ALBERT

Description: In a previous paper, published in the same series, Vol. 2 (1940), the author dealt with a small collection of snakes obtained by Dr. P. WAGENAAR HUMMELINCK in 1930 and 1936 on the islands off the Venezuelan coast and on the adjacent mainland. The present article reports on some specimens, chiefly from the Dutch islands of the Windward Group, presented by him to the Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie at Leiden in later years. Some notes are included on three specimens of Alsophis from the same area that were already present in the collections of this museum (indicated by M.L.). — The photographs were made by Dr. HUMMELINCK.

Description: The present notes deal with a small collection of frogs that was made by Dr. P. WAGENAAR HUMMELINCK during his visits to the islands of the Leeward Group, Venezuela and Eastern Colombia. I have included in this study the specimens of Pleurodema brachyops (Cope) already present in the Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, and in the Zoologisch Museum, Amsterdam. The amphibian fauna of the Dutch Leeward Islands is very poor indeed. It consists of a single species Pleurodema brachyops (Cope)) that occurs in Aruba, Curaçao, Bonaire and Klein Bonaire. Bufo marinus (L.) has apparently been introduced into Aruba within the last few years (cf. p. 91). J. H. R. NEERVOORT VAN DE POLL, who visited Aruba in 1885, took a specimen of a Leptodactylus species. This has been mentioned by VAN LIDTH DE JEUDE (1887, p. 134) as ? Rana copii Blgr.” On the authority of Dr. G. A. BOULENGER the identification was changed into Leptodactylus albilabris (Gthr.), and as such it has been mentioned recently by BOSCHMA (1947, p. 42).

Description: Investigaciones en la Ría de Arosa y sus alrededores, 1962—1964. Introducción. En los veranos de 1962 y 1963 y en el invierno y verano de 1964 un grupo científico holandés hizo investigaciones sedimentológicas, oceanógraficas, zoológicas y botánicas en la Ría de Arosa y sus alrededores. Se tomaron muestras en 934 localidades indicadas en el mapa (Apéndice I). Los nombres de los participantes han sido mencionados en el Apéndice II. El centro de las investigaciones era la fábrica de Don Luis Losada Lago en la Punta Preguntoiro en Villajuán cerca de Villagarcía de Arosa. En el texto siguiente se mencionan los periódicos en que serán publicados los resultados.

Description: Dr. P. Wagenaar Hummelinck entrusted me with the study of the snakes, which he collected during his trips to the islands off the north coast of Venezuela, to the Venezuelan mainland, and to eastern Colombia. In the present paper the species collected by Dr. Hummelinck are listed with data on scale counts, coloration and with notes on nomenclature. In a few cases specimens from other collections were used for comparison, and for these the provenance is indicated in the lists of specimens. Dr. Hummelinck made notes on the names given to the different species of snakes by the inhabitants, and by his kind permission these notes are included in the present paper. These local names form an addition to those published by Roca (1932, pp. 387—388). Unless otherwise stated the specimens are in the collections of the Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden. The numbers cited for the different specimens, Oph. 1—60, are the numbers used by the collector; they are mentioned in parentheses, the first of each list of specimens with the indication Oph., the following without this indication.

Description: In all snakes, the Boidae and Xenopeltidae excepted, only the right lung is well developed, while the left lung is rudimentary or absent (BUTLER, 1895). The right lung consists of an anterior alveolar part that is strongly vascularized, and of a posterior smooth-walled air-sac that is anangious. Between these two parts a transitional zone may be present, in which the wall of the lung shows a faint reticulate pattern, and which receives some very fine branches from the pulmonary vessels. In a number of snakes, among which the Viperidae, the situation becomes more complicated. In these snakes the membrane that connects the dorsal ends of the incomplete tracheal cartilages has become greatly expanded, and this dorsal wall has developed an alveolar structure. COPE (1894, p. 218) very aptly has named this the tracheal lung. When the tracheal lung has very strongly developed, it sometimes merges gradually into the right lung. In species with a rudimentary left lung, its opening into the trachea may be considered to mark the end of the trachea, and consequently also the beginning of the right lung. In other species a slight change in the structure of the alveoles may mark the boundary, but in a number of species it becomes a more or less arbitrary procedure to draw a boundary between the tracheal lung and the right lung. For the purpose of the present note it suffices, however, to consider as right lung that part of the respiratory tract that lies posterior to the middle of the heart. The development of the tracheal lung, and the relative size of the alveolar part of the right lung and of the air-sac vary according to genera and species.

Description: From its origin, the right aortic arch passes anteriorly, and obliquely to the right; in this part of its course it gives off the two carotid arteries, or as the case may be (e.g., in Uropeltis melanogaster (GRAY)) the common carotid trunk. It then curves dorsally, medially, and caudally. At the end of the dorsal curve, the right aortic arch gives off the vertebral artery, which runs cranially, close to the ventral surface of the vertebral column, to enter the parietes at a greater or smaller distance behind the head. In its further course, the right aortic arch fuses with the left aortic arch to form the dorsal aorta, which passes caudally close to the ventral surface of the vertebral column. The intercostal arteries arise from the vertebral artery, from the right aortic arch (between the origin of the vertebral artery and the fusion of the two aortic arches), and from the dorsal aorta. These intercostal arteries pass dorsally, and they enter the parietes in varying ways, as has been described by BEDDARD (1903; 1904a, b; 1906a, b; 1908; 1909) in a series of papers on the anatomy of snakes. This author has pointed to the possible taxonomic value of the differences shown by the various genera and species, which he examined. However, before definite conclusions can be drawn, it will be necessary to examine more genera and species. Studying the intercostal arteries of snakes is time-consuming; their number may be very high (e.g., 156 in a specimen of Xenopeltis unicolor Reinw.), and every artery has to be checked, because various types of intercostal arteries may occur in one individual.\nThe following types of intercostal arteries can be distinguished.

Description: In all snakes, the Boidae and Xenopeltidae excepted, only the right lung is well developed, while the left lung is rudimentary or absent (BUTLER, 1895). The right lung consists of an anterior alveolar part that is strongly vascularized, and of a posterior smooth-walled air-sac that is anangious. Between these two parts a transitional zone may be present, in which the wall of the lung shows a faint reticulate pattern, and which receives some very fine branches from the pulmonary vessels. In a number of snakes, among which the Viperidae, the situation becomes more complicated. In these snakes the membrane that connects the dorsal ends of the incomplete tracheal cartilages has become greatly expanded, and this dorsal wall has developed an alveolar structure. COPE (1894, p. 218) very aptly has named this the tracheal lung. When the tracheal lung has very strongly developed, it sometimes merges gradually into the right lung. In species with a rudimentary left lung, its opening into the trachea may be considered to mark the end of the trachea, and consequently also the beginning of the right lung. In other species a slight change in the structure of the alveoles may mark the boundary, but in a number of species it becomes a more or less arbitrary procedure to draw a boundary between the tracheal lung and the right lung. For the purpose of the present note it suffices, however, to consider as right lung that part of the respiratory tract that lies posterior to the middle of the heart.\nThe development of the tracheal lung, and the relative size of the alveolar part of the right lung and of the air-sac vary according to genera and species.

Description: The Past 38 Period before 1751 38 1751-1820 39 1820-1878 43 1878-1922 52 1922-1955 57 1955-1961 61 1961-1972 63 The Present (from 1972 onwards) 66 The Future 68 University teaching 70 Other teaching activities 72 The status and position of RGM 72 Acknowledgements 76 Notes 77 References 85 Appendix I 88 Appendix II 91 On the first of November, 1978, the Rijksmuseum van Geologie en Mineralogie (National Museum of Geology and Mineralogy), commemorated the day upon which, one hundred years ago, the first step was set on its way to independence. This gives occasion to review its past, its present state, as well as to try and look into its future. It will be evident that when discussing the present state and the possible future development of the museum (unless stated otherwise) the opinion given is that of the present author.

Description: This note deals mainly with the systematic position of the subspecies of Vipera russelii occurring in the Malay Archipelago, and with its distribution; some remarks are added concerning the distribution of V. russelii outside the archipelago.\nTwo subspecies of Vipera russelii have been described from the Malay Archipelago. Mertens (1927, p. 183) made a specimen from Endeh Island the type of a new subspecies: Vipera russelii limitis Mertens. In a later paper, Mertens (1930, p. 327) refers the two specimens taken in the island of Komodo by Dunn (1927, p. 4) to this same subspecies, and according to Neuhaus (1935, p. 49) the Javan specimen described by him also belongs to Vipera russelii limitis. Kopstein (1936, pp. 259-262, pl. 3) discusses the differences that he believes to be present between the Javan specimens and Mertens\'s V. r. limitis. Although Kopstein did not arrive at a definite conclusion as to the Javan specimen differing subspecifically from V. r. limitis, he proposed the name Vipera russellii sublimitis Kopstein for the Javan form should it prove to be distinct. De Haas (1950, p. 609), Wegner (1953, p. 6), and Van Hoesel (1954, p. 135, fig.) recognize Vipera russelii sublimitis as a distinct subspecies.\nUnder the heading Vipera russelii siamensis, Smith (1943, p. 484) describes the colour pattern of specimens from southern Burma, Siam, China, and the East Indies; this may mean that Smith refers the specimens from these areas to V. r. siamensis, and that he considers V. r. limitis and V. r. sublimitis (mentioned by him on p. 485) as synonyms of siamensis.\nThe systematic position of these two forms was discussed again by Mertens (1957, p. 25) after comparing a Javan specimen to the type of V. r.

Description: In his "Catalogue of Snakes" Boulenger (1893\xe2\x80\x941896) followed Cope in considering the presence or absence of well developed hypapophyses under the posterior precaudal vertebrae as a character of great systematic importance. Thus Boulenger divided the genera of both the Colubrinae and Dipsadomorphinae (= Boiginae) into two groups; one of these groups is characterized by the presence of well developed hypapophyses under the posterior precaudal vertebrae, while in the genera of the other group these hypapophyses are lacking. Ros\xc3\xa9n (1905a) showed that this character was not so important as previous authors had believed it to be, for he found well developed hypapophyses1) in Chrysopelea ornata (Shaw) and Anisodon lilljeborgi Ros\xc3\xa9n (= Psammodynastes pulverulentus (Boie)), in which species they are lacking according to Boulenger. In Helicops leopardina (Schl.) and H. modesta (Gthr.) Ros\xc3\xa9n (1905a, p. 170, figs, 1a, 1b) did not find these hypapophyses, although Boulenger placed the genus Helicops Wagl. in the group possessing them. Boulenger (1905) criticized Ros\xc3\xa9n\'s paper, and stated that he did not find more than a low keel under the posterior precaudal vertebrae in all specimens of Chrysopelea ornata (Shaw) examined by him. To this criticism Ros\xc3\xa9n (1905b) replied that among the specimens of Chrysopelea ornata (Shaw), which he examined in this respect, well developed hypapophyses were present in some specimens, while they were lacking in others. Moreover he mentions the presence of hypapophyses in Psammodynastes pulverulentus (Boie).\nNot much attention has been paid to Ros\xc3\xa9n\'s researches, and so Meise & Hennig (1935, p. 140) again mention the absence of hypapophyses in Chrysopelea Boie. It seemed to me worth while to check this character in