County, I find very few showing a style of coloration similar to that
of _A. pulchra_. A specimen from San Ardo, in the interior of this
county, is typical of _A. pulchra_, but San Ardo is in the Upper
Austral Zone. Not more than four or five of the fifty-four specimens
from the coast zone could be in the least confusing, and all of these
are more deeply pigmented above than is any example of _A. pulchra_
before me. Forty-eight of these specimens were sent me alive, and in
that condition exhibited a greater range of coloration than they show
since preservation in alcohol, which seems to have intensified their
dark pigmentation while dissolving the beautiful yellow of their lower
surfaces. When the living lizards were received from Carmel and Point
Pinos, they were divided into ten groups according to the intensity of
the dorsal pigmentation, and measurements were taken of each specimen
in each group. These grades of pigmentation of the living specimens,
with measurements in millimeters from snout to anus and anus to tip of
tail, are as follows:
1. Entire upper surface (ten, twelve, or fourteen rows of scales)
and ventral surface of tip of tail very dark Indian purple. Chin and
throat lighter Indian purple. More or less suffusion with Indian
purple about anus. Rest of lower surfaces and sides bright gamboge
yellow with chromium green staining near center of belly. Mouth
flesh-color. Labials and temporals minutely dotted with iridescent
greenish, silvery, or bronze. Eye black with bronze or silvery
markings.
153 15 Lateral line present No dorsal line
150 73 Lateral line Trace dorsal line
150 70 Lateral line Trace dorsal line
150 38 Lateral line No dorsal line
147 40 No lateral line No dorsal line
146 75 No lateral line No dorsal line
146 25 Lateral line No dorsal line
145 70 Trace lateral line No dorsal line
143 17 Trace lateral line No dorsal line
140 68 Lateral line No dorsal line
140 50 Lateral line No dorsal line
138 32 Faint trace lateral lines No dorsal line
137 68 Lateral line Trace dorsal line
137 47 Lateral line Trace dorsal line
136 45 Lateral line No dorsal line
135 65 Lateral line No dorsal line
135 53 Trace lateral line No dorsal line
134 65 Lateral line No dorsal line
133 60 Lateral line No dorsal line
132 63 Lateral line Trace dorsal line
131 50 Lateral line No dorsal line
131 16 Lateral line No dorsal line
130 34 Lateral line No dorsal line
2. Dark hair-brown above; bright gamboge below; chin Indian purple.
146 70 Lateral line No dorsal line
131 20 Two lateral lines Trace dorsal line
3. Dark purplish drab above; wax-yellow with Paris or chromium green
below; chin and throat lighter Indian purple.
140 40 Two lateral lines Trace dorsal line
134 20 Lateral line Faint trace dorsal line
123 25 Lateral line No dorsal line
120 60 Lateral line Fair dorsal line
4. Hair-brown above; gamboge below; chin Indian purple.
130 65 Two lateral lines Dorsal line
120 52 Lateral line Faint dorsal line
5. Dark drab above; waxy gamboge below.
126 65 Two lateral lines Distinct dorsal line
126 60 Lateral line Indistinct dorsal line
125 20 Two lateral lines Faint dorsal line
125 60 Two lateral lines Indistinct dorsal line
6a. Bronzed drab above; light wax-color below; chin light Indian
purple.
125 63 Two lateral lines Faint dorsal line
6b. Drab above; light wax-color below; chin light Indian purple.
117 55 Two lateral lines Faint dorsal line
116 55 Two lateral lines Faint trace dorsal line
112 20 Two lateral lines Dorsal line
105 48 Two lateral lines Dorsal line
7. Grayish drab above; wax-yellow below; chin lighter Indian purple.
126 30 Two lateral lines Faint trace dorsal line
122 60 Two lateral lines Trace dorsal line
121 20 Two lateral lines Incomplete dorsal line
119 55 Strong lateral line Trace dorsal line
116 55 Strong lateral line Faint trace dorsal line
8. Dark drab-gray above; dull wax-yellow below; chin light Indian
purple.
124 60 Lateral line Faint dorsal line
9. Drab-gray above; straw and Naples yellow below; chin light Indian
purple.
118 56 Two lateral lines Dorsal line
10. Bronzed drab-gray above; pale wax-yellow below; chin light Indian
purple.
92 41 Two lateral lines Very distinct dorsal line
These notes show clearly that the intensity of pigmentation increases
quite gradually and fairly regularly with the size of the individual,
and that while young specimens may be nearly as pale as some dark
individuals of _A. pulchra_, all of the large specimens are of the
dark type. It is also true in a general way that the smaller the
specimen the more distinctly the lines are shown.
In the light of our present knowledge, therefore, it seems
necessary to regard _Anniella nigra_ as a local and probably
recently differentiated race rather than as a melanistic phase of
_Anniella pulchra_. While the difference is purely one of color, no
intergradation has yet been shown to occur in adult specimens, and the
two forms must therefore be recognized as distinct species occupying
separate areas in different faunal zones.
If then we ignore the localities of the type specimens of "_A.
texana_" and _A. nigra_, as open to question until confirmed by the
finding of additional specimens, the known distribution of the species
of the genus _Anniella_ is as follows:
=Anniella pulchra.=
UPPER AUSTRAL ZONE.
_San Diegan Fauna._
San Diego County.
San Diego, Coronado, mountains near San Diego.
Riverside County.
San Jacinto.
San Bernardino County.
San Bernardino.
_Californian Fauna._
Kern County.
Oil City to Poso Creek.
Tulare County.
Sequoia National Park.
Fresno County.
Fresno.
Monterey County (interior).
San Ardo.
San Benito County.
Bear Valley.
Contra Costa County.
=Anniella nigra.=
TRANSITION ZONE.
_Pacific Fauna._
Monterey County (coast).
Monterey, Pacific Grove, Point Pinos, Carmel Bay.
San Francisco County.
San Francisco.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA,
August 18, 1905.
PROCEEDINGS
OF THE
CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
THIRD SERIES
ZOOLOGY VOL. IV, NO. 3
_Issued December 2, 1905_
ON THE OCCURRENCE OF THE LEATHER-BACK
TURTLE, DERMOCHELYS, ON THE
COAST OF CALIFORNIA
BY JOHN VAN DENBURGH
_Curator of the Department of Herpetology_
PLATES IX-XI
Records of the occurrence of the great marine Leather-back Turtle
in the Pacific Ocean are so few that any additional observations
are of much interest. Temminck and Schlegel[19] report upon a
specimen captured near the Bay of Nagasaki, Japan, in May, 1825.
Mr. Swinhoe[20] saw a large one at Amoy, China, in October, 1859.
Aflalo[21] has described a pair from Thursday Island, Queensland,
Australia. Krefft[22] mentions an example nine feet long from the
coast of New South Wales. McCoy[23] figures one caught at Portland,
Victoria, Australia, in 1862. Another was harpooned by Captain
Subritzky in the Bay of Islands, New Zealand, in May, 1892.[24]
Boulenger[25] mentions a skull from the Solomon Islands. The
species has been recorded from the coast of Chile by Molina[26] and
Philippi,[27] and from Guaymas, Mexico, by Mr. Belding.[28]
[Footnote 19: Fauna Japonica, 1833, pp. 9, 12.]
[Footnote 20: Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1870, p. 410.]
[Footnote 21: Sketch Nat. Hist. Australia, p. 188.]
[Footnote 22: Austral. Vertebr. p. 39.]
[Footnote 23: Prodrom. Zool. Victoria, v. 2, 1885, p. 2.]
[Footnote 24: Cheeseman, Trans. New Zealand Inst. v. 25, 1893, p. 108.]
[Footnote 25: Cat. Chelon. Brit. Mus. 1889, p. 10.]
[Footnote 26: Essai sur l'Hist. Nat. du Chili, 1789, p. 194.]
[Footnote 27: Ann. Univ. Chile, v. 104, 1899, [separate pp. 3-6], pl.--.]
[Footnote 28: West Am. Scientist, v. 3, no. 24, 1887, p. 99.]
Thus it appears that the only record of the occurrence of the
Leather-back Turtle in the waters of the western coast of the North
American continent is the brief note by Mr. Belding in the West
American Scientist, which reads as follows:
"I saw at Guaymas a Leather-back Turtle (Dermatochelys) which weighed
1,102 lbs."
I am now able to record the capture of three specimens of this turtle
on the coast of California.
Early in January of the present year I received word that a large
sea turtle had been caught near Santa Barbara, California, and at
once arranged to purchase it for the Academy. A photograph (Plate
IX) sent me at the time showed it to be a fine specimen of
the Leather-back Turtle. Upon its arrival in San Francisco this turtle
proved to be a female measuring six feet and seven inches from the tip
of its snout to the end of its tail. Its weight was given on the bill
of lading as 800 pounds, but this may have been estimated rather than
actually determined. It was secured by Mr. G. W. Gourley and Albert F.
Stafford, about January 2, in twenty-five fathoms of water in the open
sea about two miles south of Santa Barbara.
Mr. Gourley has given me the following glowing account of its capture:
"SANTA BARBARA, CAL.,
"Jan. 17, 1905.
"_Dear Sir:_--Your note of 13th inst. received.... In regard to
the details of the capture I will say that the turtle was first
seen swimming on the surface about two miles off shore and to
the southwestward of the Santa Barbara whistling buoy. I went
after it (accompanied by a boy) in an 18 foot sailboat. I had
a gaff with a hook on the end of it and bent about 200 feet of
rope onto the handle. I had also prepared a number of other
ropes with nooses on them to be ready for quick work.
"On approaching the turtle it did not hear the wash of the boat
until we were within about 25 feet of it, when it made a rush
to windward and started to dive, but the momentum of the boat
when I luffed into the wind carried her right along side of him
and I dropped the tiller and got forward with the gaff-hook and
swung over the side in the weather rigging and got the hook fast
in the leathery part of his neck. He immediately sounded and
run out the full length of the line--about 200 feet--and towed
the boat about half a mile further out to sea. He then came to
the surface and we over-handed the line and pulled up close to
him again. When he caught sight of the boat he turned and came
toward us and threw one of his flippers over the gunwale of the
boat, nearly capsizing her.[29] I climbed up on the upper side
and shoved him off with an oar. He grabbed the end of the oar
and bit the end of it off like a piece of cheese. His movements
in the water were very swift; using his fore flipper he could
turn almost instantly from one side to the other and his head
would project about 18 inches from the body. I succeeded in
throwing a noose over his head and later by attracting his
attention in the opposite direction got ropes around both
flippers--finally having five lines on him--and started to tow
him toward the shore. He repeatedly slipped the ropes off from
his neck and flippers--several times getting almost entirely
free. We were from 11:30 A. M. till nearly 4 P. M. in finally
landing him. When about half way to shore he suddenly turned and
made a break out to sea, towing the boat stern first with all
sail drawing full for several hundred yards with little effort.
He emitted at intervals a noise resembling the grunt of a wild
boar. There were (when we first tackled him) about a dozen
ramoras attached to different parts of the body. Most of them
stayed with him all through the struggle and only deserted him
when I hoisted him to the deck of the dock. I captured two of
them and kept them in a bucket for several days. One was about
ten inches long. The turtle lived for four days after taking out
of the water--being very lively when first landed and gradually
subsiding. I don't think this species ever come out of the water
on their own responsibility.
"So far as I can learn there has been but one other of this kind
ever taken on this coast. It was less than half the size of
this and was entangled in a fisherman's net and was wounded in
capturing, so that it died soon after. The meat was sold to the
hotels here and was very fine eating.
"Respectfully,
"G. W. GOURLEY."
[Footnote 29: It is interesting to note the similarity of
the account given by Captain Subritzky of the capture of his
specimen, which is given by Cheeseman (Trans. New Zealand Inst.
v. 25, 1893, p. 109) as follows: "When passing Cape Brett
on a voyage from Awanui to Auckland, he noticed a floating
object, which he at first took for a boat bottom upwards. The
schooner's boat was lowered, and he proceeded to inspect it;
when, to his astonishment, it suddenly disappeared, shortly
afterward reappearing a little distance further away. Returning
to his vessel, he secured a harpoon and line, and then pulled
cautiously up to the creature, soon recognizing it to be a
large turtle-like animal entirely new to him. After a little
manœuvering he succeeded in harpooning it in the neck.
According to him, it made a most determined resistance, making
for the boat open-mouthed, snapping its jaws violently. It
succeeded in getting its flappers over the side of the boat,
nearly capsizing it, but was stunned by a blow on the head,
towed alongside the schooner, and hoisted on board."]
Inquiry regarding the second specimen referred to in Mr. Gourley's
letter finally resulted, through the kindness of Dr. Frank M.
Anderson, in my securing from Mr. E. B. Hoyt of San Luis Obispo, a
photograph of this turtle, taken soon after its death. Mr. Hoyt tells
me that this photograph was taken by himself at Santa Barbara in July
or August, 1901. It shows the animal covering more than half the
length of the floor of a dray on which it was lying. This photograph
is reproduced in Plate X.
The third individual of this species was preserved in the museum at
Coronado, San Diego County, which I am told is now a thing of the
past. All that I have been able to learn of its history is contained
in the following note from Mrs. E. S. Newcomb, who was in charge of
the collection:
"CORONADO, March 21, 1896.
"_Dear Sir_:--I am only posted in regard to one marine turtle,
which hangs in the entrance of our museum, and provokes various
witty remarks from the travelling public.... This turtle was
caught off Point Loma [San Diego Co.] by a fisherman, weight
800 lbs. He sold it to the market, where Prof. Ward recognized
the skin as belonging to the Harp or Lute turtle, and purchased
it for this museum. It has been here eight years. I am sorry my
information is so meagre, but it is the best I can give you.
"Yours sincerely,
"(MRS.) E. S. NEWCOMB."
With no material for comparison I am unable to form an opinion as to
the identity or specific distinctness of the Leather-back Turtles of
the Atlantic, Indian, and Pacific oceans; but Distant's photograph
of an individual from South Africa[30] certainly shows a style of
coloration very different from that seen in those reproduced here.
A view of the superior surface of the hyoid is given (Plate
XI) which makes it evident that the specimen figured by
Gervais[31] was incomplete.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA,
August 4, 1905.
[Footnote 30: Distant, Zoologist, 4th ser. v. 2, 1898, p. 500.]
[Footnote 31: Gervais, N. Arch. Mus. v. 8, 1872, pl. VII,
fig. 2.]
EXPLANATION OF PLATE IX.
Photograph of Leather-back Turtle captured at Santa Barbara,
California, January, 1905.
[Illustration:
PROC. CAL. ACAD. SCI. 3^{D}. SER. ZOOL. VOL. IV.
[VAN DENBURGH] PLATE IX.
]
EXPLANATION OF PLATE X.
Photograph of Leather-back Turtle captured at Santa Barbara,
California, in July or August, 1901.
[Illustration:
PROC. CAL. ACAD. SCI. 3^{D}. SER. ZOOL. VOL. IV.
[VAN DENBURGH] PLATE X.
]
EXPLANATION OF PLATE XI.
Hyoid of Leather-back Turtle captured at Santa Barbara,
California, January, 1905.
[Illustration:
PROC. CAL. ACAD. SCI. 3^{D}. SER. ZOOL. VOL. IV.
[VAN DENBURGH] PLATE XI.
]
PROCEEDINGS
OF THE
CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
THIRD SERIES
ZOOLOGY VOL. IV, NO. 4[32]
_Issued March 14, 1906_
[Footnote 32: NOTE.--Only a few copies of the original
edition of this paper (Third Series, Vol. IV, Nos. 4 and 5,
Zoology, pp. 61-67) had been distributed prior to the great fire of
April 18, 1906, in which practically the entire edition was lost.
To enable libraries and individuals to complete their files of the
Proceedings this _exact reprint_ is issued
March 26, 1915.
BARTON W. EVERMANN, _Editor_.]
DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF THE GENUS PLETHODON (PLETHODON
VANDYKEI) FROM MOUNT RAINIER, WASHINGTON
BY JOHN VAN DENBURGH
_Curator of the Department of Herpetology_
In a small collection of amphibians secured in Washington by Dr.
Edwin Cooper Van Dyke, Curator of the Department of Entomology, is an
apparently undescribed species of salamander, which I take pleasure in
naming, in honor of its collector,
=Plethodon vandykei= sp. nov.
_Diagnosis._--Similar in general appearance to _Plethodon
intermedius_, but much larger and stouter; costal grooves 12-13;
toes and fingers webbed, only 2 phalanges of third and fourth
toes free; adpressed limbs separated by 1 costal interspace;
tail but slightly compressed; paratoid well developed; a dorsal
band, not red; lower surfaces black.
_Type._--Cal. Acad. Sci. No. 6910, Paradise Valley, Mt. Rainier
Park, Washington, Dr. E. C. Van Dyke, July 15-31, 1905.
_Description._--General form similar to _P. oregonensis_, but
body not quite so much flattened, tail less compressed, and
limbs shorter and stouter; tail cylindro-conic, somewhat
compressed in posterior half, nearly equal to length of head
and body; head depressed, about width of widest part of body;
snout broadly truncate from above, rounded in profile; eyes
moderate, smaller than in _P. oregonensis_, rather prominent,
separated anteriorly by nearly twice the length of the orbital
slit; nostrils small, near corners of snout, separated by
about their distance from pupil; subnasal groove descending
nearly to margin of lip; line of lip descending slightly below
corner of snout and ascending below posterior edge of orbit;
palatine _teeth_ in 2 slightly curved series beginning some
distance behind and a little internal to the internal nares,
converging obliquely backward, and scarcely separated on the
median line; parasphenoid teeth in 1 patch throughout, separated
from palatine teeth by an interval equal to distance from
nostril to edge of lip; internal nares rather small; tongue
large, ovate, not emarginate, attached along median line but
free laterally and for a short distance behind; neck a little
narrower than body, with large elongate parotoid gland divided
by a longitudinal groove running posteriorly and downward from
eye to gular fold, other grooves behind, above and in front
of parotoid; a groove along vertebral line; _costal grooves_
between limbs 12 on right, 13 on left, not continued to midline
either above or below; limbs a little shorter and stouter than
in _P. oregonensis_, anterior with 4 and posterior with 5
digits; digits rather short, with broad rounded ends each with
a terminal pad below, inner shortest, third longest, second
finger longer than fourth, second toe shorter than fourth which
is but little shorter than third; web well developed, extending
nearly to end of inner digits, 2 phalanges of third and fourth
toes free, feet very broadly palmate; tail slender, slightly
compressed in posterior two-thirds, with rather indefinite
grooves on proximal half; skin shiny, but roughened above and
laterally and pitted below by the mouths of small glands;
adpressed limbs separated by about the distance between 2 costal
grooves.
A broad band extends along the whole dorsal surface from the snout
to the tip of the tail. In the alcoholic specimen this band is dark
clay-color, dotted with black on the upper surface of the head. It is
broadest on the back of the head and narrowest above the anus. The
upper surfaces of the limbs and the side of the snout are clay-color
dotted with black. A black line runs from the eye to the nostril. The
hands and feet are black dotted with clay-color. The chin and central
gular region are white with a few scattered black dots. The sides of
the neck and the sides and lower surfaces of the body and tail are
intense black with a few scattered whitish dots on the belly and sides
of tail and with a zone of crowded white dots along the sides of the
neck and body.
Snout to anus 60
Front of anus to end of tail 56
Width of head 9
Nostril to orbit 2
Snout to orbit 4
Snout to gular fold 13
Snout to fore limb 17
Gular fold to anus 47
Axilla to groin 34
Adpressed limbs separated by 3
Fore limb 15½
Hind limb 18½
Heel to end of longest toe 7
Breadth of foot 6
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA,
December 21, 1905.
PROCEEDINGS
OF THE
CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
THIRD SERIES
ZOOLOGY VOL. IV, NO. 5
_Issued March 14, 1906_
ON THE OCCURRENCE OF THE SPOTTED NIGHT
SNAKE, HYPSIGLENA OCHRORHYNCHUS, IN
CENTRAL CALIFORNIA; AND ON THE
SHAPE OF THE PUPIL IN THE
REPTILIAN GENUS ARIZONA
BY JOHN VAN DENBURGH
_Curator of the Department of Herpetology_
ON THE OCCURRENCE OF THE SPOTTED NIGHT SNAKE, HYPSIGLENA
OCHRORHYNCHUS, IN CENTRAL CALIFORNIA
The little snake to which Cope, in 1860,[33] gave the name _Hypsiglena
ochrorhynchus_ was first described from specimens secured at Cape
San Lucas, Lower California. It has since been found to range across
Arizona and northern Mexico to Texas. As recently as 1893, so little
was known of the distribution of this snake in California that Dr.
Stejneger,[34] in recording the single specimen secured by the
Death Valley Expedition in the Argus Range, Inyo County, California,
thought that it added a species to the known fauna of the State. This
snake had, however, already been taken at San Diego, California, as
mentioned by Professor Cope[35] in 1883. More recently, the species
has been recorded by Cope[36] from Witch Creek, San Diego County,
and by myself[37] from the Cuyamaca Mountains, San Diego County;
Strawberry Valley and San Jacinto, Riverside County, and Hesperia, San
Bernardino County.
[Footnote 33: Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1860, p. 246.]
[Footnote 34: N. A. Fauna, no. 7, 1893, p. 204.]
[Footnote 35: Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1883, p. 32.]
[Footnote 36: Report, U. S. Nat. Mus. 1898 (1900), p. 954.]
[Footnote 37: Occas. Papers, Cal. Acad. Sci. 5, 1897, p. 180.]
These localities are all in the Desert and San Diegan faunal areas.
It was with much interest, therefore, that I found this snake in
the Californian Fauna close to the edge of the Pacific Fauna. The
specimen was secured near Los Gatos, Santa Clara County, several
hundred miles beyond the range of the species as previously known. It
was found under a pile of recently cut hay, at an altitude of about
eight or nine hundred feet, in what is locally known as the warm belt
of the foothills, where _Bascanion laterale_, _Cnemidophorus tigris
undulates_, and _Amphispiza belli_ also occur.
ON THE SHAPE OF THE PUPIL IN THE REPTILIAN GENUS ARIZONA
There has been, among herpetologists, much diversity of opinion as
to the merits of Kennicott's genus _Arizona_. The validity of the
single species for which he proposed the name _Arizona elegans_ has, I
believe, never been questioned, but the known generic characters have
been rather inadequate. Accordingly, while some authors have followed
Kennicott, others have referred the species variously to the genera
_Pituophis_ of Holbrook, _Rhinechis_ of Michahelles, or _Coluber_ of
Linnæus.
I believe that all authors (myself included) who mention the point at
all describe the eye of this snake as showing a round pupil. This is
true of most alcoholic specimens, for in these the pupil usually is
dilated. In two living specimens, however, I find that the pupil is
slightly irregular in outline so that it appears somewhat eccentric,
that it varies considerably in size from time to time, and that it
is distinctly elliptic, with the long diameter vertical, but becomes
nearly round when dilated. Some alcoholic specimens also show the
pupil somewhat contracted and elliptic.
This point is of some importance, since the possession of a vertically
elongate pupil is in itself ample basis for the recognition of the
genus _Arizona_ as distinct from the other colubrine genera with which
it has been confused.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA,
February 24, 1906.
Transcriber's Notes:
1. Pages 20, 25: The spelling of Reëxamination/reëxamination has been left
with the dieresis.
2. Italics are shown as _text_ and bold as =text=.
3. Page 19, 20: The fraction 2/2 has been retained as such.
4. Carat numbers/letters have been retained with the carat symbol to
represent an upper position.
5. Page 61: There is a date in the middle of a paragraph which does
not seem to pertain to anything. This has been removed.