, pp. 1-31.
Eumeces guttulatus and obsoletus reported.
1910a. Description of a new solitary spadefoot (Scaphiopus hurterii)
from Texas, with other herpetological notes. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash, XXIII.
July 23, 1910, pp. 115-122, pis. 1-2.
Eumeces pachyurus is discussed and figured (pi. II, fig. 2).
534 The "University Science Bulletin
1915. Reptiles and amphibians of Texas. Baylor Univ. Bull., XVIII,
No. 4, 1915, pp. 1-82.
Texas species listed: Eumeces quinquelineatus, guttulatus, obsoletus,
leptogrammus, multivirgatus, pachyurus, tetragrammus, brevilineatus, and
arithracinus (pp. 25-28).
1922. An annotated catalogue of amphibians and reptiles of Bexar
county, Texas. Bull. Sci. Soc. San Antonio, No. 4, Apr. 1922, pp. 1-21.
Plestiodon brevilineatus and P. obsoletus listed.
■ 1924. Notes on the herpetologv of Hot Springs, Ark. Baylor Univ.
Bull., XXVII, No. 3, 1924, pp. 29-47.
There is a description and discussion of Plestiodon jasciatus and a very
detailed account of Plestiodon arithracinus.
1926. Amphibians and reptiles collected in Somerville county, Texas.
Contr. Baylor Univ. Mus., No. 2, 1926, pp. 1-2.
Plestiodon jasciatus listed.
1926a. Notes on the herpetology of the east Texas timber belt.
Libertv countv amphibians and reptiles. Contr. Baylor Univ. Mus., No.
3, 1926, pp. 1-3.
Lists Plestiodon jasciatus.
19266. A list of the reptiles and amphibians collected by Louis Garni
in the vicinity of Boerne, Texas. Contr. Baylor Univ. Mus., No. 6, 1926,
pp. 1-9.
Eumeces brevilineatus listed.
■ 1926c. Notes on the herpetology of the east Texas timber belt. No.
2. Henderson county amphibians and reptiles. Contr. Bavlor Univ. Mus.,
No. 7, 1926, pp. 1-11.
Records for Eumeces jasciatus.
1927. Observations of the food habits of Texas amphibians and
reptiles. Copeia, No. 162, Jan.-Mar. 1927, pp. 6-9.
Notes on the food habits of Eumeces pachyurus.
1927a. Chapters from the life histories of Texas reptiles and amphibians.
Contr. Baylor Univ. Mus., No. 10, 1927, pp. 1-14.
Notes on the enemies of Eumeces jasciatus.
1928. Common and English folk names for Texas amphibians and
reptiles. Contr. Baylor Univ. Mus., No. 16, Aug. 4, 1928, pp. 1-21.
Common names are given for Eumeces brevilineatus and jasciatus.
1929. Dragons and other reptiles, real and imaginary. Baylor Univ.
Contr. to Folk Lore, No. Ill, 1929. pp. 1-19, pis. 3-4.
A plate showing an unnamed skink is a photograph of Eumeces obsoletus.
1929a. Field notes on the herpetology of Wilbarger county, Texas.
Contr. Baylor Univ. Mus., No. 19, 1929, pp. 1-9.
Eumeces obsoletus reported.
19296. A preliminary list of the amphibians and reptiles of Tarrant
county, Texas. Contr. Baylor Univ. Mus., No. 19, 1929, pp. 10-15.
Lists Eumeces jasciatus from Fort Worth.
1930. A catalogue of the amphibians and reptiles of Travis county,
Texas. Contr. Baylor Univ. Mus., No. 23, 1930, pp. 1-16.
Eumeces brevilineatus and E. obsoletus listed as present. States that
jasciatus probably occurs.
1933. Collecting at Helotes, Bexar county, Texas. Copeia, 1933, No.
2, July 20, pp. 77-79.
Eumeces brevilineatus mentioned (pp. 78, 79).
Strecker, John K., and Frierson, L. S. 1926. Herpetology of Caddo and
DeSoto Parishes, Louisiana. Contr. Baylor Univ. Mus., No. 5, May 15,
1926, pp. 1-8 (unnumbered).
Reports Eumeces jasciatus and arithracinus. The large red-headed speci-
men is doubtless E. laticeps.
Taylor: The Gexi s I'.i mm i s 535
Streckkr. John K., and Williams, Walter J. 1927. Herpetological records
from the vicinity of San Marcos, Texas, with distributional data on the
amphibians and reptiles of the Edwards Plateau region and central Texas.
Contr. Baylor Univ. Mus, No. 12, Dec. 1927, pp. 1-16.
E. brevilineatus discussed, and E. obsoletus and E. tetragrammus listed.
192S. Field not< - on the herpetology of Bowie county, Texas. Contr.
Baylor Univ. Mus.. No. 17, pp. 3-19.
Notes on Eumeces jasciatus.
Stuart. L. C. 1934. A contribution to the knowledge of the herpetological
fauna of El Peten, Guatemala. Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich., No.
292, June 29, 1934, pp. 1-18.
Eumeces schwartzei discussed.
Sumichrast, Ferdinand. 1880. Contribution a l'Histoire Naturelle du Mexi-
que I. Notes sur une Collection de Reptiles et de Batraciens de la partie
occidentale de l'lsthme de Tehuantepec. Bull. Soc. Zool. de France, V.
1880. pp. 162-190.
1884. Enumeracion de las especies de reptiles observados en la Parte
Meridional de la Repiiblica Mexicana. La Naturaleza, (1), VI, 1882-1884,
pp. 31-45.
Reports Eurm ces lynxe as common about Orizaba (perhaps furdrostris) .
Lists E. sumichrasti.
Sun. T. P. 1926. Notes on the lizards of Nanking. Contr. Biol. Lab. Sci.
China. II, pp. 1-10.
Description and habits of Eumeces chinensis. E. latiscutatus is listed
probably erroneously, also Plestioden (sic) elegans.
Surface. H. A. 1908. First report on the lizards of Pennsylvania. Zool. Bull.
Pennsylvania Dept. Agri., V, No. 8, 1908, pp. 234-258, pis. 30-33, figs. 26-28.
Describes Eumeces anthracinus and jasciatus in considerable detail, with
interesting notes on habits.
Svihla, Arthur, and Svihla, Ruth Dowell. 1933. Amphibians and reptiles
of Whitman county. Washington. Copeia. 1933, No. 3, Oct. 15, pp. 125-128.
Eum-eces skiltonianus recorded from the north bank of Snake river.
Swinhoe, R. 1863. A list of the Formosan reptiles; with notes on a few
species and some remarks on a fish (Orthagoriscus sp.). Ann. Mag. Nat.
Hist., (3), XII, pp. 219-226.
Mabouia chinends is reported from Tamsuy, Formosa (this is Eumeces
elegans, according to Boulenger [Cat. Liz.]).
1870. List of the reptiles and batrachians collected in the Island of
Hainan (China). Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1870, pp. 239-241.
Eumeces chinensis reported from Hainan, Formosa and the Pescadores
Islands.
1870a. Notes on the reptiles and batrachians collected in various parts
of China. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1870, pp. 409-412.
Tanner, Vasoo M. 1927. Distributional list of the amphibians and reptiles of
Utah. Copeia, No. 163. 1927, pp. 54-58.
Reports Eumeces skiltonianus from Zion National Park, New Harmony
and Cove Fort.
Taylor, Edward H. 1929. A species of lizard new to the fauna of the United
States: Eumeces callicephalus Bocourt. Univ. Kans. Sci. Bull., XIX.
1929. pp. 67-69.
The species is reported from the Huachuca mountains in Arizona.
— 1932. Eumeces inexpert at us: a new American lizard of the family
Scincidae. Univ. Kans. Sci. Bull., XX. 1932. pp. 251-258, pis. XVII-XVIII.
Gives the type description of Eumeces inexpectatu.*, with the type
locality Citrus county. Florida. The form is compared with E. jasciatus,
and figures of both species are given.
536 The University Science Bulletin
1932a. Eumeces laticeps: a neglected species of skink. Univ. Kans.
Sci. Bull., XX, 1932, pp. 263-272, pis. XIX-XX.
Reestablishes the name laticeps for the large species of skink long
regarded as the Bouthem form of Eumeces jasciatus.
1933 Two new Mexican skinks of the genus Eumeces. Proc. Biol.
Soc. Wash., XLVI, June 30, 1933, pp. 129-138, 2 figs.
Eumeces ochoterenae from Mazatlan, near Chilpancmgo, Guerrero, and
E. copei from near Asuncion, Mexico, Mexico, are described as new.
Figures of both species are given.
- 1933o. Notes on type specimens of reptiles and amphibians in the
"Alfredo Duges" museum, Guanajuato, Mexico. Copeia, 1933, No. 2,
July 20, pp. 97-98.
Eumeces altamirani and romrosae examined (p. 97).
1933b. New species of skinks from Mexico. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash.,
XLVI, Oct. 26, 1933, pp. 175-183.
The type descriptions of Eumeces parvulus from Tepic, Nayarit, Mexico,
and Eumeces parviauriculatus from Alamos, Sonora, Mexico, appear.
1934. Notes on Chinese reptiles and amphibians. Lingnan Sci. Jour..
XIII. No. 2, Apr. 18, 1934, pp. 297-310.
Eumeces chinensis and elegans reported from Foochow, China.
1934«. A new species of lizard from Mexico. Univ. Kans. Sci. Bull.,
XXI, No. 5, Mar. 1933 (Sept, 1934), pp. 257-267, pis. 24-25.
Eumeces indubitus described.
1935. A new skink from Mexico. Zool. Ser. Field Mus. Nat. Hist.,
Vol. XX, No. 10, op. 77-80, fig 7.
Eumeces colimensis is described from Colima, Mexico, with figures of
the head scales.
Tchtjnq, Lin Tchang. 1931. Notes on some Chinese lizards. Bull. Fan
Memorial Inst. Biol. Peiping, II, 1931. pp. 265-2S0, pi. 1.
Eumeces latisculatus (sic) and Eumeces pekinensis reported from Peip-
ing, and Eumeces elegans and E. chinensis from Nanking.
Temminck, C. J., and Schlegeil, H. 1835-1838. Fauna japonica. Reptilia.
pp. i-xxi, 1-144, map, pis. I-IX (Chelonia). I-X (Ophidia), I-VIII (Sauna
and Batrachia).
Discusses Scincus quinquelineatus (= Eumeces latisculatus) and gives
figures of it (PI. I, figs. 1-4).
Terentjev, Paul V. 1923. Concerning the question of the presence of
Eumeces marginatum Hall, in Russia. Copeia, No. 119. June 16. 1923, p. 76.
Specimens of skinks from the Ussuri coast of Siberia identified by
Elpatjewski and Sabanejew as Eumeces rnarginatus are identified as E.
latisculatus.
Theobald, William. 1866. Catalogue of reptiles in the museums of the
Asiatic Society of Bengal. Extra Number, Journ. Asiatic Soc. Bengal, No.
CXLVI, 1866,' pp. 1-88, pis. 1-4.
Lists Plestiodon quinquelineatum (= Eumeces chinensis) from China,
and Mabouia quadrilineata Blyth from Hongkong, probably the type He
states the specimen is labelled "Plestiodon quinquelineatum L. North Caro-
lina, Rev. F. Fitzgerald" in Mr. Blyth's handwriting! Plestiodon scutatus
is also described from a specimen without locality, and P. [lestiodon]
laticeps D. & B. is listed from North Carolina.
1876 Descriptive catalogue of the reptiles of British India. Calcutta,
Thacker. Spink and Co.. 1876, pp. i-x, 1-238, i-xxxviii. i-xiii, pis. 1-2
Lists and describes Eumeces taeniolatus from "hills between Jhilum and
Kashmir," and Eumeces blythianus from the doubtful locality. Amntsar,
Punjab.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 537
Tho.minot. M. A. 1SS3. Note sur un Reptile d'espece aouvelle provenanl du
Mi srique el appartenanl au genre Eumeces (Plestiodon) . Bull. Soc. Philoru,
Paris. (7). VII. 1882-1883. pp. 138-139.
leces (Plestiodon) dugesii is described as new from a specimen
collected by Alfredo Dime.- in the state of Guanajuato, Mexico.
Thompson. Crystal. 1915. The reptiles and amphibians of Manistee county.
Michigan. I >ce. Papers Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich., No. 18, 1915, pp. 1-6.
Notes on Eumeces quinquelineatus.
Thompson, .1. C. 1912. Herpetological notices No. 2. Prodrome of descrip-
tion of new species of Reptilia and Batrachia from the Far East. Privately
printed, June 28, 1912, pp. 1-4.
Eumeces oshiirn nsis is described as new from Kikaigashima, Loo Choo
Islands, and Eumeces stimsonii from Ishigaki Island, Loo Choo Islands.
1912a. Herpetological notice- No. 3. On reptiles new to the island
arcs of Asia. Privately printed, July 31, 1912, pp. 1-5.
Mentions Eumeces stimsonii.
Townsend, Charles H. 1887. Field notes on the mammals, birds and reptiles
of Northern California. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., X, 1887, pp. 159-241.
Reports Eumeces skiltonianus from Pitt river.
Tristam. 1860. The Great Sahara wanderings south of the Atlas mountains.
London. I860. Appendix VI.
Appendix VI includes data on reptiles.
Turner, Clarence L. 1914. Wax reconstruction of the brain of an embryo
lizard, Eumeces. Univ. Kans. Sci. Bull.. 9. No. 9, pp. 111-118.
Uncer and Kotschy. 1865. Die Insel Cypern. Wien., 1865, 8 vo, pp. 1-572.
(Not seen.)
Van Denburgh, John. 1895. A review of the herpetologv of Lower Cali-
fornia. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., (2), V, 1895, pp. 77-162, pi." XIII.
The type description of Eumeces lagunensis appears, with good figures
on pi. XIII, figs. a-f.
1896. A list of some reptiles from southeastern Arizona, with a descrip-
tion of a new species of Cnemidophorus. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., (2), VI,
1896. pp. 338-349.
Eumeces obsoletus reported from Fort Grant, Graham county, Arizona.
1896a. Description of a new lizard (Eumeces gilberti) from the Sierra
Nevada of California. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci.. (2), VI, 1896, pp. 350-352.
Type description given of this form from a specimen from Yosemite
Valley, Mariposa county, California.
1897. The reptiles of the Pacific Coast and the Great Basin. Occ.
Papers Calif. Acad. Sci., V, 1-236.
Careful accounts given of Eumeces skiltonianus and E. gilberti, with a
figure of the former species.
1905. The reptiles and amphibians of the islands of the Pacific Coast
of North America from the Farallons to Cape San Lucas and the Revilla
Gigedas. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., (3), IV, 1905, pp. 1-40.
Reports Eumeces skiltonianus from North Coronado Island, Lower Cali-
fornia.
1912. Advance diagnoses of new reptiles and amphibians from the
Loo Choo Islands and Formosa. Privately printed, July 29, 1912, pp. 1-5.
Describes Eumeces man/hint us amamiensis from Araami Oshima, E.
ishigakiensis from Ishigaki Shima, E. marginatus kikaigensis from Kikaigo
Shima. E. barbouri from Anianii Oshima, and E. chinensis formosensis from
Formosa.
1912a. Notes on a collection of reptiles from southern California .and
Arizona. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci.. (4). Ill, 1912-1913. pp. 147-156.
Eumeces skiltonianus reported from localities in San Diego and San
Bernardino counties California.
538 The University Science Bulletin
19126. Concerning certain species of reptiles and amphibians from
China, Japan, the Loo Choo Islands and Formosa. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci.,
(4), III, 1912-1913 (Dec, 1912), pp. 187-258.
A very important paper describing in detail Eumeces barbouri, marginatus
amanuensis, marginatus kikaigensis, ishigakiensis and chinensis jormosensis,
brief descriptions of which had been published in a privately printed paper
previously.
1922. The reptiles of western North America. Vol. I, Lizards.- Occ.
Papers Calif. Acad. Sci., X, 1922, pp. 1-611, pis. 1-57.
Detailed accounts of Plestiodon skiltonianus, lagunensis, obsoletus and
guttulatus [obsoletus (part.) — callicephalus Bocourt]. Gilberti is described
and reluctantly placed in the synonymy of skiltonianus. Fig. 1, pi. 56, is of
skiltonianus; fig. 2 is of gilberti; pi. 57 is a photograph of obsoletus.
1924. Notes on the herpetology of New Mexico, with a list of species
from that state. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., (4), XIII, No. 12, 1924, pp. 189-230.
Lists Eumeces multivirgatus from Fort Wingate and Top of Ridge. Forks
of Rio Ruidoso. E. obsoletus and guttulatus are also listed.
Van Denburgh, John, and Slevin, Joseph. 1913. A list of the amphibians
and reptiles of Arizona, with notes on the species in the collection of the
Academy. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., (4), III, 1913, pp. 391-454, pis. 17-28.
Eumeces obsoletus listed from Arizona.
1914. Reptiles and amphibians of the islands of the west coast of
North America. Proc Calif. Acad. Sci., (4), IV, 1914, pp. 129-152. _
Reports Eumeces skiltonianus from Coronados Islands, Mexico, and
from Catalina Is., Cal.
1915. A list of the amphibians and reptiles of Utah, with notes on the
species in the collection of the Academv. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., (4), V,
1915, pp. 99-110.
Reports Eumeces skiltonianus from Mt. Baldy, Beaver county, Utah.
1921. A list of the amphibians and reptiles from Nevada, with notes
on the species in the collection of the Academy. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., (4)
XI, No. 2, July 8, 1921, pp. 27-38.
Lists Plestiodon skiltonianus.
1921a. List of the amphibians and reptiles of Idaho, with notes on the
species in the collections of the Academv. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., (4), XI,
No. 3, July 8, 1921, pp. 39-47.
First records of Eumeces skiltonianus from Idaho: Ft. Hall, Bingham
county, and Boise, Ada county.
19216. A list of the amphibians and reptiles of the peninsula of Lower
California, with notes on species in the collection of the Academv. Proc.
Calif. Acad. Sci., (4), XI, No. 4. July 8, 1921, pp. 49-72.
Lists Plestiodon skiltonianus and P. lagunensis.
Van Hyning, O. C. 1933. Batrachia and Reptilia of Alachua county, Florida.
Copeia, 1933, No. 1, Apr. 3, pp. 3-7.
Lists Eumeces egregrius (sic) and Eumeces Jasciatus (= probably lati-
ceps and inexpectatus) .
Vasiljev, L. 1904. Eumeces scutatus in the Transcaspian Province. Ann.
Mus. St. Petersb., IX, 1904, pp. xiii-xv, Bupplement.
Obtains 30 specimens in Transcaspia, especially in the Arvaz (Arizav?)
Pass at Kopet-dag (p. xiii).
Verrill, A. E. 1902. The Bermuda Islands. New Haven, Conn., 1902, 8 vo,
pp. 1-548, illus.
Note on E. longirostris.
Vogt, Theodor. 1914. Siidchinesische Reptilien und Amphibien. Sitz. Ges.
Naturf. Freunde. Ber.. 1914, pp. 96-102.
Lists Eumeces elegans from Canton.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 539
1922. Zur Reptilien- und Amphibienfauna Siidchinas. Arch. Naturg.,
88, Beft 10. Abt. A., 1922, pp. 135-146.
Lists Eumeces chinensis and E. elegans.
1924. Reptilien und Amphibien aus Szetschwan, Osttibet und Tschili.
Zool. Anz, LX. 1924. pp. 337-344.
Eumeces chinenxis listed from < )beres Mental and Kanton. States
"Hinter den zwei parr Nuchalia sind die folgenden Zwei parr Riichen-
schuppen deutlich vergrossert."
Wagler, J. 1830. Natiirlich.es System der Amphibien. Miinchen, Stuttgart,
und Tiibigen. 1830, pp. 1-354.
Euprepis quinquelincatus and Euprepis jasciatus mentioned p. 161.
Wagner, M. 1841. Bemerkungen iiber die in der Regentschaft Algier gesam-
melten Amphibien von Schlegel. Reisen in der Regenschaft Algier, Leip-
zig, 1841.
Weller. W. H. 1930. Guide to the exhibition of amphibians and reptiles,
Cincinnati Society of Natural History, pp. 1-4.
Lists Eumeces jasciatus.
1930o. On a recent occurrence of the blue-tailed skink in Hamilton
county. Proc. Cin. Junior Sbc. Nat. Sci.. I, 1930. p. 9.
Reports Eumeces Jasciatus.
1930/>. Records of some reptiles and amphibians from Chimney Rock
Camp. X. C. and vicinity. Proc. Cin. Junior Soc. Nat. Sci., I, 1930. pp.
9-12 (unnumbered).
Reports Eumeces jasciatus.
Werner. Fr\xz. 1904. Uber Reptilien und Batraehier aus Guatemala und
China in der Zoologischen Staats-Sammlung in Miinchen, nebst einem
Anhang iiber seltene Formen aus anderen Gebieten. Abh. Baver. Akad.
Wiss., II.' Kl. XXII. 1904. pp. 343-384. 1 pi., 4 text figs.
Records of Chinese Eumeces given: quadrilimeaUis (Hongkong. Szet-
schwan. Kwantung), elegans, chinensis and xanthi (the latter doubtfully
correct) .
1914. Ergebnissee einer von Prof. F. Werner im Sommer 1910 mit
LTnterstiitzung aus dem Leg-ate Wedl ausgefiihrten Zoologischen Forschung-
sreise nach Algerien. II. Vertebrata. Sitz. Kais. Akad. Wiss. Wien. Math-
Natur. Klasse. CXXIII. Pt. 4, 1914, pp. 331-363.
Under the heading "Die reptilien von Figig'' is listed Eumeces algeri-
ensis meridional).*.
1917. Reptilien aus Persien (Provinz Fars). Verhand. K. K. Zool-
Botan. Ges. Wien, LXVTI, 1917, pp. 191-220.
Eumeces schneiderii (Daud.) is reported and discussed from this region
(p. 203).
1929. Wissenschaftlich Ergebnisse einer Zoologischen Forschungsreise
nach We-talgerien und Marokko. Sitz. Akad. Wiss. Wien. Math.-Natur.
Klasse, Abt. I, Band 138, Heft 1-2, 1929, pp. 1-34. pis. I-IV.
Reports E. algeriensis, E. schneiderii and E. algeriensis meridionnlis
Domergue (the latter from Ain Sefra).
Wetstein, Otto. 1928. Amphibien und reptilien aus Palastina und Svrien.
Sitz. Akad. Wiss. Wien., Math.-Naturw. Klasse, 137, 1928, pp. 773-786, 1 pi.
Eumeces schneiderii (Daud.) subsp.? is reported from Benyamina, south
of Haiffa.
Wied. Prixz zu Maximilian. 1865. Verzeichnis der Reptilien welche auf einer
Reise im nordlichen America beobachtet wurden. Nova Act. Acad. Leopold
Carol. Nat. Curios. XXXII. 1865. pp. i-yii, 1-143, pis. 1-7.
Contains a detailed account of Plestiodon erythrocephalum and P. quin-
qm lim ut Km.
540 The University Science Bulletin
Wiegmann, A. F. 1828. Beitrage zur amphibienkunde. Isis, 1828, pp. 364-383.
Lists the type specimen of Eumeces lynxe as Scincus quinquelineatus
var. Schneid. He states that it is called Lynxe by the natives. However,
the name lynxe is apparently a translation of the name applied to both
the lizard and to the large mountain lions by the Mexicans in certain
localities. The classic form of the name is lynx, lyncis.
1834. Herpetologia Mexicana, 1834, pp. 1-vi, 1-54, pis. I-X.
Under the name Euprepes lynxe Wiegmann describes as a new species
the specimen mentioned in Isis (1828, p. 373) as Scincus quinquelineatus
var. The type locality is "prope, Chico," Mexico. He does not place it
in the newly created genus Eumeces appearing in the same work.
■ 1835. Bericht liber die Fortschritte der Zoologie in Jahre 1834 vom
Herausgeber (Schlufs.). Arch, fiir Naturg., I Jahr, II Band, pp. 255-348.
Chooses Eumeces pavimentatus the type by the statement "Falschlich
sind Scincus rujescens Merr. und punctatus Schn. dazu gestellt; beide
gehoren zu Euprepes s. st. Nur Sc. pavimentatus Geoffr. gehort zu
Eumeces." (p. 288.)
1837. Herpetologische Notizen vom Herausgeber. Arch, fiir Naturg.,
Ill Jahr, I Band, 1837, pp. 123-136.
Eumeces pavimentatus is discussed (pp. 131-132) as "die typische Art
dieser Abtheilung ist der schone Scincus pavimentatus Geoff.," etc.
Williams, J. B. 1903. A further note on the blue-tailed lizard. Ottawa
Naturalist, XVII, 1903, p. 60.
On Eumeces jasciatus.
Wolter, O. 1918. Feldpostbriefe aus Mesopotamien. Blatt. fiir Aquar.-Terr.-
kunde, XXIX, 1918, pp. 289-291.
1919. Feldpostbriefe aus Mesopotamien. Blatt. fiir Aquar.-Terr-
kunde, XXX. 1919, pp. 15, 339. 353-354.
Eumeces schneiderii included.
Woodbury, Angus M. 1928. The reptiles of Zion National Park. Copeia, No.
166, 1928. pp. 14-21.
Lists Plestiodon skiltonianus.
1931. A descriptive catalogue of the reptiles of Utah. Bull. Univ.
Utah, XXI, 1931 (Biol. Surv. Vol. I, No. 4), pp. 1-129, text figs. 1-58.
Contains a good account of Eumeces skiltonianus.
Wright, Albert H. 1919. The turtles and the lizards of Monroe and Wayne
counties, New York. Copeia, No. 66, 1919, pp. 6-8.
Gives New York locality records of Eumeces anthracinus.
Wright, Albert H., and Funkhouser, W. D. 1915. A biological reconnais-
sance of the Okefinokee Swamp in Georgia. The reptiles. Proc. Acad. Nat.
Sci. Phila., Mar., 1915, pp. 108-192.
Detailed account given of Plestiodon quinquelineatum (= Eumeces
laticeps and E. inexpectatus) .
Wu, H. W. Herpetological notes from Hangchow. Sc. Rept. Nation. Cent.
Univ. Nankins:, I, pp. 51-58.
Eumeces clegans listed.
Yarrow, H. C. 1882. Checklist of North American Reptilia and Batrachia.
Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 24, 1882, pp. 1-249.
Recognizes the following species of Eumeces: septentrionalis, multi-
virgatus, leptogrammus, obsoletus, guttulatus, skiltonianus, jasciatus and
longirostris.
Yarrow, H. C. and Henshaw, H. W. 1878. Report upon the reptiles and
batrachians collected during the years 1875, 1876, 1877, in California, Arizona,
and Nevada by Dr. H. C. Yarrow, acting assistant surgeon U. S. A., and
H. W. Henshaw. Ann. Rept. Geog. Surv. West 100th Mer. (App. L. Ann.
Rept. Chief Eng. for 1878), pp. 206-226. (Also published in a series, Ann.
Rept. Chief Eng. to Secv. War, 1878. pt. 3, App. NN (App. L. pp. 1628-1648).
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces 541
Zarudny, N. IS90. Recherches Zoologiques dans la Contree Transcaspienne.
Reptiles < t Amphibies. Bull. Soc. Imp. Nat. Moscow, 1890, pp. 2SS-315.
p. 295)
E imeces princeps recorded from Murgab, Tidschent, Merve, and Pcnde
Zrt.Mi.M.';. Beitrage zur Herpetologische Fauna.-; von Zentral Asiens. Zodl.
Anz., 81, p. 238.
Zi t.i kt\. Antonio de. 190S. Nota sobre batracios y reptiles de Mogador con
descripcion de la forma joven de Saurodactylus mauretanicus Dum. &
Bibr. Bol. Real Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat.. VIII, Dec. 1908, pp. 151-157.
Eurrn c< s algeriensis included (pp. 454-455).
1909. Xota sobre reptiles de Melella (Marruecos). Bol. Real Soc.
Esp. Hist. Nat.. IX, Jul.. 1909, pp. 351-354.
Eumeces algeriensis included (p. 354).
ADDENDA TO THE BIBLIOGRAPHY
Baird. S. F.. and Girard, Charles. 1852. Reptiles. In Stansbury's Explora-
tion and Survey of the Valley of the Great Salt Lake of Utah. App. C.,
pp. 336-353.
Bovlenger. G. A. 1885. On the geographical distribution of the Lacertilia.
Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist.. (5), XVI. Aug.. 1885.
18S7. List of reptiles and batrachians from Cyprus. Ann. Mag. Xat.
Hist.. (5). XX. No. 119. Nov., 1887. pp. 344-345.
Eumeces schneideri Daudin listed from Cyprus. Five specimens, three
with 26. two with 24 scale rows round the middle of body.
1887a. On the affinities of the North American lizard fauna. Ann.
Mag. Nat. Hist.. (5). XX. Xo. 119. Nov., 18S7. pp. 345-346.
1888. On the affinity of the North American lizard fauna. Ann. Mag.
Xat. Hist., (6), I. No. 2. Feb., -1888, pp. 107-109.
Burt, Charles E. 1936. A key to the lizards of the United States and
Canada. Trans. Kans. Acad. Sci., XXXVIII. 1935, pp. 255-305. 71 figs.
This work, just oft' the press, contains a key to eleven of the nineteen
forms of Eurrn a s occurring in the territory treated. Certain of his "species"
are composite groups of three or four forms. The work will be of little use
in identifving many of the species and subspecies occurring in the United
States.
Heilprix. Axgelo. 1888. On the affinity of the North American lizard fauna.
Ann. Mag. Xat. Hist., (6). I. Jan.. 1888. pp. 24-27.
Lord, J. K. 1886. British Colombia, II. Lizards, pp. 302-308.
Pope. Clifford H. 1935. The reptiles of China. Xat. Hist. Cent. Asia. X.
pp. i-lii. 1-604, pis. I-XXVII. text figs. 1-78.
Treats briefly with d^tributional records of Eumeces chinensis chim nsis,
Eumeces chinensis pvlcher, Emmas elegcms, Eumeces quadrilineatus,
Eumeces tunganus and Eumeces xanthi.
Taylor. Edward H. 1936. The rediscovery of the lizard Eumeces altamirani
(Duges) with notes on two other Mexican species of the genus.
Detailed description of Eumeces altamirani, with comments on Eumeces
copei Taylor and Eumeces callicephalus Bocourt.
EXPLANATION OF PLATES
(543)
544 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE I
Eumeces schwartzei Fischer
Michigan University Museum of Zoology, No. 68226; snout to
vent, 112 mm.; Chichen-Itza. Yucatan, Mexico.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
545
PLATE I
I
35—1123
546 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE II
Eumeces altamirani Duges
Fig. 1. Taken from Duties (1891). Plate XXII.
Eumeces managuae Dunn
Fig. 2. Photograph of British Museum. No. 53,8.17,6; snout
to vent, 116 mm. (Eumeces taeniolatus Boulentier. non Blyth).
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
547
PLATE II
\-^\
548 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE III
Eumeces taeniolatus (Blyth)
Fig. 1. Lateral view, British Museum, No. 70,11,29,9; Alpine Punjab on
the route from Jhelum into Kashmir. Photograph by courtesy of the British
Museum (Natural History).
Fig. 2. Same, dorsal view.
Eumeces princeps (Eichwald)
Fig. 3. Kansas University Museum, No. 11020; snout to vent, 125 mm.;
Transcaspia.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
549
PLATE III
/
I
! *
/
2
3
4
M
■^
550 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE IV
Eumeces taeniolatus iBlyth)
Fig. 1. Lateral view. E. H. Taylor Collection. No. 4888; snout to vent.
98.2 mm.; Puli Hatun, Transcaspia.
Fig. 2. Same, dorsal view.
Taylor: The < Ii.m s Ei meces
551
PLATE IV
***
rJ\
■']
'
•
552 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE V
Eumeces schneiderii (Daudin)
Fig. 1. E. H. Taylor Collection, No. 6521 ; snout to vent, 160 mm.; "Haiffa"
Syria.
Eumeces pavimentatus (GeofTroy Saint-Hillaire)
Fig. 2. Kansas University Museum, No. 11021; snout to vent, 136 mm.;
"Haiffa" Syria.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
553
PLATE V
*
^M^
554 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE VI
Eumeces blythianus (Anderson)
Fig. A. Lateral view, British Museum. Xo. 98,7,12.1; Afridi
country, Afghan borderland. Photograph by courtesy of the Brit-
ish Museum (Natural History).
Fig. B. Same, dorsal view.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
555
PLATE VI
556 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE VII
Eumeces algeriensis algeriensis (Peters)
From Boulenger, Trans. Zool. Soc. London, XIII, Plate 16.
Mogodor, Morocco. (Reduced somewhat.)
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
557
PLATE VII
S6«^>"
558 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE VIII
EumeoSs schneiderii (Daudin)
Fig. 1. United States National Museum, No. 10946; snout to vent. 155 mm.;
Algeria.
Eumeces algeriensis algeriensis (Peters)
Fig. 2. Kansas University Museum. No. 11019; snout to vent. 173 mm.;
Casablanca, Morocco.
Fig. 3. United States National Museum. No. 37290; snout to vent, 180 mm.;
Oran, West Algeria.
Taylor: The < Jenus Ei mm es
559
PLATE VIII
ill
/
z
560 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE IX
Eumeces longirostris (Cope)
Fig. 1. Kansas- University Museum, No. 8215; snout to vent, 60 mm.;
Castle Island, Bermuda Islands.
Fig. 2. Kansas University Museum. No. 8216; snout to vent, 79 mm.;
adult male; Castle Island, Bermuda Islands.
Fig. 3. Kansas University Museum, No. 7280; snout to vent, 72 mm.;
Castle Island, Bermuda Islands.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
561
PLATE IX
36—1123
562 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE X
Eumeces sumichrasti (Cope)
Fig. 1. Lateral view, British Museum, No. 81,10,31,30; about natural size;
Jalapa, Vera Cruz, Mexico. Photograph by courtesy of the British Museum
(Natural History).
Fig. 2. Same, dorsal view.
Fig. 3. Paratype of "Eumeces schmidti" Dunn. Field Museum Natural
History, No. 18004; snout to vent, 64 mm.; Lancetilla. Honduras.
Taylor: The Gents Kr. mixes
563
PLATE X
fe
564 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XI
Eumeces fasciatus (Linnaeus)
Fig. 1. Kansas University Museum, No. 11359; adult male, about natural
size; Imboden, Ark.
Fig. 2. Kansas University Museum. Xo. 11355; about natural size; transi-
tional coloration; Imboden. Ark.
Fig. 3. Kansas University Museum. Xo. 11352; actual size; Imboden, Ark.
Taylor: Tin-: (ii:.\vs Immkcks
565
PLATE XI
I
\
/
i
■■-'
;"><;<; The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XII
Eumeces laticeps (Schneider)
Fig. 1. Michigan University Museum of Zoology, No. 67792; snout to vent,
93 mm.; adult female; Pigeon river, Butte county, Alabama.
Fig. 2. Michigan University Museum of Zoology. No. 67793; snout to vent,
87 mm.; Houston county, Georgia.
Taylor: The <ii:.\is Eimeces
567
PLATE XII
5(38 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XIII
Ewmeces laticeps (Schneider)
Fig. 1. Michigan University Museum of Zoology, No. 57717; snout to vent,
54 mm.; seven-lined form; Micanopy Road. Florida.
Fig. 2. Michigan University Museum of Zoology, No. 56607; snout to vent,
95 mm.; seven-lined form; female with 14 undeveloped eggs in ovaries;
Alachua county, Florida.
Fig. 3. Michigan University Museum of Zoology. No. 56686; snout to vent,
84 mm.; five-lined form; Hanover, Ind.
Fig. 4. Oklahoma University Museum, No. 7265; snout to vent. 112; five-
lined form; Delaware county, Oklahoma.
Taylor: The (Ie.ms Kimku:-.
569
PLATE XIII
J
570 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XIV
Eumeces inexpectatus Taylor
Fig. 1. Lateral view, Michigan University Museum of Zoology, No. 61629;
female; snout to vent, 67 mm.; Gulfport, Pinelas county, Florida.
Fig. 2. Same, dorsal view.
Fig. 3. Michigan University Museum of Zoology. No. 61631 ; snout to vent,
50 mm.; Hillsboro county. Florida.
Fig. 4. Kansas University Museum, No. 8232; type; snout to vent, 66 mm.;
Citrus county, Florida.
Fig. 5. Kansas University Museum, No. 8233; paratype; snout to vent, 62
mm.; Citrus county, Florida.
Taylor: The (Jknts Kimeces
571
PLATE XIV
;
ft § |
mm
572 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XV
Eumeces xanthi Giinther
Figs. 1, 2, 3. Dorsal and lateral view of British Museum. No.
89, 6, 25.4; cotypes; about natural size. Photographs by courtesy
of the British Museum (Natural History).
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
573
PLATE XV
574 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XVI
Eumeces elegans Boulenger
Fig. 1. California Academy of Sciences, No. 31402; snout to vent, 69 mm.;
Moh Kan Shan, China.
Fig. 2. California Academy of Sciences, No. 31399; Moh Kan Shan, China.
(The head scales of this specimen are shown in text figure No. 4, A and B.)
Fig. 3. California Academy of Sciences, No. 26762; snout to vent, 89 mm.;
Moh Kan Shan, China.
Taylor: The (Iknts Immkces
575
! J i
I
PLATE XVI
J
576 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XVII
Eumeces stimsonii Thompson
Fig. 1. California Academy of Sciences, No. 21658; snout to vent, 63 mm.;
Ishigakijima, Riu Kiu Islands, Japan.
Fig. 2. California Academy of Sciences, No. 21659; snout to vent. 55 mm.;
Ishigakijima. Riu Kiu Islands, Japan.
Fig. 3. California Academy of Sciences, Xo. 21670; snout to vent, 60 mm.;
Ishigakijima, Riu Kiu Islands. Japan.
Fig. 4. California Academy of Sciences. No. 21648; snout to vent, 53 mm.;
Ishigakijima, Riu Kiu Islands, Japan.
Taylor: The Gents Ki.mkcks
577
PLATE XVII
': ; I
I
*
'*
*-?
£
-.'."
4
-112:)
578 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XVIII
Eumeces marginatus (Hallowell)
Fig. 1. California Academy of Sciences, No. 24252; snout to vent, 53 mm.;
Nago, Okinawa, Riu Kiu Islands, Japan.
Fig. 2. California Academy of Sciences, No. 24254; snout to vent. 70 mm.;
Nago, Okinawa, Riu Kiu Islands, Japan.
Fig. 3. California Academy of Sciences, No. 24251; snout to vent, 72 mm.;
male; Nago, Okinawa. Riu Kiu Islands, Japan.
Taylor: The (Jkxis Eumkces
579
imati: win
\
fv
580 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XIX
Eumeces okadae (Stejneger)
Fig. 1. United States National Museum, No. 23895; snout to vent, 79 mm.;
female; Niishima, Idzu Islands, Japan.
Fig. 2. United States National Museum, No. 23896; snout to vent, 41 mm.;
Niishima, Idzu Islands, Japan.
Eumeces oshimensis Thompson
Fig. 3. California Academy of Sciences, No. 21595; Amamioshima, Riu Kiu
Islands, Japan.
Taylor: The Gknts Eimeces
581
PLATE XIX
-~
582 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XX
Eumcces oshimensis Thompson
Fig. 1. California Academy of Sciences, No. 21634; snout to vent, 65.5
mm.; Kikaigashima, Riu Kiu Islands, Japan.
Fig. 2. California Academy of Sciences, No. 21626; snout to vent, 82.5 mm.;
Kikaigashima, Riu Kiu Islands, Japan.
Fig. 3. California Academy of Sciences, No. 21613; snout to vent, 66 mm.;
Amamioshima, Riu Kiu Islands, Japan.
Fig. 4. California Academy of Sciences, No. 21565; snout to vent. 78 mm.;
Amamioshima, Riu Kiu Islands, Japan.
Fig. 5. California Academy of Sciences. No. 21633; snout to vent, 53 mm.;
Kikaigashima, Riu Kiu Islands, Japan.
Taylor: Tin: (i i:\is Immkces
:,s:{
PLATE XX
I
h:
/
584 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXI
Eumeces latiscutatus (Hallowell)
Fig. 1. California Academy of Sciences, No. 33028; snout to vent, 72.5 mm.;
Kobe, Japan.
Fig. 2. California Academy of Sciences, No. 33048; snout to vent, 74.5
mm.; Miyazo, Japan.
Fig. 3. California Academy of Sciences, No. 33049, snout to vent, 72 mm.;
Miyazo, Japan.
Taylor: Thk (Iknus Eumeces
:.*;>
PLATE XXI
V
586 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXII
Eumcces brevilineatus Cope
Fig. 1. Kansas University Museum, No. 7769; snout to vent, 51 mm.;
topotype; Helotes, Bexar county, Texas.
Fig. 2. Kansas University Museum, No. 13199; snout to vent, 49 mm.;
Glass Mountains, Brewster county, Texas.
Fig. 3. Kansas University Museum, No. 13200; snout to vent, 58 mm.;
Chisos Mountains, Brewster county, Texas.
Fig. 4. Kansas University Museum, No. 7768; snout to vent, 59 mm.;
Alpine, Brewster county, Texas.
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces
587
lM.ATK \.\I1
.^
5SS The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXIII
Eumeces callicephalus Bocourt
Fig. 1. Lateral view. Harvard Museum of Comparative Zoology, No. 15928;
snout to vent, 57 mm.; Chihuahua (City?), Chihuahua, Mexico.
Fig. 2. Same, dorsal view.
Fig. 3. Lateral view; California Academy of Sciences, No. 48095; snout to
vent, 52.2 mm.; Huachuca Mountains, Arizona.
Fig. 4. Same, dorsal view.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
:,si)
IM.ATi: Will
590 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXIV
Eumeces obsoletus (Baird and Girard)
Fig. 1. E. H. Taylor Collection, No. 1886; snout to vent, 94 mm.; Law-
rence, Kan.
Fig. 2. Kansas University Museum, No. 7775; snout to vent, 90 mm.;
Cameron county, Texas.
FlG. 3. E. H. Taylor Collection, No. 1887; snout to vent, 97 mm.; Law-
rence, Kan.
Taylor: The Genus Etjmeces
591
PLATE XXIV
%?m0
'V,
mVv-
• /
I
592 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXV
Eumeces chinensis pulcher (Dumeril and Bibron)
Fig. 1. California Academy of Sciences, No. 14662; Shanghai, China.
Eumeces chinensis chinensis (Gray)
Fig. 2. Michigan University Museum of Zoology, No. 65028; snout to vent,
92 mm.; Moh Kan Shan, China.
Fig. 3. California Academy of Sciences, No. 18603; Keelung, Formosa.
("Eumeces chinensis formosmtus" Van Denburgh.)
Taylor: The Gkxis Immkcks
5<K5
PLATE XXV
t
38—1123
594 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXVI
Eumeces kishinouyei Stejneger
Fig. 1. California Academy of Sciences, No. 21724; snout to vent, 80 mm.;
Ishigakijima, Riu Kiu Islands, Japan.
Fig. 2. California Academy of Sciences, No. 21722; snout to vent, 134 mm.;
Miyakojima, Riu Kiu Islands, Japan.
Fig. 3. California Academy of Sciences, No. 21725; snout to vent, 137.5
mm.; Ishigakijima, Riu Kiu Islands, Japan.
Taylor: The (Jexi s Kimeces
595
PLATE XXVI
596 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXV 1 1
Eumcces multivirgatus (Hallowell)
Fk;. 1. Denver Museum, No. 6; snout to vent. 60 nun.; Weld county,
Colorado.
Fig. 2. Denver Museum, No. 3; snout to vent, 57 mm.; Weld county.
Colorado.
Fig. 3. Denver Museum, No. 8; snout to vent. 63 mm.; Weld county,
Colorado.
Tayloh: Tin: Gk.nis F,i mkcks
597
PLATE XXVII
598 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXVIII
Eumccc-s .s< ■ pt( ■ntrionalis obtusirostris (Boeourt)
Fig. 1. Kansas University Museum, No. 13158; snout to vent, 63 mm.;
Waco, McLennan county, Texas.
Fig. 2. Kansas University Museum, No. 13159; snout to vent, 45 mm.;
Waco, McLennan county, Texas.
Eumeces multivirgatus Hallowell
Fig. 3. United States National Museum, No. 30833; snout to vent, 69 mm.;
Chihuahua, Chihuahua, Mexico.
Fig. 4. Collection Grand Canon National Park, unnumbered; young; snout
to vent, 35 mm.; Grand Canon National Park, Arizona.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
.-)!)!)
PLATE XXVIII
600 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXX
Eumeces humilis Boulenger
Fig. 1. Lateral view, Kansas University Museum, No. 13161; snout to vent,
47 mm.; two miles south of entrance of Carlsbad Caverns, New Mexico.
Fro. 2. Same, dorsal view.
Fig. 3. Michigan University Museum of Zoology, No. 70516; snout to vent,
65 mm.; Guadalupe Mountains, Culberson county, Texas.
Taylor: The (Ikxis Famkcks
601
PLATE XXX
602 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXXI
Eumeces egregius onocrepis (Cope)
Fig. 1. United States National Museum, No. 60515; snout to vent, 54 mm.;
Auburndale, Pope county, Florida.
Eumeces egregius egregius (Baird)
Fig. 2. United States National Museum. No. 61692; snout to vent. 46 mm.;
Big Pine Key, Florida.
Eumeces parvulus Taylor
Fig. 3. United States National Museum, No. 51395; paratype; snout to
vent, 37 mm.; Miniman, Nayarit, Mexico.
Fig. 4. United States National Museum, No. 56903; snout to vent, 51 mm.;
type; Tepic, Nayarit, Mexico.
Eumeces parviauriculalus Taylor
Fig. 5. United States National Museum, No. 47536, snout to vent, 47 mm.;
Alamos, Sonora, Mexico.
Taylor: The Gkms Kimkcks
603
/
PLATE XXXI
t
604 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXXII
Eumeces anthracinus (Baird)
Fig. 1. Kansas University Museum, No. 11342, snout to vent, 56 mm.;
Cherokee county, Kansas.
Fig. 2. Kansas University Museum, No. 8219; snout to vent, 56 mm.;
Imboden, Lawrence county, Arkansas.
Fig. 3. Kansas University Museum, No. 8221; snout to vent, 56 mm.;
Imboden, Lawrence county, Arkansas.
Fig. 4. Kansas University Museum, No. 11339; actual size; Galena, Chero-
kee county. Kansas.
Fig. 5. Kansas University Museum. No. 11340; actual size; Galena, Chero-
kee county, Kansas.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
605
PLATE XXXII
v-->
2
: 3
606 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXXIII
Eumeces copei Taylor
Fig. 1. United States National Museum, No. 32291; snout to vent, 70 mm.;
"Either the valley of Mexico, or the neighboring one of Toluca" (Distrito
Federal or Mexico, Mexico).
Fig. 2. E. H. Taylor and Hobart M. Smith Collection, No. 3865; snout to
vent, 62 mm.; 10 miles southeast of Asuncion, Western Mexico, Mexico.
Fig. 3. E. H. Taylor and Hobart M. Smith, No. 3859; snout to vent, 76
mm.; 10 miles southeast of Asuncion, Western Mexico, Mexico.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
607
PLATE XXXIII
ft'
/
608 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXXIV
Eumeces septentrionalis septentrionalis (Baird)
Fig. 1. Kansas University Museum. No. 6982; snout to vent. 74 mm.;
Onaga, Pottawatomie county, Kansas.
Fig. 2. Kansas University Museum, No. 6979; snout to vent, 65 mm.;
Onaga, Pottawatomie county. Kansas.
Fig. 3. Kansas University Museum, No. 6991; snout to vent, 68 mm.;
Onaga, Pottawatomie county, Kansas.
rAYLOR: The ( Jenus Ei meces
I id!)
PLATE XXXIV
;}'
II i
3
39—1123
6T0 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXXV
Eumeces skiltonianus skiltonianus (Baird and Girard)
Fig. 1. Lateral view, California Academy of Sciences, Xo. 48923; snout to
vent, 40 mm.; Carmel, Monterey county, California.
Fig. 2. Same, dorsal view.
Fig. 3. California Academy of Sciences. Xo. 39330; snout to vent, 65 mm.;
Comptche, Mendocino county, California.
Fig. 4. California Academy of Sciences, Xo. 26986; snout to vent. 67 mm.;
Carmel, Monterey countv, California.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
611
PLATE XXXV
w <
2
3
4
<i!2 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXXVI
Eumeces lagunensis Van Denburgh
Fig. 1. University of California, Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, No.
13760; snout to vent, 50 mm.; Comondu, 1.000 feet, Baja California, Mexico.
Eumeces skiltonianus skiltonianus (Baird and Girard)
Fig. 2. California University Museum of Vertebrate Zoology; snout to
vent, 65 nun.; typical specimen; Toclos Santos Islands, Baja California,
Mexico.
Fig. 3. California Academy of Sciences, No. 13736; snout to vent, 65 mm.;
male; Carmel, Monterey county, California.
Fig. 4. California University Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, No. 10950;
snout to vent, 61 mm.; Turner's. Lyonsville, Tehuma county, California. (A
single atypical specimen obtained in a large series of typical ones.)
Taylor: The (Ik.ms Kimkcks
G13
PLATE XXXVI
/
2
ff
o
'I
I
*
614 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXXVII
Eumeces gilberti gilberti Van Denburjih
Fig. 1. California Academy of Sciences, Xo. 65307, snout to vent, 75 mm.;
Panamint Mountains, Inyo county. California.
Fig. 2. California University Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, Yosemite
Valley, Mariposa county, California.
Fig. 3. California Academy of Sciences. Xo. 50158. snout to vent, 96 mm.;
Yosemite Valley, Mariposa county, California.
Taylor: Tin: Genus Etjmeces
615
4
PLATE XXXVII
rlli
23
i
V ^"
- —
? ,
-tt
GIG The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXXVIII
Eumeces gilberti gilberti Van Denburgh
Fig. 1. Stanford University Museum, No. 3421; approximately natural size;
San Joaquin county, California.
Fig. 2. Stanford University Museum, No. 3422; approximately natural size;
San Joaquin county, California..
Fig. 3. California University Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, No. 3985;
•snout to vent, 89 mm.; Carbondale, Amador county. California.
Fig. 4.' California University Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, No. 3559;
snout to vent, 98 mm.; San Joaquin county, California.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
(ill
PLATE XXXVIII
tils The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XXXIX
Eumeces gilberti rubicaudatus subsp. nov.
Fig. 1. California Academy of Sciences, No. 39001; snout to vent, 51 mm.;
Tehachapi Mountains, Kern county, California.
Fig. 2. California Academy of Sciences, No. 35363, snout to vent, 39.5 mm.;
Witch Creek, San Diego county, California.
Fig. 3. California University Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, No. 5560;
snout to vent, 87 mm.; near Fort Tejon, Kern county. California.
Fig. 4. California Academy of Sciences, No. 40301; male; snout to vent,
101 mm.; Campo, San Diego county, California.
Taylor: The Geni s Ki meces
til!)
PLATE XXXIX
•
•
bi
I
620 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XL
Eumeces quadrilineatus (Blyth)
FlG. 1. American Museum of Natural History, No. 30197; male; snout to
vent, 73 mm.; South Mountains, Nodoa, Hainan, China.
Eumeces lynxe lynxe Wiegmann
Fig. 2. Michigan University Museum of Zoology, Xo. 48066; female; snout
to vent, 67 mm.; Guerrero, Hidalgo, Mexico.
Eumeces colimensis Taylor
Fig. 3. Field Museum of Natural History, No. 1649; type; female; snout to
vent, 65 mm.; Colima, Colima, Mexico.
Eumeces lynxe lynxe Wiegmann
Fig. 4. United States National Museum, Xo. 14605; female; snout to vent,
62 mm.; "Mexico."
Taylor: Tiik (Ikxis Eumeces
623
PLATE XL
/
\
V
622 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XLI
Eumeces brevirostris (Giinther)
Fig. 1. E. H. Taylor and Hobart M. Smith Collection, Xo. 2587; snout to
vent, 54 mm.; Totalco. Vera Cruz, Mexico.
Fig. 2. E. H. Taylor and Hobart M. Smith Collection. Xo. 2571; snout to
vent, 54 mm.; Totalco, Vera Cruz, Mexico.
Fig. 3. United States National Museum, Xo. 46682; snout to vent, 64 mm.;
La Parada, Oaxaca, Mexico.
T wi.oh: The < rENUS Ki mei es
623
PLATE \LI
624 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XLII
Eumeces indubitus Taylor
Fig. A. E. H. Taylor and Hobart M. Smith Collection. No. 1674; paratype;
about actual size; forty miles south of Mexico City. Distrito Federal. Mexico.
Fig. B. E. H. Taylor and Hobart M. Smith Collection. No. 1731; type;
about actual size; forty miles south of Mexico City, Distrito Federal, Mexico.
Taylor: The Genus Eumeces
625
PLATK XLII
Fig. A.
Fie. B.
40— nii:;
626 The University Science Bulletin
PLATE XLIII
Eumeces ochoterenae Taylor
Fig. 1. E. H. Taylor and Hobart M. Smith Collection, No. 1481; snout to
vent, 53 mm.; Mazatlan, Guerrero. Mexico.
Fig. 2. E. H. Taylor and Hobart M. Smith Collection, No. 1015; snout to
vent, 56 mm.; Mazatlan, Guerrero. Mexico.
Eumeces dugesii Thominot
Fig. 3. United States National Museum, No. 26153; snout to vent, 58.6
mm.; Guanajuato, Guanajuato, Mexico.
Fig. 4. United States National Museum, Xo. 26154; snout to vent, 67 mm.;
Guanajuato, Guanajuato. Mexico.
Taylor: The Gents Eumeces
627
yV*i
PLATE XLIII
GENERAL INDEX
Abbot, Chas. C, 503 bibl.
Abstract, 1!'. 20
Ar:iilrni> ..I Naiui:il N'mi'v-, Philadelphia, 23
Acknowledgments, 22, 23, 24
Addenda, 541
African species, 57, 58
agilis (Mabouia), 4.".!'
Agujilla. 172
AM, Ernst. 503 bibl.
'Vandii (Eumeces), 2s, 519
aldrovandii (Plestiodon), 31, 121, 122, 126,
146, 514, 51.".. 516, .".19
Aldrovandi, Ulyssis, 119, 503 bibl.
algeriensis (Eumeces), 28, 31, 73, 121, 140,
505, 521, 528, 529, 539, 541
ILGERIENSIS ALGKUIENSIS (EUMECES), 10, 14,
20, 3S, 73, 8ss key, 119, 121, 124 key,
184 map, (146 to 151), 148 fig.
ALGERIENSIS MERIDIONALIS (EUMECES), 10, 20,
38, 82 key, 119, 122, 124 key, 13', map,
1 47. (15% to 154), 514, 539
algeriensis (Eumeces pavimentatus), 122, 146,
147
algerii nsis ( Eumeces schneiderii), 146
Allard, H. A., 503 bibl.
Allen, J. A., 503 bibl.
ALTAMHUNI (Eumeces), 14, 20, 27, 30, 33,
36, 38, 50, 74, 81 key, '.)', key, 95, 100,
101 map. (102 to 104), 105, 514, 530
sis {Eumeces marginatus), 20, 28,
253, 254, 268
amantus (Eumeces), 518
amblygrammus (Eumeces), 28
am.blygramm.us (Eumeces skiltonianus), 413,
414. U6
American Museum Natural History, 23
American species, 53, 54, 55
■ <es), 28
us), 191, 195, 212, 521, 529
Anderson, John, 112, 143, 503 bibl.
\..t:.l, Dr. M. F., 24, 473
angulare, 16
Annandale, Xelson, 117, 123, 503 bibl.
Anolis pave, 111
ANTHRACINT7S (EUMECES), 12, 16, 19, 27, 38,
51, 59, 60, 76, 86 key, 37£ key, 373 var.,
t.. 387), 375 fig., 385 map, 504,
505, 509, 511, 513, .".10, 517, 518, 523,
.".27. 528, 529, 530, 534, 535, 540
AnthKACINTJS uroiip, 35, 36, 49, 54, 154, 372
key, 388
anthracinus (I'U stiodon), 373
Aquatic habits, 60, 61
A: t .i ulare, 16, 47
Asiatic species. ( astern, 3
Asiatic species, western, 57
Atkinson, D. A., 503 bibl.
at rocostatum (Emoia ), 31
At- at. Sarah 1{., 503 bibl.
aurata (Lacerta), 119, 120, 121
aurata (Mabouia), 32, 120
aurata (Mabuya), 31
auratus (Plestiodon), 120, 120. 140. ;,is. 519,
53 4
auratus (Scincus), 188
Autarchoglossa, 29
B
Babcock, Harold L., 504 bibl.
Bailey, Vernon, 504 bibl.
Baird. Spencer F., 289, 342, 373, 304, 401,
5U4 bibl.
Baird, S. F., and Girard, Charles, 307. 411,
504 bibl., addenda
nARBOURi (Eumeces), 8', key, 91 key, 1^7 key
(265 to 267), 2S2 map, 537, 538
Barbour, Thomas, 23, 156, 132, 133, 504
bibl., 505 bibl.
Barriers, 57, 58
Barry. Lewis T., 24, 349
Basioccipital, 42
Basisphenoid, 43
Hash- Museum, 24
Bastide, L., 505 bibl.
baudinii (Emoia), 31
baudinii (Eumeces), 31
Bean, T. H., 156
Beddard, Frank E., 505 bibl.
bellii (Eumeces), 20, 28, 163
Bellii (Plestiodon), 163, 104, 165, 518
Berlandier, Dr. Luis, 298
Beyer, George S., 505 bibl.
Bibliography, (503 to 5',1)
bicolor (Scincus), 195, 196, 212, 52]
bicolor (Tiliqua), 212
Bingham, Oren R., 24
Bishop, Dr. S. C., 23, 505 bibl.
Blanchard, Dr. Frank N., 24, 505 bibl.
Blanford, W. J., 112, 117, 145, 177, 500 bibl.
Blatchley, W. S., 506 bibl.
Bleeker, P., 500 bibl.
Blyth, E., 32. ill, 112, 117. 4.".2. 500 bibl.
BLYTHIANUS (Eumeces), 14, 28, 38, 12', key
(143 to l)r,). 503, 508, 516, 536
Blythianus (Mabouia), 143, 144, 145, 503
Bocourt, Firinm. 104. 320. 405, 412, 453,
4.".o. 5110 bibl.
bocourtt (Eumeces), 28, 102, 358, 508, 512,
520
Boettger, Oscar, 134, J47, 506 bibl.
41—1123
(629)
630
Index
Bogert, C. M., 352, 507 bil>l.
Boll, Mr., 405
Bond, Harley D., 507 bibl.
Bosc, 194
Boulenger, George A., 32, 37, 58, 112, 114,
122, 147, 155, 164, 165, 173, 179, 251,
267, 277, 329, 342, 358, 406, 412, 459,
460, 473, 508 bibl., addenda
Boring, Alice M., 507 bibl., 508 bibl.
Bouring, J. C, Esq., 452
Brachymeles, 68
Brady, Maurice, 508 bibl.
Breeding habits, 63, 64
BREVILINEATUS (EuMECEs), 11, 12, 15, 27, 38,
51, 59, 60, 85 key, 283 key, (283 to 290),
285 fig., 288 fig., 289 map, 409, 504,
508, 511, 514, 528, 533, 534, 535
Brevilineatus group, 35, 36, 39, 50, 51, 55,
172, 283 key, 402
brevilineatus (Plestiodon), 284
brevipes (Einneces), 27, 429
brevipes (Eumeces skiltonianus), 13, 19,
81 key, 413, 414, 1,15 key, 425 map,
(428 to 1,31)
brevirostris (Eumeces), 13, 17, 22, 28, 38,
51, 52, 61, 64, 65, 67, 75, 87 key, 100,
387 var., 457, .{58 key, map, (1,59 to
1,66), 1,61, fig., 461, key, 472, 473, 506,
511, 512, 517, 520
Brevirostris group, 13, 35, 36, 50, 51, 64,
410, 457, 485, 490
brevirostris (Mabouia), 100, 459, 519
brevirostris var. (Eumeces), 387, 459, 511
Brimley, C. S., 508 bibl.
British Museum (Natural History), 23, 24
Brooding habits, 65
Brown, Arthur Erwin, 33, 509 bibl.
Brown, W. Wilmot, 168
Brues, C. T., 432
Buchet, Gaston, 152
Bumpus, H. C., 509 bibl.
Bunker, Charles, 23
Burnett, W. L., 509 bibl.
Burt, Dr. Charles, 6, 23, 204, 291, 308, 509
bibl., addenda
Burt, C. E., and Burt, May D., 510 bibl.
Burt, May Danheim, 23
C
cadurcensis (Plestiodon), 513
Cadwalader, Charles M. B., 23
Cahn, Alvin, 510 bibl.
Calabresi, Enrica, 510 bibl.
California Academy of Sciences, 23
callicephalum (Plestiodon), 291, 296
callicephalus (Eumeces), 12, 15, 28, 38,
39, 51, 52, 87 key, 89 key, 204, 283 key,
(290 to 298), 292 fig., 308, 371, 506,
509, 511, 512, 520, 532, 535, 538
Camp, Charles Lewis, 414, 438, 439, 510 bibl.
Canadian species, 53, 54
Cannibalism, 62
Cantor, Theodore, 321, 329, 510 bibl.
capito (Eumeces), 28, 232, 506
Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, 23
Carpals, 47, 48
Carphophis, 63
Carr, A. F., 24
carteretii (Eumeces), 31
Catesby, Marc, 191, 197, 510 bibl.
cauda caerulea (Lacerta), 11, 191, 192 fig.
Central American species, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53
cepedii (Eumeces), 28
cepedii (Scincus), 525
Chalcides, 68
Chang, Mangven L. Y., 510 bibl.
chinensis (Eumeces), 10, 28, 32, 1,0 figs., 51,
244, 246, 321, 329, 335, 339, 340, 507,
516, 518, 523, 525, 529, 532, 535, 536,
539
chinensis chinensis (Eumeces), 12, 15, 20,
38, 55, 89 key, 90 key, 304, 305 key,
(320 to 328), 323 fig., 327 map, 334
chinensis jormosanus (Eumeces), 537, 538
chinensis (Mabouia), 32, 245, 320, 507, 519,
535
chinensis pulcher (Eumeces), 12, 15, 20,
31, 38, 55, 89 key, 90 key, 304, 305 key,
326, 327 map, (328 to 324), 330 fig.
chinensis (Tiliqua), 246, 320, 321
Chinshields, 77
Clark, John H., 307
Clavicle, 47
Cncmidophorus sexlineatus, 62
Cochran, Dr. Doris, 22
Cockerell, T. D. A., 510 bibl.
Cocteau, M., 510 bibl.
colimensis (Eumeces), 13, 17, 20, 27, 38,
53, 74, 86 key, 457 key, 458 map, (478
to 482), 479 fig., 536
Colorado Museum Natural History, 24
Color description, 79
Conant, Roger, 23, 510 bibl.
Contents, 7, 8, 9
Cook, Lorenzo H., 24, 510 bibl.
Cook, Dr. S. S., 105
Cope, Edward D., 32, 155, 164, 165, 173,
179, 196, 197, 299, 308, 342, 343, 349,
373, 374, 387, 393, 395, 405, 406, 413,
459, 473, 496, 497, 511 bibl., 512 bibl.
copei (Eumeces), 12, 13, 16, 27, 38, 49, 51,
61, 86 key, 372 key, (387 to 394), 389
fig., 393 map, 459, 511, 536
Copulation, 63, 64
Coracoid, 47
Cornell University, 23
Coronoid, 46
Corrington, Julian, 512 bibl.
Corson, Dr. Jos., 374
Couch, Lieut. Darias Nash, 298
Coues, E., 512 bibl.
Index
631
Coues, Elliot and Yarrow, H. C. 395, 512
bibl.
Cragin. F. W., 350, 395, 512-513 bibl.
Cuvier, Georges, 513 bibl.
cyanogaster, Emoia, 31
cyanurum (Emoia), 31
cyprinw (Tiliqua), 121, 126, 518
cyprium (Plestiodon), 146, 533
cyprius (Eumeces), 28
cyprius (Eumeces schneiderii), 122
cyprius scincoides (Lacerta), 119, 120, 121,
123
cyprius (Scincus), 121, 126, 146, 513
Czernov S., 513 bibl.
D
Darrell, .1. H., 155
Dasia, 34
Data recording, 25, 26
Daubenton, Louis Jean Marie, 513 bibl.
Daudin, F. M., 119, 120, 194
David, Armand, 513 bibl.
Davis, N. S. and Rice, F. L., 513 bibl.
de Catesby (Euprepis), 510
Deckert, Richard, 513 bibl.
Defense habits, 62, 63
de Gray (Tiliqua), 328
De Kay, James E., 513 bibl.
Dentary, 46
Deppe, Ferdinand, 164
Deringen, K. M., 513 bibl.
DeStefano, G., 513 bibl.
Diadophis, 63
Diapsida, 29
dicei (Eumeces), 13, 27, 38, 53, 68, 74, 85
key, 371, 457, 458 key, map, (482 to
485), 483 fig., 530
Dice, Lee R., 482
Diploglossus millepunctatus, 517
Distribution, general, 48, -J9 map, 50, 51, 52,
53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58
Ditmars, R. L., 156, 513 bibl.
Doederlein, L., 514 bibl.
Domergue, F., 152, 153, 514 bibl.
Dondorff, 514
Douglas, Melvin. 24
Duges, Alfredo, 32, 33, 36, 64, 94, 95, 102,
172, 179, 291, 472, 477, 514 bibl.
DCGEsn (Eumeces), 13, 17, 20, 28, 38, 52,
64, 73, 83 key, 457 key, 458 map, 471,
(472 to 478), ',74 fig., 511, 512, 514,
520, 522
Dugesii, (Eumeces [Plestiodon]), 472, 537
Dumeril, Aug.. 514 bibl,
Dumeril, A. M. C. and Bibron, Aug., 31, 33,
36, 121, 123, 146, 321, 328, 514 bibl.
Dumeril, M. C. and Dumeril, Aug., 515 bibl.
Dunkle, David, 5
Dunn, Dr. E. R., 105, 179
Dunn, E. R. and Emlen, John T., 515 bibl.
Dury, Ralph, 515 bibl.
Dwigubuski, I., 515 bibl.
Ectoptergoid, 43
Egregius group, 35, 36, 54, 67, 490
■lius (Eumeces), 27, 37, 38, 61, 68, 7:i.
7 1. 76, 77, 368, 4S5, 490 key, 497, 198,
499, 511, 513, 524, 538
EGREGIUS ONOCREPIS (EUMECKS), 13, 16. 19,
38, 83 key, 495, 496, (497 to 502), 501
map
Eggs, 4, 26, 65, 203, 245, 265, 271, 350, 384,
393, 413, 472
EGREGIUS EGREGIUS (EUMECES), 13, 16, 19,
38, 61, 73, 74, 76, 77, 82 key, (490 to
496), 4.02 fig., 501 map, 502
egregius (Plestiodon), 490, 504
Eichwald, Ed., 121, 515 bibl.
Eisen, Gustav, 431
elegans (Eumeces), 11, 15, 28, 38, 55, 56,
68, S4 key, 91 key, 187 key, 240, 244,
(245 to 253), 248 fig., 252 map, 507,
508, 510, 519, 520, 525, 529, 531, 532,
535, 536, 538, 539, 540
elegans (Lygosoma), 520
elegans (Plestiodon), 246, 269, 535
Elevation, 50, 51, 52, 60, 61, 393
Ellis, Max, 515 bibl.
Ellis, Max M., and Henderson, Julius, 515
bibl.
Elpatjewsky, V. S., and Sabanejew, L. L.,
■ 515 bibl.
Emoia
atrocostatum, 31
baudinii, 31
cyanogaster, 31
cyanurum, 31
Epicoracoid, 47
Epiotic postparietal, 45
epipleurotis (Eumeces), 27, 342, 343, 344,
350, 357, 511
Epiptergoid, 43
Erwin, Richard P., 516 bibl.
erythrocephalus (Eumeces), 27, 197, 511
i rythrocephalus (Plestiodon), 193, 196, 213,
511, 539
rrythrocephatus (Scincus), 195, 197, 212, 518,
521, 522
erythrocephalus (Tiliqua), 212, 213
Eumeces, 10, 29, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 48, }9
map, 410, 412, 416, 509, 522, 523, 525,
526, 527, 528, 529, 532
algeriensis, 28, 31, 73, 121, 146, 505, 521,
528, 529, 539, 541
ALGERIENSIS ALGERIENSIS, 10, 14, 20, 38,
73, 82 key, 119, 121, 124 key, 134 map.
(1)6 to 151), 148 fig.
algeriensis meridionalis, 10, 20, 38, 82 key,
119, 122, i24 key, 13!, map, 147 (152 to
153), 514, 539
ai.tamirani, 14, 20, 27, 30. 33, 36, 38, 50,
74, 81 key, 9} key, 100, 101 map, (102
to 104), 105, 514. 536
632
Index
Eumeces — Continued :
amantuti, 518
amblygrammus, 28
americanus, 28
anthracinus, 12, 16, 19, 27, 38, 51, 59,
60, 76, 86 key, 372 key, 373 var., (373
to 387), 375 fig., 385 map, 505, 509,
511, 513, 516, 517, 518, 523, 526, 527,
528, 529, 530, 534, 535, 540
BARiiOtmi, 20, 28, 38, 55, 68, 81, key, 91
key, 187 key, (265 to 267), 282 map,
537, 538
baudinii, 31
bellii, 20, 28, 163
bicolor, 27
blythianus, 14, 28, 38, 121, key, (.1)8 to
11,5). 503, 508, 516, 536
bocourti, 28, 102, 358, 508, 512, 520
BREVILINEATUS, 11, 12, 15, 27, 38, 51, 59,
60, 85 key, 283 key, (283 to 290), 285
fig., 288 fig., 289 map, 409, 504, 508,
511, 514, 528, 533, 534, 535
brevipes, 27, 429
brevirostris. 13, 17, 22, 28, 38, 51, 52,
61, 64, 65, 67, 75, 87 key, 100, 387 var.,
457, 45S key, map, (1,59 to 1,66), 1,64
fig., 1,61, key, 472, 473, 506, 511, 512,
517, 520
brevirostris var., 387, 459, 511
callicuphalus, 12, 15, 28, 38, 39, 51, 52,
87 key, 89 key, 204, 283 key, (290 to
298), 292 fig., 30S, 371, 506, 509, 511,
512, 520, 532, 535, 538
capita, 28, 232, 506
carteretii, 31
cepedii, 28
chinensis, 10, 28, 32, 1,0 figs., 51, 244, 246,
321. 329, 335, 339, 340, 507, 516, 518,
523. 525, 529, 532, 535, 536, 539
chinensis chinensis, 12, 15, 20, 38, 55,
89 key, 90 key, 304, 305 key, (320 to
328), 323 fig., 327 map, 334,
chinensis formosanus, 20, 28, 321, 537, 538
CHINENSIS TULCHER, 12, 15, 20, 31, 38, 55,
89 key, 90 key, 304, 305 key, 326, 327
map, (S2S to 334), 330 fiff.
colimensis, 13, 17, 20, 27, 3S, 53, 74, 86
key, 457 key, 458 map, (478 to 482),
1,79 fig., 536
copei, 12, 13, 16, 27, 38, 49, 51, 61, 86
key, S7J key, (387 to 391,), 389 fig.,
393 map, 459, 511, 536
cyprius, 28
dicei, 13, 27, 38, 53, 68, 74, 85 key, 371,
4.-,7, }5S key, map, (1,82 to 485), 1,83
fit:., 530
DUGESII, 13, 17, 20, 28, 38, 52, 64, 73, 83
key, 457 key, 1,58 map, 471, (472 to
-}78), 47.', fig.. 511, 512, 514, 520, 522
Etmeces — Continued :
cgregius, 27, 37, 38, 61, 68, 73, 74, 76, 77,
368, 485, 490 key, 497, 498, 499, 511,
513, 524, 538
EGREOIUS EGREGICS, 13, 16, 19, 38, 61, 73,
74, 76, 77, 82 key, (490 to 496), 492
fig., 501 map, 502
egregius onocrepis, 13, 16, 19, 38, 83 key,
495, 496, 501 map, C',97 to 502)
elegans, 11, 15, 28, 38, 55, 56. 68, 84 key,
91 key, .787 key, 240, 244, (245 to 253),
248 fig., 252 map, 507, 508, 510, 519,
520, 525, 529, 531, 532, 535, 536, 538,
539, 540
epiplcirotis, 27, 342, 343, 344, 350, 357,
511
erythrocephalus, 27, 197, 511
fasciatus, 11, 14, 26, 28, 31, 37, 38, 53, 54,
55, 58, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67, 72, 76, 84
key, 88 key, 91 key, 165, 187 key, 188,
189, 190, 191, 192 fig., (193 to 2/2),
204, 213, 219, 224, 230, 267, 291, 308,
383, 503, 504, 505, 506, 508, 509, 510,
511, 512, 513, 515, 516, 517, 518, 521,
522, 523, 524, 525, 526, 527, 528, 529,
530, 531, 533, 534, 535, 536, 539, 540
freycinetii, 31
funebrosus, 27, 299
furcirostris, 27, 165, 471, 473, 511, 512,
516, 517, 520
gaigei, 12, 19, 27, 3S, 39, 89 key, 90 key,
31,1 key, 350 map, (353 to 35S), 35.}
fig.
gilberti, 13, 413, 414, 43S, 446, 503, 510,
519, 537, 538
gilberti gilberti, 13, 16, 19, 38. 54. 60,
67. 68, 69, 89 key, 91 key, 4 75 key, 430,
431. (438 to 446), 1,1,0 fig., 1,1,5 map,
447. 449, 450
gilberti rubricaudatus, 13, 17, 19, 52, 54,
60, 69, 89 key, 91 key, 415 key, 428,
433, 437, 439, 445 map, (446 to 451),
448 fig.
guttulatus, 27, 204, 291, 306, 504, 509, 511,
512, 514, 518, 528, 532, 533, 534, 538,
540
hallowelli, 28, 412, 413, 416, 506
herrcrae, 388
humilis, 12, 16, 2S, 38. 82, S3 key, 85
key, 91 key, 340, 841 key, 353, (358 to
363), 359 fig., 363 map, 371, 520, 523,
526, 532
inditbitus, 13, 17, 20, 27. 38, 52. 61, 87
key, 393, 457, 4-58 key, map, (466 to
472), 536
inexpectatus, 11, 14, 19, 27, 38, 54, 67,
79, 88 key, 91 key, .787 key, 191, 196,
197, 198, 219, 220, (224 to 234), 226
fig.. 308, 518, 519
Indi x
633
l'i mi i es -Continued :
inornatus, 27, 342. 343, 344, 347. 511, 512,
521
ishigakienstSj 20, 260, 268, 538
japonicus, 28,
kishixouyki, 12. 15, 20, 38, 55, 58, 88
key, 91 key, JOS key, 527 map, (33} to
i, ,J.?5 fig., 532
LAGUNENSIS, 13, 16, 28, 38. 52, 55, 87 key,
U0, I l.X. iXS key, 420, (431 to .$37),
\34 fig., ;.,'7 map, 524, 525, 532, 537
LATICEPS, 10, 11, 14, 19, 26, 28, 31, 36, 38,
41 figs., 54, 59, 61, 62, 65, 67, 68, 69,
7 2. 74. 76, 88 key. 91 key, 165, 1S7 key,
191, 192, 194, 195, 196, (.212 to 884),
215 fig., 218 fig., 221 map, 224, 225,
230, 231, 266, 308, 383, 505, 506, 515,
521, .".23. 7.27. 536, 538, 540
latiscutatus, 277, 521, 522, 527, 528, 536
latisctptatus, 11, 15, 20, 27, 38, 55, 56,
72, S', key. 91 key, 187 key, 240, 244,
24.".. 246, 267. 272, 275, (276 to 283),
879 fig., 282 map, 506, 515, 525, 529,
535, 536
latiscutatus okadae, 27
leptogrammus, 27, 342, 344, 349, 350, 511,
512, 514, 521, 534
lessojiii, 31
loxgirostris. 10, 14, 27, 38, 61, 68, 78,
79, 83 key, (1.55 to 162), 157 fig., 162
map, 308, 511, 517, 518, 523, 53S, 540
lynce, 164, 517
lynxae, 164, 521
lynxe, 28, 37, 51, 163, 471, 511, 512, 514,
517, 520, 529, 535, 540
lynxe ltitciROSTRis, 11, 20, 38, 51, 73, 83
key, 163 map, 165 172, (173 to 17S),
n.', fig., 180, 511, 512, 513, 516, 520,
535
LYNXE LYNXE, 10, 17, 20, 38, 64, 65, 85
key. 92 key, (163 to 173), 163 map, 166
fig., 174, 177, 179, 180
mabouia, 31
MANAGUAE, in. 14. 20, 27, 37, 38, 50, 53,
61, SI key, 94 key, 95, 101 map, 102,
(10k to 110), 106 fig., 109 fig., 113, 515
MARGINATUS, 1.".. 27. 3S. 55, S.J key, 92 key,
18S key, 245, 246, 27.4. 27.5, 259, 264,
(266 to 271), 276, 882 map, 507, 508,
509, 517, 527, 536
marginatus aman 20, 28, 253, 254,
268, 537, 538
marginatus kikaigensis, 20, 28, 253, 254,
259, 268, 537, 538
meridionalis , 28
microlepis, 31
MULTiyiRi;ATfs, 12, 15, 16, 27, 38, 52, 68,
72. 7.-,. SO, 89 key, 204, 308, 340, .: [ /
key, (Sil to 353), 345 fig.. SS0 map.
35.} fig.. 356, 357, 362, 402. 509, 510,
l.i MECES Continued:
511, 512, 513, 514, 517., 520, 521, 526,
534, 538, 540
ihisoletus, 10, 12, 15, 22, 26, 27, 32, 36,
38, 40 figs., 51, 54, 58, 59, 61, 62, 63,
65, 72, 7 1. 78, 79, 82, 83 key, 154, 204,
291, 304, (305 to 320), 309 fig., 317 map,
358, 503, 504, 506, 509, 510, 511, 512,
513, 515, 516, 518, 521, 526, 528, 531,
532, 533, 534, 535, 537, 538, 540
isirostris, 28, 405, 407, 506
0CHOTERANAE, 13, 17, 20, 27, 38, 39, 53, 75,
86 key, 457, .J5S key, map, (485 to 490),
',S7 fig., 536
okadae, 15, 20 38, 55, 84 key, 91 key, 187
key, (272 to 276), 282 map
onocrepis, 28, 497, 511, 513
opelii, 31
oshimexsis, 11, 15, 20, 28, 38, 55, 8',
key, 92 key, 188 key, (253 to 260), 256
fig., 258 fig., 268, 282 map, 532
pachyurus, 19, 27, 405, 406, 511, 514,
528, 533, 534
parviauriculatcs, 12, 16, 20, 27, 38, 39,
52, 68, 86 key, 341 key, 363 map, 367,
(368 to 372), 370 fig., 536
parvulus, 12, 16, 20, 27, 38, 52, 68, 86
key, 340 key, 363 map, (363 to 368),
365 fig., 371, 536
pavimentatus, 10, 14, 20, 28, 29, 30, 36,
38, 41 figs., 82 key, 119, 121, 122, 125
key, 126, (133 to 139), 142, 145, 146,
505, 506, 507, 517, 523, 540
pavimentatus algeriensis, 122, 146, 147, 507
pavimentatus syriaca, 122, 126, 133, 507,
7.25
pekinensis, 20, 27, 230. 240, 243. 244, 247.,
7ns. 525, 529, 532, 536
(Plestiodon) Dugesii, 472, 537
(Plestiodon) japonicus, 277, 506
(Plestiodon) quinquelineatus var, Japonicus,
277, 7.06, 525, 529
(Plestiodon) sumichrasti, 178
pluvialis, 19, 28, 373. 374, 3S0, 385, 511,
514, 521
prixceps, 10, 14, 20, 2S, 38, 82 key, 1/8
map, 119, 12.5 key. (138 to l',2), 139
fig., 541
. 2-. 2 17.. 321. 322, 327 map, 328,
506, 531
pulchra, 328, 7.17.. 518
tat us, 31
quadrilineatus, 13, 17, 27, 29, 32, 37, '<'>,
:..;. 61, 87 key, 412. 413. 416, (4:,
J57), ;■'>', fig., 4-r>>' map, 713, 520, 7.21.
7,27.. 526, 7,31, 539
q (ad) i irgatus, 29, 452, 173, 156, 521
quinquelineatus, 29, 198, 204, 213, 224,
231. 27.3. 276, 291, 7)0 1. 506, 511, 512,
7,13. 514, 515, 517, 518, 522, 7.23, 526,
7.3 1. 533, 534, 7.37
634
Index
Eumeces — Continued :
quinquelineatui polygrammus, 28, 197, 198,
231, 512
Rovirosae, 27, 50, 178, 179, 180, 183, 184,
185, 508, 514, 536
rufescens, 29
rufo-guttatus, 29
schmidti, 11, 14, 27, 37, 50, 53, 178, 179,
180, 183, 184 fig., 185, 515
schneiderii, 10, 14, 29, 31, 32, 38, 68, 73,
82 key, 119, 122, 125 key, (126 to IS.',),
128 fig., 134 map, 138, 142, 146, 147,
503, 507, 508, 510, 513, 516, 517, 522,
523, 525, 527, 529, 530, 539, 540
schneiderii algeriensis, 146, 525, 529
schneiderii cyprius, 122, 525
schneiderii payvimentatus, 122, 133, 525
schneiderii princeps, 127, 525
schneiderii schneiderii, 122, 127, 138, 525
schneiderii syriacus, 127 , 504
schwartzEI, 10, 14, 29, 37, 3S, 50, 53, 61,
08, 74, 81 key, 94 key, (9', to 102), 104,
105, 109, 121, 508, 511, 512, 516, 520,
535
scutatus, 20, 29, 37, 75, 111, 503, 508,
513, 523, 526, 527, 538
septentrionalis, 13, 27, 51, 3S1, 394, 395,
407, 40S, 409, 505, 509, 510, 511, 512,
513, 516, 518, 521, 522, 523, 527, 528,
529, 530, 531, 540
SEPTENTRIONALIS OBTUSIROSTRIS, 13, 15, 19,
38, 60, 61, 90 key, 290, 372 key, 381,
400, 403 map, 404, 407, (405 to 410),
533
SEPTENTRIONALIS SEPTENTRIONALIS, 13, 16,
19, 26, 38, 53, 59, 64, 65, 70, 72, 75, 90
key, 372 key, (394 to 405), 397 fig., 403
map, 408, 409
sine?isis, 320, 506
skiltonianus, 22, 27, 62, 66, 67, 68, 73, 75,
77, 410, 412, 413, 414, 416, 431, 437,
438, 446
skiltonianus amblygrammus, 413, 414, 41<;,
512
skiltonianus brevipes, 13, 19, 81 key, 413,
414, 415 key, 425 map, (428 to 431),
512
skiltoniantis lagunensis, 431, 526
skiltonianus skiltonianus, 13, 16, 38,
52, 53, 60, 62, 66, 67, 77, 87 key, 89
key, 165, 415 key, (416 to 428), 425
map, 428, 429, 431, 4-»2, 437, 447, 503,
506, 507, 510, 511, 51' 519, 523, 524,
525, 528, 530, 531, 532, o35, 537, 538,
540
sloanii, 31
"species," 520
spixi, 31
Stimsonii, 11, 13, 15, 20, 28, 38, 55, 8J
key, 92 key, 187 key, (260 to 265), 261
fig., 282 map, 537
Eumeces — Concluded :
striatus, 190, 511
sumichrasti, 11, 14, 27, 38, 50, 53, 85
key, 92 key, (178 to 186), 184 fig-, 186
map, 291, 506, 511, 512, 514, 520, 535
syriaca, 29
taeniolatus, 10, 14, 20, 29, 32, 36, 37, 38,
73, 75, 81 key, 93, 104, 105, 109, (111
to 119), 114 fig-, 119 map, 503, 505,
508, 522, 526, 532, 536
tetragrammus, 12, 27, 38, 51, 60, 85 key,
90 key, 92 key, 185, 283, 286, 288, 289,
(298 to 304), 405, 406, 511, 514, 523,
533, 534, 535
triaspis, 29, 472, 473
tristatus, 29, 197
tunganus, 27, 38, 55, 82, 88 key, 90 key,
1S7 key, (234 to 239), 240, 245, 252
map, 525, 532
vittigerum, 29
xanthi, 11, 15, 20, 27, 38, 55, 56, 87 key,
i87 key, 234, (239 to 245), 242 fig., 246,
252 map, 508, 520, 525, 532, 539
zarudnyi, 10, 20, 29, 38, 82 key, 118 map,
119, 122, 125 key, (142 to 143), 527
Euprcpes
harlani, 520
lynxe, 31
principes, 138, 139, 140, 141, 527
tristatus, 212
Euprepis de Catesby, 510
Euprepis, 29
fasciatus, 539
lynxe, 163, 164
princeps, 515, 527
quirt quelineatis, 539
Eurylepis, 30, 32, 36, 37, 506
taeniolatus, 30, 32, 104, 111, 112, 506
Exoccipital, 42
Eyelid, 39, 75
F
Fan, T. H., 326, 516 bibl.
fasciata (Lacerta), 188, 191, 194, 195, 510,
514, 517, 519, 524, 529, 530, 531
fasciatus (Eumeces), 11, 14, 26, 28, 31, 37,
38, 53, 54, 55, 58, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67,
72, 76, 84 key, 88 key, 91 key, 165, 187
key, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192 fig., (193 to
212), 204, 213, 219, 224, 230, 267, 291,
308, 383, 503, 504, 505, 506, 508, 509,
510, 511, 512, 513, 515, 516, 517, 51S,
521, 522, 523, 524, 526, 527, 528, 529,
530, 531, 533, 534, 535, 536, 539, 540
fasciatus (Eiiprepis), 539
Fasciatus group, 11, 24, 35, 36, 51, 54, 55,
56, 57, 69, 154, 178, 180, 186, 187 key,
198, 214, 225, 268, 278, 402
fasciatus (Plestiodon), 189, 213, 503, 504,
505, 513, 515, 528, 529, 530, 534
fasciatus (Scincus), 155, 188, 190, 197, 213,
513, 522, 523
Index
635
attu (Scincus [related to] i, 155
ding habits, 61, 62
Femur, 18
Ferrari-Perez, Fernando, 516 bibl.
Field .Museum of Natural Bistory, 23
Filippi, F., de, 516 bibl.
Finn, F., 144, 146, 516 bibl.
1 ischer, J. G., 516 bibl.
Fisher, Joh. von, 516 bibl.
Fitzinger, L. I., 31, 32
Flower, Stanley, 516 bibl.
od, 61, 62, 296, 393, 471
Force, Edith R., 516 bibl.
Formalin preservation, 25
tnosanus (Eumeces chinensis), 20, 28, 321,
537, 53S
Forrer, Alfonso, 291, 358, 459
Fowler, Henry W.. 23
frcycinetii (Eumeces), 31
Fritze, Adolphe, 517 bibl.
Frontal, 39, 72
Frontal, divided, 165
• brosus (Eumcccs), 27, 299
furcirostris (Eumeces), 27, 165, 471, 473,
511, 512, 516, 517, 520, 535
FCRCIROSTRIS (EUMECES IiYNXE), 11, 20, 38,
51, 73. S3 key, 163 map, 165, 172, (173
to 17S), nit fig., 180
G
Gadow, Hans, 165, 172, 517 bibl.
gaigei (Eumeces), 12, 19, 27, 38, 39, S9
key. 90 key. S',1 key, 350 map, (,353 to
35S), 35$ fig.
Gaige, Helen T., 23. 356, 357
Ganneth, Henry, 517 bibl.
Garden, Dr. D. D., 197
Garman, Samuel, 155, 373, 517 bibl.
Gary, Rev. George, 411
Gee, N. Gist, 517 bibl.
Generic description, 39
Generic relationships, 34
Generic unity, 36, 37, 38
Genotype, 30, 31, 32
Geoffroy Saint-Hillaire, E., 121, 133, 517
bibl.
Georgi, J. G., 517 bibl.
Gernaert, M., 321
Gervais, Paul, 146, 517 bibl.
Gibbs, Morris, Notestein, F. N., and Clark,
H. L., 518 bibl.
Gilbert, Charles H., 412, 438
gilberti (Eumeces), 13, 413, 414, 438, 446,
503, 510, 519, 537, 538
GILBEUTI GILBERTI (EUMECES), 13, 16, 19, 38,
54, 60, 67, 68, 69, 89 key, 91 key, !,i:>
key, 430, 431, (438 to 446), 440 fig., ',',5
map, 447, 449, 450
GILBERTI RUBRICAUIIATUS (EUMECES), 13, 17,
19, 52, 54, 60, 69, 89 key, 91 key, 415
key, 428, 433, 437, 439, US map, (',.',6
to 451), 448 fig.
Gilliams, Jacob, 195, .Ms bibl.
Girdle, pectoral, 47
Girdle, pelvic, Is
Gloyd, Howard K., 23, .'.Is bibl.
Gmelin, Jean-Frederic, 192, 518 bibl.
Godet, D. T. L., 153, 518 bibl.
Goldman, E. A., 308, 460
Goode, G. Brown, 155, 518 bibl.
Graenicher, S., 518 bibl.
1 .' nit . ( 'hapman, 518 bibl.
Granvenhorst, J. L. C, 193, 518 bibl.
Gray, J. E., 164, 246, 321, 518 bibl.
Green, Jacob, 195, 519 bibl.
Grinnell, Dr. Joseph, 22, 414, 447, 519 bibl.
Grinnell, Joseph and Camp, Chas. L., 414,
519 bibl.
Grinnell, Joseph, Dixon, Joseph and Linsdale,
Jean M., 519 bibl.
Grinnell, J. and Storer, Tracy I., 519 bibl.
Group
AnthraCINUS, 35, 36, 49, 54, 154, 372 key,
388
BRBVILINEATUS, 35, 36, 39, 50, 51, 55, 172,
283, 402
Brevirostris, 13, 35, 36, 50, 51, 64, 410,
457, 4S5, 490
Egregius, 35, 36, 54, 67, 490
Fasciatus, 11, 24, 35, 36, 51, 54, 55, 56,
57, 69, 154, 178, 180, 186, 187 key, 19S,
214, 225, 26S, 278, 402
Loxgirostris, 35, 36, 67, 69, 154
Lynxe, 10, 35, 36, 49, 64, 162, 471
Mui.tivirgatus, 35, 36, 39, 51, 52, 54,
340 key, 368
Ousoletus, 12, 35, 36, 49, 54, 55, 56, 67,
69, 305 key, 304
QuADRiLixEATrs, 35, 36, 56, 67, 410, 451
Schxeiderii, 24, 31, 35, 36, 37, 57, 58,
67, 74, 76, 79, 110, 119, 120, 121, 122,
123, 124 key, 125 key, 144, 154
Schwartzei, 35, 36, 37, 49, 50, 67, 78, 79,
93, 94 key, 101 map, 107, 110, 154
Skii.toxianus, 35, 36, 49, 51, 52, 54, 56,
57, 69, 79, 154, 155, (410 to 415), 415
key, 433, 452, 457
Sumichrasti, 35, 36, 49, 69, 178
Taeniolatus, 35, 36, 57, 58, 67, 78, 110,
154
Groups within genus, 35, 36, 37, 38
Growth, 66, 67
guttulata, Plistodon, 511
guttulatus (Eumeces), 27, 204, 291, 306, 504,
509, 511, 512, 514, 518, 528, 532, 533,
534, 538, 540
guttulatus (Latnprosaurus), 30, 32, 305, 520
guttulatus (Plcstiodon), 305, 504
Guyon, Dr., 146
Guiehenot, A., 519 bibl.
Guillet, C, 519 bibl.
Guilliver, George, 519 bibl.
GUnther, Albert, 32, 24(>, 358, 459, 519 bibl.
636
Index
H
Habitat, 58, 59, 60, 61
Habits
aquatic, 60, 61
breeding, 63, 64
brooding, 65
defense, 62, 63
feeding, 61, 62
Hallovvell, Edward, 32, 196, 267, 277, 307,
342, 344, 412, 452, 521 bibl.
hallowelli (Eumeces), 28, 412, 413, 416, 506
Halton, William L., 521 bibl.
Hamilton, Dr W. .1., 23
Hammond, Dr., 307. 342
harlani, Plestiodon, 523
Harlan, Richard, 191, 195, 521 bibl.
Harper, Francis, 521 bibl.
Hartman, F. A., 521 bibl.
Hartweg, Norman, 64, 164, 170, 171, 521 bibl.
Harvard Museum of Comparative Zoolgy, 23
Hatta, S., 521 bibl.
Hay, O. P., 521 bibl.
Hayden, F. V., 342, 521 bibl.
Head, Dr., 395
Head Plates, 70, 71 fie, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76,
77
Hediger, F. V., 521 bibl.
Hempricht, F. G. and Ehrenberg, C. G., 522
bibl.
Henshaw, Samuel, 522 bibl.
Herre, Dr. Albert W., 22
Herrera, Alfonso L., 522 bibl.
herrerae (Eumeces), 388
Herrick, C. L., Terry, John, and Herrick,
H. N. .1., 522 bibl.
Herrman, A. L., 522 bibl.
Higley, W. K., 522 bibl.
Hilgendorff, F., 522 bibl.
Hoege, C. T., 179, 3S7
Hoffman, C. K., 522 bibl.
Hohenacker, Fr., 522 bibl.
Holbrook, John Edwards, 191, 193, 195, 196,
198, 224, 522 bibl.
Hora, Sunder Lai, 522 bibl.
Hoy, P. R., 395, 522 bibl.
Hughes, Edward, 522 bibl.
Humerus, 4 7
humilis (Eumeces), 12, 16, 28, 38, 82, 83
key, 85 key, 91 key, 340, S!tl key, 353,
(358 to 363), 350 fig., 363 map, 371,
520, 523, 526, 532
Hurler, Julius, 363, 523 bibl.
Hurter, Julius and Strecker, John K., 373,
523 bibl.
Hyde, James M., 412, 438
I
Illustrations, lists, 10 to 17
Illustrations, methods, 26
in'dubitus (Eumeces), 13, 17, 20, 27, 38,
52, 61, 87 key, 393, 457, 458 key, map,
(166 to 472), 536
INEXPECTATUS (EUMECES), 11, 14, 19, 27,
38, 54, 67, 79, 88 key, 91 key, 187 key,
191, 196, 197, 198, 219, 220, (22/, to
234), 226 fig., 308, 518, 519, 535, 538
Infralabials, 76
Ingoldsby, Capt. C. M. and Proctor, Joan B.,
523 bibl.
inornatus (Eumeces), 27, 342, 343, 344, 347,
511, 512, 521
inornatus (Plestiodon), 341, 342, 343, 504
Institute-de Biologia, 23
Interparietal, 73
Introduction, 21 to 28
Ischium, 48
ishigakiensis (Eumeces), 20, 260, 268, 538
Ivy, James H, 53, 105
J
Jan, G., 523 bibl.
japonicus (Eumeces), 28, 506
japonicus (Eumeces [Plestiodon]), 277, 506
japonicus (Eumeces [Plestiodon] quinque-
lienatus var.), 277, 525
japonicus, Eumeces quinquelineatus, 529
Jerdon, T. C., 112, 523 bibl.
Jones, 523 bibl.
Jordan, David Starr, 523 bibl.
Jugals, 45
K
Kansas University Museum, 23
Kennedy, Dr., 298
Kessler, K., 523 bibl.
kikaigensis (Eumeces marginatus), 20, 28,
253, 254, 259, 268, 537, 538
King, Willis, F., 523 bibl.
Kingman, R. H, 37, 39, 48, 523 bibl.
Kirn, Albert J., 24, 289
Kirtland, Jared Potter, 523 bibl.
Kishinouye, Dr. K., 334
kishinouyei (Eumeces), 12, 15, 20, 38, 55,
68, 88 key, 91 key, 305 key, 327 map,
(33j to 340), 335 fig., 532
Klauber, Lawrence M., 23, 60, 352, 415, 523
bibl.'
Klots, Alexander Barrett, 524 bibl.
Knowlton, George F. and Janes, Melvin J.,
524 bibl.
Kulagin, N. M., 524 bibl.
Kuhl, Heinrich, 524 bibl.
Kuhne, V., 260, 265
L
Labials, lower, 76
Labials, upper 76
Lacepede, 192, 524 bibl.
Lacerta, 29
aurata, 119, 120, 121
cauda caerulea, 11, 191, 192 fig., 510
Cyprius scincoides, 119, 120, 121, 123, 503
fasciata, 188, 191, 194, 195, 510, 514, 517,
519, 524, 529, 530, 531
marianus minor cauda caerulea, 529
Index
637
Lacerta marinus minor. 191, 529
maritima maxima, 120
quinquelineata, 188, 191, 192, 193, 194,
195, 225, 277
5-lineata, 530
rufescens, 120, 126
Wj 1 26, 517, 522
tristata, 212, 524
Lachrymal, 15
1 IODNENSIS (EtTMECES), 13, 10. 28, 38, 52,
55, 87 key, 410, U3, ',15 key, 420, (.JSl
to 4*7), }.{} Bg., J37 map. 524, 525, 532,
537
lagunensis (Eumeces skiltonianus), 431, 526
lagurtensis (Plestiodon), 431, 538
Lallement, ('., 524 bibl.
Lamb, Chester C, 432
Lamprosaw is, 30, 32. 36, 307
(fatus, 30, 32. 305, 307. 520
olatus (Plestiodon), 522
Land bridges, 56
L'anolis gigantesque, 121
Lataste, F., 524 bibl.
alt (Leiolopisma), 505, 529
lateralis (Scincus), 18S, 530
lateralis var., (Sctwcws), 196
Lateral postanal, 79
i.aticeps (Eumeces), 10. 11, 14, 19, 26, 28,
31, 36, 38, 41 fig., 54, 59, 61, 62. 65,
67, 68, 69, 72. 74. 76, 88 key, 91 key,
165, 187 key, 191, 192, 194, 195, 196,
.'/.' to 224), 215 fig., 218 fig., 221 map.
224, 225, 230, 231, 266, 308, 383, 505,
506, 515, 521, 523, 527, 536, 538, 540
laticeps (Plestiodon), 30, 31, 155, 212, 452,
515. :,1-;. .-,23. 536
us), 193, 194, 212, 513, 531
LATISCUTATTJS (EUMECES), 11, 15, 20, 27,
38, 55. :,6. 72, Si key, 91 key, 1S7 key,
240, 244, 245, 246, 267, 272, 275, (276
283), 279 fig., 282 map, 506, 515,
521. 522, 525. 529, 535, 536
latiscutat tiodon), 276, 277
latiscutatus okadae (Eumeces). 27, 272
Latreille, P. -A., 524 bibl.
Le Dore, 120, 121
Leiolopisma, 65, 409
laterale, 505, 529
pulchellum pulchellum, 65
semperi, 65
unicolor, 61, 65
/• ittogrammus (Eumeces), 27, 342, 344, 349,
350, 511, 512, 514, 521, 534
leptoyrammus (Plestiodon), 341, 342, 504
lessonii (Eumeces), 31
Lezard a queue bleue, 193
Levant rembruni, 194
Lezard strie, 193
Limbs, :-:'.'
lineotus (Plistodon), 189, 197, 511
Linnaeus, 119, 191
Linne, Carolus von. 524 bibl.
Linsdale, Dr. .lean. 22. 4! I. 432, 447, 524
bibl.
Linsley, .1. H.. 524 bibl.
Literature, 21
Loding, II. 1'.. 374. 52 t bibl.
Loennberg, Einar, 524 bibl.
LONGIROSTRIS group, 35, 36. 67, 69. 15',
Loxi.iKusTius (Eumeces), 10, 14, 27, 38, 61,
'•■«, 78, 79, 83 key, (155 to 162), 15 7
fig., 162 map, 3ns. 511. 517, 518, 523,
:.;:-. 540
longirostris (Plestiodon), 511. 517
Loreals, 75
Lortet, L., 524 bibl.
Loyeridge, Arthur, 23, 414, 432, 524 bibl.
Lumping species, 21
Lunceford, Bill, 23
'Lygosoma,' 34. 37
elegans, 520
lyitce (Eumeces). 164, 517
lynxae (Eumeces), 164. 521
Lyme group, 10, 35, 36, 49, 64, 162, 471
lynxc (Eumeces), 28, 37, 51, 163, 471, 511,
512. 514, 517, 520, 529, 535, 540
lynxe (Euprepes), 31
lynxe (Euprepis), 164
LYXXE FURCIROSTRIS (EUMECE:), 11, 20, 38,
51, 73, 83 key, 163 map, 165, 172, (173
to 17S), 171, fig., ISO
LYXXE LYXXE (EUMECES), 10, 17. 20. 38, 64.
65, 85 key, 92 key, (163 to 173), 263
map, 166 fig., 174, 177, 179, 180
lynxe (Plistodon), 164, 387, 511
M
Mabouia, 3". i.vi
agilis, 459
iiiirata, 32, 126
Rlythianus. 143. 144. 145, 503
brevirostris , 459, 519
chinensis, 32, 245, 320, 507, 519, 535
maculata, 32
quadrilineata, 32, 452, 519, 536
taeniolata, 111, 503
mabouia ( Eumeces), 31
Mabuya, 29, 34, 65, 68
nurata, 31
midticarinata, 65
;;/ ult ijusi mli' . 65
nigropunctata, 31
sloanii, 31
McCoy, Clinton V.. 524 bibl.
McGee, Edwin D., 352
McLain, Robert Baird, 413, 432, 525 bibl.
ata (.Mabouia), 32
maculatua (Sphenomorphus), 32
Malleis, Harry, 53, 101
MANAGUAE (EUMECES), 10, 14, 20, 27, 37,
50, 53, 61, 81 key, 9>, key, 95, 101
map, 102. (It)', u, 110), 106 fig., 189
!ig.. 113. 515
638
Index
Mann. Dr. W. M.. 168, 432, 433
Manney, Rev. S. W., 394
marginatus amamiensis (Eumeces), 20, 28,
253, 254, 258, 537, 538
marcinatus (Eumeces), 15, 27, 38, 55, S4
key, 92 key, 188 key, 245, 246, 254, 255,
259, 264, (266 to 271), 276, 282 map,
507, 508, 509, 517, 527, 536
marginatus (Plestiodon), 267, 521
marginatus kikaigensis (Eumeces), 20, 28,
253, 254, 259, 268, 537, 538
marinus minor (Lacerta), 191
maritima maxima (Lacerta), 120
Mark, E. L„ 156
Marnoek, G. W., 284
Martens, Edward von, 525 bibl.
Martin del Campo, Sr. Rafael, 23
Maynard, Mr., 497
Maxillary, 44
Mearns, Edgar A., 525 bibl.
Mell, R., 525 bibl.
Mental, 76
meridionalis (.Emneces), 28
meridionalis (Eumeces algeriensis), 28
Merrem, Blasius, 120, 121, 525 bibl.
Mertens, Dr. Robert. 24, 122, 123, 138, 147,
525 bibl., 526 bibl.
Methods, 24, 25
Mexican species, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53
Mexico, 5
Meyer, Fred A. A., 526 bibl.
microlepis (Eumeces), 31
microlepis (Riopa), 31
Mikhailovski, M., 526 bibl.
millepunctatus (Diploglossus), 517
Mobray, L. S., 156
Mocquard, M. F., 526 bibl.
M<nse. Max, 526 bibl.
Mosauer, Dr. Walter, 356, 358, 359, 362,
526 bibl.
Miiller, Baron I. W., 526 bibl.
Miiller, Prof. Iorenz, 123, 526 bibl.
multicarinata (Mabuya), 65
multifasciata (Mabuya), 65
multivirgatum (Plestiodon), 341, 342
MULTIVIRGATUS (EUMECES), 12, 15, 16, 27,
38, 52, 68, 72, 75, SO, 89 key, 204, 308,
340, $1,1 key, (31,1 to 353), 345 fig.,
350 map, 353 fig., 356, 357, 362, 402,
510, 511, 512, 513, 514, 515, 520, 521,
526, 534, 538, 540
Multivirgatus group, 35, 36, 39, 51, 52,
54, 340 key, 368
Murray, James A., 526 bibl.
Museo Nacional de Mexico, 392
Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle de
Paris, 24
Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of
California, 22
Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan,
23
Myers, George, 526 bibl.
N
Nasals, 46, 70, 11 figs.
Navarro, Dr. Octavius, 472
Necker, Walter, 526 bibl.
Nelson, Edward W., 414, 460, 526 bibl.
Nelson, E. W., and Goldman, E. A., 364, 367,
460
Nelson, Julius, 526 bibl.
Netting, Graham, 23, 526 bibl., 527 bibl.
Newberry, C. G., 291
nigropunctata (Mabuya), 31
Nikolsky, A. M., 122, 142, 527 bibl.
Noble, G. K., 23, 249, 356
Noble, G. K., and Bradley, H. T., 527 bibl.
Noble, G. K., and Mason, E. R., 26, 65, 527
bibl.
Nutting, C. C, 527 bibl.
O
obsoletum (Plestiodon), 305, 307. 504, 520,
521
obsoletus (Eumeces), 10, 12, 15, 22, 26, 27,
32, 36, 38, 40 fig., 51, 54, 58, 59, 61, 62,
63, 65, 72, 74, 78, 79, 82, S3 key, 154,
204, 291, 304, (305 to 3.10), 309 fig.,
317 map, 358, 503, 504, 506, 509, 510,
511, 512, 513, 515, 516, 518, 521, 526,
528, 531, 532, 533, 534, 535, 537, 538,
540
Obsoletus group, 12, 35, 36, 49, 54, 55, 56,
67, 69, 304, 305 key
obsoletus (Plistodon), 306, 511
obtusirostris (Eumeces), 28, 405, 407, 506
OBTUSIROSTRIS (EUMECES SEPTENTRIOXALIS),
13, 15, 19, 38, 60, 61, 90 key, 290, 373
key, 3S1, 400, 403 map, 404, (-',05 to 1,10)
ocellatus (Scincus), 155, 518
Ochoterena, Dr. Isaac, 23, 486
OCHOTEREXAE (EUMECES), 13, 17, 20, 27, 38,
39, 53, 75, 86 key, 457, 1,5S key and
map, (485 to 490), 487 fig., 536
officinalis (Scincus), 126, 515
Ohio State Museum, 23
okadae (Eumeces), 15, 20, 38, 55, 84 key,
91 key, 1S7 key, (272 to 276), 282 map
okadae (Eumeces latiscutatus), 27, 272
Okada, S., 272, 527 bibl., 528 bibl.
Olivier, Ernst, 528 bibl.
onocrepis (Eumeces), 28, 497, 511, 513
onocrepis (Eumeces egregius), 13, 16, 19,
38, 83 key, 495, 496, (497 to 502), 501
map
onocrepis (Plistodon), 497, 511
opelii (Eumeces), 31
Oppenheimer, C. and Pincusseu, L., 52S bibl.
Origin, 67
Ortenburger, Dr. A. I., 23, 59, 202, 290, 406,
528
oshimensis (Eumeces), 11, 15, 20, 28, 38,
55, 84 key, 92 key, 188 key, (253 to
260), 256 fig., 258 fig., 268, 282 map,
537
Iiuii x
639
(i- transversum, )3
Ottawa University, 24
Over, William H., 396, 528 bibl.
oviparity, 64, 65
ovoviviparity, 64, 65
pachyurus (Eumeces), 19, 27. 4m;,. 406, 511,
."■I I. 528, 533. 534
pachyurus (Plestiodon), 405
Palatine. 43
Pallary, P., 52S bibl.
Palmer, Dr. Edw., 16S
Paraquadrate, 45
Parasphenoid, 43
Parietal, 42, 75
Pariocela, 30, 32, 36
Parker. H. W., 23. 104, 110, 113. 114. 11-.
133, 144. 164, 165, 180, 240. 299, 459
PARVIAtTUClLATUS (EtTMECES), 12, 16, 20, 27,
38, 39, 52, 68, S6 key, $',l key, 363
map, 367, (36S to 372), 370 fig., 536
PARVULT7S (ErMKCEs), 12, 16, 20, 27, 38, 52,
68, S6 key, 3>,0 key, 363 map, (363 to
36S), 365 fig., 371, 536
Patch. Clyde L., 52S bibl.
pavimentatus algeriensis (Eumeces), 122, 146,
147. 507
PAVIMENTATUS (Ecmeces), 10, 14, 20, 28, 29,
30, 36, 38, U fig., 82 key, 119, 121, 122,
125 key, 126, 033 to 139), 13!, map, 135
fig.. 142, 145, 146, 505, 506, 507, 517,
523, 540
pavimentatus (Eumeces schneiderii), 122, 133
pavimentatus (Plestiodon), 126
pavimentatus (Scincus), 31, 111, 121, 133,
514. 540
pavimentatus syriaca (Eumeces), 122, 126,
133, 507. 525
Pavlov, P., 528 bibl., 529 bibl.
Peace, L. M., 24
Pectoral girdle, 47
pekinensis (Eumeces), 20, 27. 239. 240, 243,
244, 245, 508, 525, 529, 532, 536
Pelegrin, Dr. Jaques, 529 bibl.
Pelvic girdle, 48
Peracca. M. G., 529 bibl.
Peters, W., 147, 164, 277. 529 bibl.
Petiver, Jacob, 191, 529 bibl.
Phalanges, 48
Photographs and methods, 26
Phylogenetic tree, 38
Piatt, Jean, 529 bibl.
Pickens. A. L., 529 bibl.
Pits, scales, 79
Plates, lists, 14, 15, 16. 17
Platyphohs, 30, 32, 36, 102, 514
Pleistodon, 30, 31, 32, 36
laticeps, 30
Plestiodon, 30, 32, 33. 36, 516, 520, 522, 529,
531, 532
Plestiodon aldrovandii, 31, 121, 122. 126,
514, 515, 516, 519
anthracinus, 373. 504, 523. 534
auratus, 120, 126, 146, 518, 5 1'', 534
Hi, 163, 164, 165, 518
/><■< vilim at us, 284, 534
cadurcensis, 513
callicephalum, 291, 296, 514
cyprium, 146, 533
1 gius, 490, 504
. egans, 246, 209. 535
erythrocephalus, 193, 196, 213„ 539
(Eumeces) scutatus, ill, 523
fasciatus, 189, 213, 503, 504, 505,
515, 52S, 529, 530, 534
guttulatus, 305, 504
harlani, 520
inornatus, 341, 342, 343, 504
lagunensis, 431, 538
lanceolatus, 522
laticeps, 31, 155, 212, 452, 515, 518,
536
latiscutatus, 276, 277. 521
leptogrammus, 341, 342, 504
longirostris, 155. 511
marginatus, 207, 521
multivirgatum, 341, 342
obsoletum, 305, 307. :,"4. 520
pachyurus, 405
pavimentatus, 1 26
pluvialis, 373. 524
pulchrum, 31, 328, 329, 515, 518
quadrilineatum, 4 52, 506
quinquelineatum, 30, 31, 32, 36. 1G3,
212. 224, 271, 320, 328, 506, 514,
518, 523, 524, 530, 536, 539, 540
scutatus. 104. 11. 523, 536
septentrionalis. 3:'l. 504, 530
1 nse, 31. 320, 321, 329, 515, 520
skiltonianum, 415, 440, 504, 531, 538,
skiltonianus lagunensis, 431
ti tragrammus, 298, 504
vittigerum, 1--. 196, 197, 231. 520
Plistodon, 30, 32, 164
aldrovandii, 519
guttulatus, 511
lineatus, 189, 197. 511
lynxe, 164, 387. 511
obsoletus, 300, 511
onocrepis, 497, 511
striatus, 189, 197, 503
sumichrasti, 178
talis (Eumeces), 19. 28, 373. 374.
385, 511, 514, 521
pluvalis (Plestiodon), 373, 524
polygrammus (Eumeces), 28, 197, 198,
polygrainmus (Eumeces quinqm !n.iatus ).
Pope, Clifford, 23. 240, -_'45. 24''.. 249,
325. 327. 329, 529 bibl.. addenda
Pope, Philip, 156
Pope, T. E. B., 529 bibl.
1 16,
513,
523,
1S8,
515,
540
380,
231
512
322,
640
Index
Pope, T. E. B., and Dickinson, W. E., 529
bibl.
Postanal, lateral, 79
Post frontal, 45
Postgenial, 77
Postmental, 76
Postnasal, 72
Postoculars, 75
Postorbital, 45
Postsuboculars, 74
potamophis striatulus, 61
Pratt, Henry S., 528 bibl.
Preanals, 78, 79
Prearticulare, 46
Precoracoid, 47
Preface, 5, 6
Prefrontal, 45, 72
Premaxiliary. 44
Preocular, 75
Presphenoid, 43
Presuboculars, 74
Pre vomer, 44
princeps (Etjmeces), 10, 14, 20, 28, 38, 82
key, 118 map, 119, 125 key, (.138 to 142),
139 fig., 541
princeps (Eumeces schneiderii), 127
princeps (Euprepis), 138, 515, 527
Prootics, 43
Pterygoids, 34, 43
pulchellum pulchellum (Leiolopisma), 65
pulcher (Eumeces), 28, 245, 321, 322, 327
map, 328, 532
PULCHER (EUMECES CHINEXSIs), 12, 15, 20,
31, 38, 55. 89 key, 98 key, 304, 305
key, 326, 827 map, (328 to 334), 330 fig.
pulchra (Eumeces), 328, 506, 515, 518
pulchra (Plestiodon), 515, 518
pulchrum (Plestiodon), 31, 328, 329, 515,518
punctata (Riopa), 31
punctatus (Eumeces), 31, 514
punctatus (Scincus), 30, 31, 514, 540
Q
Quadrate, 43
quadrilineata (Mabouia), 32, 452, 519, 536
quadrilineatum (Plestiodon), 452, 506
QUADRILINEATUS (EUMECES), 13, 17, 27, 29,
32, 37, 55, 56, 61, 87 key, 412, 413, 416,
(-',52 to -}57), 454 fig., 456 map, 513,
520, 521, 525, 526, 531, 539
Qi'adrilineatus group. 35, 36, 56, 67, 410,
451
quadrivirgatus (Eumeces), 29, 452, 453, 456,
521
quinquelineata (Lacerta), 188, 191, 192, 193,
194, 195, 225, 277. 514, 516, 51S, 519,
524, 526, 531
quinquelineata (Tiliqua), 212, 518
quinquelineatus (Eumeces), 29, 198, 204, 213,
224, 231, 253, 276, 291, 504, 506, 511,
512, 513. 514. 515, 517, 518, 522. 523,
526. 531, 533, 534. 537
quinquelineatus (Euprepis), 539
quinquelineatus japonicus (Eumeces), 529
quinquelineatus (Plestiodon), 32, 36, 506, 5J',
518, 523, 524, 530, 536, 539, 540
quinquelineatus (Plestiodon), 30, 31, 163,
188, 271, 212, 224, 320, 328
quinquelineatus polygrammus (Eumeces), 512
quinquelineatus (Scincus), 188, 195, 19B, 197,
198, 212, 276, 411, 513, 521, 522, 525,
531, 536, 540
quinquelineatus var. Japonicus (Eumeces
[Plestiodon]), 277, 525
quinquelineatus var. (Scincus), 164
R
Radius, 47
Ragsdale, G. H., 299
Reed, Hugh D., and Wright, Albert H., 529
bibl.
Reeves, J., 321, 328
Helm, J. A. G., 53, 179
Relationships, 34, 35, 36, 37, 3S, 39
Reptilia, 29
Rhodes, Samuel N., 530 bibl.
Ribs, 47
Rice, E. L., 530 bibl.
Riopa microlepis, 31
Riopa punctata, 31
Riopa rufescens, 31
Roddy, Harry Justin, 530 bibl.
Roux, Dr. Jean, 24
rnrirosae (Eumeces), 27, 50, 178, 179, 180,
183, 184, 185, 508, 514, 536
Rovirosa, Jose N., 179
RUBRICAUDATUS (EUMECES GILBERTl), 13, 17,
19, 52, 54, 60, 69, 89 key, 91 key, 415
key, 428, 433, 437, 439, 445 map, (446
to 451), 448 fig.
rufescens (Eumeces), 29
rufescens (Lacerta), 120, 126
rufescens (Riopa), 31
rufescens (Sci7icus), 540
rufo-guttata (Eumeces), 29
rufo-guttata (Tiliqua), 321, 326, 329, 510
Ruthven, Dr. A. G., 396, 530 bibl.
Ruthven, A. G., and Gaige, H. T., 412
Ruthven, A. G., Thompson, Crystal, and
Gaige, Helen Thompson, 530 bibl.
Sachs, W. B., 530 bibl.
Saeger, Abram, 530 bibl.
Salle, Auguste, 459
Sauria, 29
Say, Thomas, 530 bibl.
Scale pits, 79
Scales rows, 77
Scales, eyelid, 75
Sceloporus occidentalis, 510
Schmidt, F. G. W., 530, bibl., 531 bibl.
Schmidt, Dr. Karl P., 23, 57, 246, 321-325,
329. 330, 432. 453, 530 bibl., 531 bibl.
Index
641
schmidti (Eumi es), 11, 14. 27, 37, 50,
178. 17!'. IMi. /85, ;.s) fig., L85, 515
schneiderii algeriensis (Eumeces), no, 525,
529
schneiderii cyprius (Eumeces), L22
SCHNEIDERII (EUMECES), 10, 14, 29, SI, 32.
- 68, 73, 88 key, 119, 122, 125 key,
18 fig., 184 map- 138, 142,
146, 147, 503, 507, 508, 510, 513, 516,
517, 522, 523, 525, 527, 529, 530, 539,
544
S< HNEIDERU group 2 4 . 31, 35, 36, 37, 57, 58,
67, 74. 76, 7v. no. U9, 120, 121, 122,
12S, W, key. 125 key, 144. 17.4
schm avimentatus (Eumeces), 122, 133,
525
schneiderii princeps (Eumeces), 127. 525
schneiderii schneiderii (Eumeces), 122, 127,
138.
schnt S '■'■incus), 121, 126, 513
schneiderii syriacus (Eumeces), 127, 504
Schneider, Joann Gottlob, 193, 531 bibl.
Schwartze, E. W. K.. 94
schwartzei (Eumeces), 10, 14. 29, 37, 38,
50, 53, 61, 68, 74, 81 key, 94 key, (94
to 102), 104, 105, 109, 121, 508, 511,
512, 516, 520, 535
Schwartzei group, 35. 36, 37, 49, 50, 67, 78,
79, 93, <.'.', key, 101 map. 107, 110, 154
Scincidae. 29, 34
Scincomorpha, 2f>
>, 523
americanus, 191, 195, 212. 7,21, 529
auratus, 188
bkolor, 195, 196, 212, 523
cepedii, 120, 126, 525
cyprius, 121, 126, 146, 513
erythrocei . 195, 197, 212, 518, 521,
522
fasciatus, 155. 188, 1!";. 197, 213, 513,
. 523
lateralis, 188
lateralis var., 196, 530
laticeps, 193, 194. 212
ocellatus, 155. 518
. ! 26, 515
pavimentatus, 31, 111, 121, 133, 514, 540
fatus, 30, 31. 514, 540
quinquelineatws, 188, 195, 196, 197, 198,
212. 276, 411
quinquelineatus var., 163, 164
related to fasciatus, 155
rufescens, 30, 540
schneiderii, 121, 126, 513
tristatus, 194, 195, 196, 212. 513
Sanctis (Lacerta), 12';. 7.17, 522
Scinque a cinq raies, 193
scutatus (Eumeces), 20, 29. 37. 75, ill, 503,
508. 513, 523, 526, 527, 538
scutatus (Plestiodon), 104. 111.
scutatus (PIi stiodon [Eumeces]), 111
Si ondary lines, 79
peri (Leiolopisma), 65
Senckenberg Museum, 24
septentrionatis (Eumeces), 13, 27, 51, 381,
394, 395, 407, 408, 409, 504, 505, 509,
510, 511, 512, 513, 516, 518, 521, 522,
523, 527, 528, 529, 530, 531, 540
SI i rENTRIONAMS OBTTJSIROSTRIS I EUMECES), 13,
15, 19, 38, 60, 61, 90 key, 290, 3~3 key,
3S1, 400, 488 map, 404, (.',05 to .',10),
533
itrionalis (Plestiodon), 394, 504, 530
SEPTENTRIONAMS SEPTENTRIONALIS (EUMECES),
13, 16, 19, 26, 38, 53, 59, 64, 65, 70,
72. 75. 98 key, 872 key, (894 to 405),
897 fig., 408 map, 408, 409
S< molds, 48
Severtzoff, N. A., 531 bibl.
sexlineatus (Cnemidophorus), 62
Shaw, George, 120, 194, 531 bibb
nens< (Plestiodon), 31, 320, 321. 329, 515,
520
sine) sis (Emm ces), 320, 506
sinensis (Tiliqua), 321
Skeleton, (39 to -}S)
Skilton, Avery J., 411, 531 bibl.
skiltonianus amblygrammus (Eumeces), 413
414, 416, 512
SKILTONIANUS BREVIPES (EUMECES), 13, 19,
SI key, 413, 414, 415 key, .} .'.i map, I \28
to 481), 512
skiltonianus (Eumeces), 22. 27, 62, 66, 67,
68, 73, 75, 77. 410, 112, 413, 414, 416,
431, 437, 438, 440. 503, 506, 507, 510,
511, 515, 519, 523, 524, 525, 528, 530,
531, 532. 535, 537, 538, 7.40
Skiltonianus group 35, 36, 49, 51, 52, 54,
56, 57, 69, 79. 154. 155. (',10 to .',15),
',15 key, 433, 452. 457
skiltonianus lagunensis (Eumeces), 431
skiltonianus lagunensis (Plestiodon), 431
skiltonianus (Plestiodon), 415. 440. 504, 531,
538, 540
skiltonianus skiltonianus (Eumeces), 13,
16, 38, 52. 53, 60, 62, 66, 07, 77. 87
key, 89 key. 165, ',15 key, (.',16 to 428),
(25 map, 42v 129, 131, 432, 437, 447
Skulls. (37 to 46)
Slevin, Joseph, 115
I imeces), 31
(Mabuya), 31
Smith, Eugene, 531 bibl.
Smith, Dr. Hobarl M., 5, 24, 63, 172, 177,
284, 348, 388, 392. 393, 185
Smith, Hobart M. and Leonard, Arthur B.,
531 bibl.
Smith, Dr. Malcolm, 325, 453, 531 bibl.
Smith. W. II.. 531 bibl.
Sokoloff, Dr. I).. 23
. M P . 531 bibl.
Specii s, i i . 22
642
Index
Sphenomorphus maculatus, 32
spixi (Eumeces), 31
Splenial, 46
Splitting species, 21
Squamata, 29
Squamosal, 45
Stanford University Museum, 22
Stanley, A., 531 bibl.
Stapes, 46
Stejneger, Dr. Leonhard, 22, 239, 246, 251,
252, 267, 272, 277, 281, 334, 368, 413,
532 bibl.
Stejneger, Leonhard and Barbour, T., 2, 220,
307, 414, 532 bibl.
Stephen, Frank, 532 bibl.
Sternum, 47
Stevens, Governor, 395
Stimpson, Dr. W., 267
stimsonii (Eumeces), 11, 13, 15, 20, 28, 38,
55, 8b key, 92 key, 187 key, (260 to
265), 261 fig., 282 map, 537
Stoliczka, F., 532 bibl.
Stone, Witmer, 533 bibl.
Stone, Witmer and Rehn, James A. G., 533
bibl.
Storer, D. H., 533 bibl.
Strauch, A., 146, 533 bibl.
Strecker, John K., 406, 533, bibl., 534 bibl.
Strecker, John K. and Frierson, L. S., 534
bibl.
striatulus (Potamophis), 61
striatus (Eumeces), 190, 511
striatus (Plistodon), 189, 197, 503
Stuart, L. C., 535 bibl.
Subcaudals, 79
Subspecies, criteria of, 22
Sumichrast, F., 178, 179, 460, 535 bibl.
SUMICHRASTI (EUMECES), 11, 14, 27, 38, 50,
53, 85 key, 92 key, (178 to 186), IS.',
fig., 186 map, 506, 511, 512, 514, 520,
535
sumichrasti (Eumeces [Plestiodon]), 178
Sumichkasti group, 35, 36, 49, 69, 178
sumichrasti (Plistodon), 178
Sunn, T. P., 327,. 535 bibl.
Superciliaries, 73
Supralabials, 76
Supramastoid, 45
Supranasals, 72
Supraoccipital, 42
Supraoculars, 73
Suprascapula, 47
Supratemporal, 45
Surangular, 46
Surface, H. A., 535 bibl.
Svihla, Arthur and Svihla, Ruth Dowell, 535
bibl.
Swinhoe, R., 246, 535 bibl.
syriaca (Eumeces), 29
syriaca (Eumeces pavimentatus), 122, 126,
133
syriacus (Eumeces, schneiderii), 127
taeniolata (Mabouia), 111, 503
TAENIOLATTJS (EUMECES), 10, 14, 20, 29, 32,
36, 37, 38, 73, 75, 81 key, 93, 104, 105,
109 (111 to 119), 111, fig., 119 map, 503,
505, 508, 522, 526, 532, 536
taeniolatus (Eurylepsis), 30, 32, 104, 111,
112, 506
Taeniolatus group, 35, 36, 57, 58, 67, 7 3,
110, 154
Tanner, Vasco, 535 bibl.
Taylor, Dr. Edward H., 535 bibl., 536 bibl.,
addenda
Tchung, Lin Tchang, 536 bibl.
Teeth, 34
Temminck, C. J. and Schlegel, H., 277, 536
bibl.
Temporals, 74
Terentjev, Paul V., 268, 277, 536 bibl.
TETRAGRAMMUS (EUMECES), 12, 27, 38, 51,
60, 85 key, 90 key, 92 key, 185, 283,
286, 288, 289, (298 to S8b), 405, 406,
504, 511, 514, 523, 533, 534, 535
tetragrammus (Plestiodon), 298
Text figures, lists, 10, 11, 12, 13
Theobald, William, 111, 112, 452, 537 bibl.
Thominot, M. A., 64, 472, 537 bibl.
Thompson, Crystal, 537 bibl.
Thompson, Dr. J. C, 254, 260, 265, 364,
367, 537 bibl.
Tibia, 48
Tillqua
bicolor, 212, 518
chinensis, 246, 320, 321
cyprinus, 121, 126, 518
de Gray, 328
erythrocephalus, 212, 213
quinquelineatus, 212, 518
rufo-guttata, 321, 326, 329, 510
sinensis, 321
Toledo Zoological Society, 23
Townsend, Charles H., 537 bibl.
Transpalatine, 43
triaspis (Eumeces), 29, 472, 473
Tristam, 537 bibl.
tristata (Lacerta), 212, 524
tristatus (Eumeces), 29, 197
tristatus (Euprepes), 212
tristatus (Scincus), 194, 195, 196, 212, 513
Tropidophorus, 68
tuxganus (Eumeces), 27, 38, 55, 82, 88
key, 90 key, .787 key, (234 to 239), 240,
245, 252 map, 532
tungarus (Eumeces), 525
Turner, Clarence L., 537 bibl.
Type specimens, 27
u
Ulna, 47
Unger and Kotschy, 537 bibl.
unicolor (Leiolopisma), 61, 65
United States National Museum, 22
Index
643
I ni\ ersity of Kansas, 5
University of Oklahoma, 23
Universitj of Rochester, 23
V
Vanatta, E. Q., 156
Van Denburgh, John, 251, 2.V2. 254, 257, 259,
260, 265, 268, 307, 308, 334, 412, 413,
438, 439, 431, 438, 537 bibl.
Van Denburgh, Dr. John and Slevin, J., 412
Van Hyning, O. C, 538 bibl.
Vasiljev, L., 538 bibl.
Verrill, A. E., 538 bibl.
Vertebral column, 4 7
vittigerum (Eumeces), 29
vittigerum (Plestiodon), 1SS, 196, 197, 231,
520
Vogt, Theodor, 538 bibl.
Vomer. 4 4
W
Wagler, J., 539 bibl.
Wagner, M.. 539 bibl.
Walker, Charles F., 23
Weller, W. H., 539 bibl.
Werner, Franz, 153, 539 bibl.
Wetstein, Otto, 539 bibl.
Wied, Prinz zu Maximilian, 539 bibl.
Wiegmann, A. F., 30, 31, 36, 133, 164, 540
bibl.
Wiley. Grace, 24
Williams, J. B., 540 bibl.
Williams, Dr. Walter, 24
Wils.m, Dean W. B., 24
Wolter, O., 540 bibl.
Woodbury, Annus M., 319, 540 bibl.
Wright, Or. Albeit II., 23, 540 bibl.
Wright, Albert. II. ami Funkhouser, W. D.,
540 bibl.
Wright, John Suarez, 24
Wu, H. W., 540 bibl.
Wurdemann, G., 491
X
xan-thi (Eumeces), 11, 15, 20, 27, 38, 55,
56, S7 key, /S7 key, 234, (2.J9 to 2 ',5),
242 fig., 246, 852 map, 508, 520, 525,
532, 539
Y
Yarrow, H. C., 155, 204, 291, 395, 540 bibl.
Yarrow, H. C. and Henshaw, H. W., 540 bibl.
Zarudny, N. A., 142, 541 bibl.
zarudxyi (Eumeces), 10, 20, 29, 3S, 82 key,
118 map, 119, 122, 125 key, {142 to
143), 527
Zoological Society of San Diego, 23
Zugmeyer, 541 bibl.
Zulueta, Antonio de, 542 bibl.
PRINTED BY KANSAS STATE PRINTING PLANT
W C. AUSTIN. STATE PRINTER
TOPEKA 1936
16-1123
Publications of the University of Kansas
Recently adopted postal charges are 1 cent for each two ounces in the United
States and possessions, and 1 Vfi cents to all foreign countries. In transmitting
postage for mailing, find proper amount of postage for your zone by weight in-
dicated.
Volume KANSAS university quarterly
I No. 1, weight, 12 ounces. Nos. 2, 3, supply exhausted. No. 4,
weight, 12 ounces.
II Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, supply exhausted.
Ill Nos. 1, 2, supply exhausted. No. 3, weight, 16 ounces. No. 4,
weight, 12 ounces.
IV No. 1, weight, 9 ounces. No. 2, weight, 12 ounces. Nos. 3, 4, weight
each, 8 ounces.
V No. 1, weight, 8 ounces. No. 2, weight, 6 ounces. Vol. V consists of
only two numbers.
VI, A... Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, supply exhausted.
VI, B...No. 1, weight, S ounces. No. 2, weight, 12 ounces. No. 3, weight,
8 ounces. No. 4, weight, 12 ounces.
VII, A... Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, supply exhausted.
VII, B...Nos. 1-2, weight, 12 ounces. No. 3, weight, 8 ounces. No. 4,
weight, 16 ounces.
VIII, A... No. 1, weight, 9 ounces. No. 2, weight, 10 ounces. No. 3, weight,
12 ounces. No. 4, weight, 12 ounces.
VIII, B... No. 1, weight, 8 ounces. Publication of Series B was suspended with
this number.
IX No. 1, weight, 10 ounces. No. 2, weight, 10 ounces. No. 3, weight,
9 ounces. No. 4, weight, 12 ounces.
X Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, weight each, 12 ounces.
Volume science bulletin
I Nos. 1-4, weight, 8 ounces. Nos. 5-9, weight, 12 ounces. Nos.
10-12, weight, 6 ounces.
II Nos. 1-3, weight, 20 ounces. Nos. 4-9, weight, 11 ounces. Nos.
10-15, weight, 20 ounces.
Ill Nos. 1-6, weight, 33 ounces. Nos. 7-10, weight, 25 ounces.
IV Nos. 1-6, weight, 33 ounces. Nos. 7-20, weight, 28 ounces.
V Nos. 1-11, weight, 33 ounces. Nos. 12-21, weight, 27 ounces.
VI No. 1, weight, 27 ounces. Nos. 2-7, weight, 19 ounces.
VII Nos. 1-17, weight, 50 ounces.
VIII Nos. 1-10, weight, 52 ounces.
IX Nos. 1-21, weight, 54 ounces.
X Nos. 1-15, weight, 17 ounces.
XI No. 1, weight, 20 ounces.
XII Nos. 1-2, weight, 19 ounces.
XIII Pt. I, Nos. 1-9, weight, 12 ounces. Pt. II, Nos. 10-15, weight, 10
ounces.
XIV Nos. 1-21, weight, 34 ounces.
XV Nos. 1-6, weight, 18 ounces.
XVI Nos. 1-6, weight, 14 ounces.
XVII Pt. I, No. 1, weight, 18 ounces. Pt. II, Nos. 2-7, weight, 8 ounces.
XVIII Nos. 1-13, weight, 38 ounces.
XIX Pt. I, Nos. 1-7, weight, 6 ounces. Pt. II, Nos. 8-14, weight, 16
ounces.
XX Pt. I, Nos. 1-6, weight, 11 ounces. Pt. II, Nos. 7-21, weight, 15
ounces.
XXI Nos. 1-16, weight, 32 ounces.
XXII Nos. 1-18, weight, 32 ounces.
The Kansas University Quarterly and the Science Bulletin will be sent in ex-
change for other publications of like character, or will be sent on receipt of the
amount of postage according to weight mentioned above, or may be sent by ex-
press, charges collect. Separates of all articles in the Science Bulletin, not out of
print are available. Applications should be made to Science Bulletin, Library of
the University of Kansas.
Date Due
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11