Table Of Content

MISCELLANEOUS NOTES have laid eggs more than once. However, the Acknowledgements inter-nesting period is not known. The laying of eggs collectively by several females in the same This paper is part ofa study funded by the site could be due to the scarcity ofsuitable sites. Biosphere Programme (F.No. 10/14/97-CS) of It appears that these sites have some specific the Ministry of Environment and Forests, microclimate such as temperature. Preliminary Government of India. We thank R.K. Rai, observations show that these sites have higher Additional Director, Biosphere Programme, for temperature than the general atmosphere. timely release offunds, and colleagues at SACON Warmer nest conditions may help faster for encouragement. We are grateful to R.P.S. embryonic development and hatching. Kotwal, ChiefWildlife Warden, Tamil Nadu and Communal nesting (Smith 1935) in a suitable S. Paulraj, Wildlife Warden, Nilgiris for site is not uncommon in geckoes. Thirty eggs of permission to work in the protected area and for Hemidactylus frenatus have been found in a logistic support. wooden box embedded in the wall (Bhupathy, unpublished data). Many females ofthe endemic March 13, 2002 S. BHUPATHY and endangered golden gecko, Calodactylodes A.M.A. NIXON aureus also deposit eggs collectively, and the Salim Ali Centrefor Ornithology number of eggs may exceed 40 at each site and Natural History, (Daniel, J.C. pers. comm.). Smith (1935) P.O. Anaikatti, reported the largest number of 1 86 eggs in a nest Coimbatore 641 108, of Gekko japonicus perhaps an instance of Tamil Nadu, , communal egg laying. India. Reference Smith, M.A. (1935): The FaunaofBritish India. Reptilia andAmphibia. Vol II. Sauria. Taylorand Francis, London. 440 pp. 28. RANGE EXTENSION OF RANA MALABARICA (BIBR.) IN MADHYA PRADESH One night in August 1999, while driving In May 2000, after a couple of pre- back to my camp (Wild Chalet, Mocha village), in monsoon showers, a friend informed me that he the buffer zone ofKanhaNational Park in Madhya had seen a number ofcolourful frogs in a newly Pradesh, I stopped to watch a frog crossing the dug well in the village ofMocha. I asked him to road. It looked like an interesting species, but I procure a specimen immediately, which he did. was unable to get down immediately as it was The live frog in a bottle confirmed the existence raining. Since I had seen similar frogs earlier in of Rana malabarica around Kanha. I kept the South West India, it did nottake me longto identify frog for about 24 hours and released it after it as the fungoid frog Rana malabarica (Bibr.). I photographing it. I went around the village trying never knew that this frog existed as far north as to gather more information about this species, Mandla district in Madhya Pradesh, and after my and saw some individuals in two or three wells first sighting, I kept a lookout for it to photograph (in May and June) sitting on the sides above the and confirm my identification. I did not see that water. I never saw them actually living in water species duringthat season, but instructed my local and support the earlier observations on habits 1 I assistants to keep a lookout. (Daniel 1975). 332 JOURNAL, BOMBAY NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY, 99(2), AUG. 2002 , MISCELLANEOUS NOTES The occurrence of Raria malabarica Essentially a forest dweller, Rana malabarica observed in and around Kanha is an extension seems to prefer moist-deciduous biotopes to dry of its range. It was reported earlier from deciduous tracts and perhaps this explains why Jagdalpur in Bastar district (Daniel and Selukar it is absent (?) between the Kasara Ghat 1964) now in Chattisgarh, about 350 km (Maharashtra) and Eastern Satpura trend ofhills southeast of Kanha. The present report from with sal forests. Having been reported from Kanha in the Satpuras (Maikal Range) definitely Bastar already, the species may very well occur strengthens the view that the species has a much in the Eastern Ghats. wider distribution in the Peninsula. However, around Kanha, it is definitely not a common January 18, 2002 E.P. ERIC D’CUNHA species, as it appears only during two or three PO. Kisli 481 768, months of the year, unlike in southwest India District Mandla, and also perhaps in Bastar, where it is stated to Madhya Pradesh, be not uncommon (Daniel and Selukar 1964). India. References Daniel, J.C. & T.G. Selukar (1964): Occurrence ofthe Daniel, J.C. (1975): Field guide to the amphibians of fungoid frog Rana malabarica (Bibr.) at Jagdalpur, westernIndia. Part3.J. Bombaynat. Hist. Soc. 72(2): Bastar district, M.P. JBNHS60: 743-744. 516-518. A NOTE ON MESONOEMACHE1LUS HERREI NALBANT AND BANARESCU 29. (CYPRINIFORMES: BALITORIDAE: NOEMACHEILINAE) With one plate ( ) Mesonoemacheilus herrei described by ofherrei were reported subsequent to its original Nalbant and Banarescu (in Asket Singh et al. description. Silas (1951), in his paper on the 1981) was based on collections made from fishes ofAnamalai and Nelliampathi Hill ranges, Puthutotam Estate, Valparai in Anamalai Hills reported collection ofNoemacheilus triangularis by Herre in 1941, and identified as belonging to from the streams draining the Ponnani drainage the species guentheri. Nalbant and Banarescu system in the Nelliamathi Hills. N. herrei , distinguished herrei from guentheri (described especially the juveniles, superficially resemble by Day from Nilgiri Hills), based on several both guentheri and triangularis and the , characters, including differences in colour specimens named triangularis by Silas (op. cit.) pattern and structure of scales (white spots on could possibly be herrei described subsequently , body being more roundish and regularly disposed by Nalbant and Banarescu. More recently, six in guentheri vs. white coloration ‘V’ or ‘Y’- survey teams of the Zoological Survey of India shaped in herrei; scales with reduced and (1996-1998) collected three species of eccentric focal zone in the former vs. a central Noemacheilus from the Anamalais, namely and much larger focal zone in the latter). denisoni herrei and monilis. , Menon (1987), in his revisionary study of A total of27 specimens ofherrei ranging , mm the Noemacheilids, treated herrei as a synonym in length from 20.5-52 SL were collected of guentheri. However, Jayaram (1999), from two localities and Kolikamuthi at altitudes m m following Banarescu and Nalbant (1995), 890 and 870 respectively. M. herrei (Plate 1 retained it as a separate species. No specimens Fig.l) is reported here, and an attempt is made JOURNAL, BOMBAY NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY, 99(2), AUG. 2002 333