OCR Text |
Show 636 MR. W. T. BLANFORD ON INDIAN REPTILES. [Julie 20, 1872, p. 89). With regard to Cabrita jerdoni, it is probable that Dr. Gunther and I have examined different Lizards. Although I thought it remarkable that I should have made so very clumsy a blunder as to mistake an Ophiops for a Cabrita, I carefully reexamined my original specimens of C. jerdoni, and found that they had the well-developed lower eyelids characteristic of the latter genus. On account of its transparency this lower eyelid is easily overlooked; but it is not likely that Dr. Gunther has made a mistake of this kind ; and as the British Museum possesses Col. Beddome's types, I should be inclined to conclude that I was in error in identifying the Lizard I obtained in the Godavery valley and elsewhere with Cabrita jerdoni, if it were not for Col. Beddome's original description of the species*. It is a subject of regret to every Indian her-petologist that Col. Beddome should have published descriptions of his numerous interesting discoveries in Southern India in a medical journal; and it is very possible that no copy of the work exists at the British Museum. I therefore copy the following paragraphs from the description in question :- " Cabrita jerdoni (Bedd.). Two loreals, snout more pointed than in C. leschenaulti; .... lower eyelid transparent; .... femoral pores twelve on each thigh, &c. " Only a single specimen of this interesting Lizard was procured, between Cotegal and Caverypooram. In its large scales it much resembles an Ophiops, but has a distinct lower eyelid. " A n Ophiops, which I take to be O. jerdoni, Blyth, is very abundant near the banks of the Tamboodra, north of Adoni, on red soil; and I have found the same species at Pothanore. It is very similar in colour to the Cabrita here described, and the scales of the back are similar in size; it, however, wants the lower eyelid, and differs in the shields of the head, and has a much shorter tail, and only 8-9 femoral pores on each side. A casual observer, however, might take the two to be the same species." Now I think it is impossible to read the above paragraphs (the italics are m y own) and to doubt that Colonel Beddome, when he wrote them, was well acquainted with the two species, Ophiops jerdoni and Cabrita jerdoni. I sent a specimen of the Lizard which I identified with the latter to Col. Beddome; and he assured me it agreed exactly with his type, as I mentioned in m y paper, l.s.c. p. 348, note. 3. HEMIDACTYLUS cocTiEi. Dr. Gunther unites to this H. bengcdiensis, Anderson (already shown to he identical hy Stoliczka, /. c. p. 98), H. giganteus, Stoliczka, and Doryura berdmorei of Blyth and others. It is very probable that the single specimen of Hemidactylus giganteus examined by Dr. Gunther was a female, and that the tail was entirely renewed, in which case it could not easily be distinguished from II. coctai. I have reexamined four specimens of H. giganteus-a. pair (male and female) in the Indian Museum, and * Madras Monthly Journal of Medical Science, Jan. 1870, p. 34. |