| OCR Text |
Show .332 MR. G. A. BOULENGER ON THE [Nov. 29, 5. On the Lacerta depressa of Camerano. B y G. A. B o u le n g e r , F.R .S ., V .P .Z .S . [Received October 20, 1904.] (Plate XXII.*) Much work has been done lately on the various forms which cluster round the common Lacerta muralis of Europe, and the younger herpetologists have shown an ever increasing inclination towards multiplying species. Whether this narrower conception of species will result in a better understanding of the distribution and phylogeny of this difficult group, is a question I will not at present discuss. But I may say that these recent systematic attempts seem to justify the view expressed by Dr. Gunther thirty years agof, that " Such nominal species rarely survive their author; but before they are merged again in the synonymy, they are the cause of much unnecessary trouble, and being founded on slight individual peculiarities, they are frequently mistaken, rarely recognised." The history of Lacerta depressa illustrates the case in point. Some timo ago I received from my friend Dr. F. Werner a lizard from the Bithynian Olympus, near Brussa (altitude 1500- 1800 metres), which he referred to L. depressa of Camerano, and particularly to the var. rudis of Bedriaga. An account of this and other specimens of the same form is given by Werner in his valuable paper on the Reptiles of Asia Minor J. This lizard differs so considerably from the specimen of L. depressa (one of the types, received from the Turin Museum) preserved in the British Museum, that I could not satisfy myself of the correctness of Werner's identification, notwithstanding his express statement that this was arrived at after comparison of one of the types from Trebizond, entrusted to him by the Turin Museum. In order to clear up my doubts, I applied to my friend Prof. Camerano for the loan of the specimens of L. depressa § preserved in the Museum under his charge; and my request having been kindly granted, I wish to lay before the Society the result of my examination. This shows that, as could be gathered from Bedriaga's description ||, the species is made up of several distinct forms (I would call them varieties). There is no evidence that the specimens all came from Trebizond, for De Filippi, their collector, himself says of the species referred to X. taurica % " trovanno commune da Trebisonda a Tiflis." It is remarkable that the descriptions of both Camerano and Bedriaga, who had access to all the specimens, * For explanation of the Plate, see p. 339. f Introduction to Catalogue of Fishes, viii. p. vi. J Sitzb. Ak. Wien, cxi. 1902, p. 30, pi. iii. § Podarcis depressa, Camerano, Atti Acc. Torin. xiii. 1878, p. 539. || Abh. Senck. Ges. xiv. 1886, p. 272. •j[ Arch, per la Zool. ii. 1863, p. 386. |
