Studies on the anatomy of the tail in Sauria and Rhynchocephalia

II.Chameleon zeylanicus Laurenti
  • Syed Muzammil Ali


Theprehensile type of tail, found in the familyChameleonidœ, is adapted for grasping supports by coiling and uncoiling in a dorso-ventral direction. It has the following features.
  1. (a)

    The scales are arranged in an annular manner, the transverse rows of the dorsal side exceeding those of the ventral.

  2. (b)

    The ventral epithelium differs from the dorsal in being thicker and stronger and in being provided with peg-shaped spines.

  3. (c)

    The vertebral column is displaced gradually upwards as it proceeds posteriorly. The pre- and post-zygapophyses are extremely well developed, the latter fitting not over, but in between the former so that the lateral movements of the tail are restricted. The inter-vertebral foramina are large. The transverse processes which arise from the ventral part of the centrum are short and broad, lie at the middle of the vertebra and face outwards and downwards. The neural spine is a prominent structure confined almost completely to the posterior part of the vertebral roof. The anterior face of the centrum has its lower border much shorter than the upper and lateral ones.

  4. (d)

    The caudal musculature, which has been described in detail, consists of longitudinally extended muscles, overlaid by numerous tendons of varying form and length.



Vertebral Column Transverse Process Neural Spine Longissimus Muscle Caustic Potash 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ahl, E. “Doppelschwanzige Zauneidechse,”Aquarium, Berlin, 1927. 70–1.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ali, S. M. “Studies on the Comparative Anatomy of the Tail in Sauria and Rhynchocephalia, I.Sphenodon punctatus Gray,”Proc. Ind. Acad. Sci., 1941,13, 171–92.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alonzo, G. “Ricerche Sullo sviluppo della coda e degli arti nel Gongylus ocellatus,”Atti. Acc. Gioen., 1903, (4)16, No. 5, 48.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Annandale, N. “Contributions to Oriental Herpetology. 1. The lizards of the Andamans, with the description of a new gecko and a note on the reproduced tail in Ptycho-zoon homalocephalum,”Jour. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 1904,73, 12–22.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Asana, J.J. “The Natural History of Calotes versicolor (Boulenger), the common Bloodsucker,”Jour. Bomb. Natural History Soc., March 2, 1931, 1041–47.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barbour, T., and Stetson, H. C. “The squamation of Homœosaurus,”Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., Harvard, 1929,69, 99–104.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bolkay, St. J. “The rôle of the regenerated tail of the Lacertiæ at the preservation of the species,”Glasn. Zemal. Mus. Bosni Herc. Sarajevo, 1924,36, 91–4.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boulenger, G. A. “On the Scaling of the Reproduced Tail in Lizards,”Proc. Zool. Soc., London, 1888,1, 351–53.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Catalogue of the Lizards in the British Museum (Natural History) (Geckonidae, Eublepharidae, Agamidae), 1885,1, 137.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    -The Fauna of British India including Ceylon and Burma. Reptilia and Batrachia, London, 1890–92.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brindley, H. H. “On a Specimen of Hemidactylus gleadovii Murray, with a bifid renewed tail,”Jour. Bomb. Natural Hist. Soc., 1894,9, 30–33.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    — “Some cases of caudal abnormality in Mabuia carinata and other lizards,” —, 1898,11, 680–89.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Burne “A contribution to the Myology and visceral anatomy of Chlamydophorus truncatus,”Proc. Zool. Soc., 1901, p. 104.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Camp, C. L. “Classification of the Lizards,”Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 1923,48, 289–482.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Contejean “Sur Pautotomie chez la Sauterelle et le lezard,”C. R. Acad. Sc. Paris, 1890,61, 611–14.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Das, G. M. “Observations on the trifid tails in two specimens of Hemidactylus flaviviridis Rüppel, with a note on the artificial regeneration of double and triple tails of the ‘Tokhak’ lizard, Gecko verticillatus, Laurenti,”Jour. Bomb. Nat. Hist. Soc., 1932,35, Pt. 3, 657–62.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fischer, G. E. C. “Aberration in scales of regrown tail of Agama tuberculata Grey,” —, 1907,18, 208.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fraisse, P.Die Regeneration von Geweben und Organen bei den Wirbel-thieren, besonders Amphibien and Reptilien. Cassel, 1885.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fredericq, L. “L’autotomie chez les etoiles de mer,”Revue Scientifique (Ser. 3), 1887, 13.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    - “L’autotomie on la mutilation dans le regne animal,”Bull. de L’ Acad. roy. de. Belgique (Ser. 3), 1893, 26.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gadow, H.The Cambridge Natural History Series, Amphibia and Reptiles, 1901.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gay, G. “Sulla coda monstruosa della lacertole,”Monitore Zool. ital. Firenze, 1909,20.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gegenbaur, C.Untersuchungen zur vergl. Anatomie der Wirbelsäule bei den Amphibien und Reptilien, Leipzig, 1862.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Giuliani “Sulla struttura del midollo spinale, e sulla riproduzione della corda della Lacerta viridis,”Roma Salvucci, 1878.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gräper, Ludwig “Über eine. druschwänzige Eidechse mit sieben Schwanz skeleten,”Arch. Entw. Mech. Leipzig, 1909,27, 640–59.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Guyenot, E. “Territoire de Regeneration chez le lezard (Lecerta muralis),”C.R. Soc. Biol. Paris, 1928,99, 27–28.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    — and Matthey, R. “Les processus regeneratifs daur la patte posterievre du lezard,”Arch. Entw. Mech. Org., Berlin, 1928,113, 520–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hoffmann, C. K. “Reptilian II—Eidechsen und Wasserechsen,”Bronn’s Kl. u. Ordn. d. Thier-Reichs, 1890, Bd.6, Abt. 3, 475–76.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hooker, Davenport “Die Nerven in regenerierten Schwanz die Eidechsen,”Arch. Mikr. Anat., 1912,80, 217–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hora, S. L. “Notes on Lizards in the Indian Museum, I. On the unnamed collection of Lizards of the family Geckonidae,”Rec. Ind. Mus., 1926,28, 193.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hyrtl, J. “Ueber normale Quertheilung der Saurier-Wirbel,”Sitzb. der Akad. der Wiss. in Wien., 1853, Bd.4, 185.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lange, Adolf “Wirbelsäule und ihre Abkommlinge, “Handb. d, vergl. Anat. herausgeg. von Bolk, Goppert, Kallius andLubosch, 1936, 4.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lonnberg, Einar “Svanseus betydelse och anvandning hos ryggradsdjuren.” (The object and use of tails in the case of vertebrate animals).Fauna and Flora Uppsala, 1910,5, 2–25, 49–71, 118–28.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Mahendra, B. C. “Contributions to the bionomics, anatomy, reproduction and development of the Indian House-gecko, Hemidactylus flaviviridis Riippel,’Proc. Ind. Acad. Sci., Sept. 1936,4, No. 3, 250–81.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Marcucci, Dott Ermete “Trapianti di pelle e rigenerazione in Lacerta muralis,”Archivio Zoologico Italiano, 1932,17, Fasc. 3–4, 435–46.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Milone, S. “Ricerche sulla velocita di accrescimento del midollo spinale della coda di Rettilli e Uccelli,”Monitore Zool. ital. Forenze, 1922,32, 144–48.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Misuri, Alfredo “Ricerche sulla struttura della coda normale e rigenerata nella Lacerta muralis Merr.,”Roma Boll. Soc. Zool. ital. (Ser. 2), 1910,11, 103–35.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Misuri, A. “ Ricerche sulla struttura della coda normale e rigenerata nella Lacerta muralis, Nota I e II,”fold., 1911,11.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mivart, St. George “On the myology of Chamaeleon parsonii,”Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1870, 850–890.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Morgan, T. H.Regeneration, Macmillan Company, New York, 1901.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mosauer, Walter “On the Locomotion of Snakes,”Science, Dec. 23, 1932,76, No. 1982, 583–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Müller, H. “Eine Eidechse, Lacerta viridis mit zwei über einander gelagerten Schwänzen, welche beide als das Product einer überreichen und durch den feineren Bau der wiedererzeugten, betnerkenswerthen Reproduction-skraft erscheinen,”Verhandl. d. phys-med Gesellschaft in Wurzburg, 1852, Bd.2, 66.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Nishi, S. “Muskeln des Rumpfes,”Handb. d. vergl. Anat., herausgeg, v. Bolk Goppert, Kallius, u. Lubosch, 1937,5, 387–406.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Remane, Adolf “Wirbelsäule und ihre Abkömmlige,” —, 1936,4, 120.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Schmincke, Alexander “Die regeneration der quergestrieften muskelfäsern bei den Sauropsiden,”Beitr. Path. Anat. Jena,43, 1908, (519–551) 1 taf.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sibtain, S. M. “Studies on the Caudal Autotomy and Regneration inMabuya dissimilis Hallowell,”Proc. Ind. Acad. Sci., 1938,8, 63–78.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Slotopolsky, B. “Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Verstümmelungs und Regeneration. svorgange am Lacertilier Schwanze,” Viertelj,Nat-Ges. Zurich, 1921,66, 39–48.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Sood, Maheshwar Singh “A peculiar case of caudal abnormality inHemidactylus flaviviridis Rüppel,”Proc. Ind. Acad. Sci., 1939,9, 316–22.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Smith, Malcolm, A.The Fauna of British India including Ceylon and Burma: Reptilia and Amphibia; London, 1935, 2.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Stuart, G. A. D. “Abnormal Tail in a lizard Hemidactylus gleadovii,”Jour. Bomb. Nat. Hist. Soc., 1908,18, 688–89.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Terni, T. “La rigenerazione dei simpatico nella coda regenerata dei Sauri,”Monitore zool. ital. Siena, 1922,33, 58–62.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Tornier, G. “Über experimentell erzeugte dreischwanzige Eidechsen and Doppelgliedmassen von Molchen,”Zool. Anzeig., 1897, Band20, 356.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    - “Über Schwanzregeneration und Doppelschwänze bei Eidechsen,”Sitzungsber. Gesell. Naturfor. Freunde, Berlin, 1897, 59–64.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Werner, F. Über die Schuppenbekleidung des regenerierten Schwanzes bei Eidechsen,”SB. Akad. Wiss. Wien. math-naturw-Kl., 1896,105, Abt. 1, 123 ff.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    - “Selbstverstümmelung bei Heusschrecken,”Zool. Anz., 1892.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    — “Selbstverstümtnelung und Regeneration des Eidechsensch-wanzes,”Wein Wissen fur Alle., 1910,10, 17–18.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    White, Charles Powell “Regeneration of the Lizard’s Tail,”Jour. Path. Bact., 1925,28, 63–68. (Report of Brit. Assoc. Advancement Science, Manchester, 1915, 472–73).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Woodland, W. N. F. “Some observations on caudal autotomy and regeneration in the Gecko (Hemidactylus flaviviridis Rüppel) with notes on the tails of Sphenodon and Pygopus,”Quart. Jour. Micr. Sci., 1920,65, Pt. 1, 63–100.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Academy of Sciences 1948

Authors and Affiliations

  • Syed Muzammil Ali
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologyBirla CollegePilani

Personalised recommendations