Probably the most common pattern of dorsal coloration consists of eight or ten dark stripes (fig. 1, B). In snakes having this pattern the stripes on the 1st, 3rd, 4th and 7th rows are always present and prominent, although those on the 1st and 3rd rows sometimes are present as discontinuous rows of dashes. The ground-color from the venter to the 7th row is usually pale brown, and that dorsally between the 7th rows on each side is usually a darker, medium brown. A series of spots or dashes or a continuous stripe is sometimes present on the 8th row of scales. Snakes having a larger number of dark stripes and more dark pigmentation occur in the southern part of the range. There seems to be a cline from paler snakes having fewer stripes in the north to darker snakes in the south. [Illustration: FIG. 3. Patterns of dorsal coloration at mid-body of juveniles of two sympatric species of _Conophis_. A. _C. lineatus dunni_ (MCZ 49794) from Tegucigalpa, Honduras. B. _C. pulcher_ (MCZ 49791) from Tegucigalpa, Honduras. Approximately × 1.] In juveniles, there are six or eight black stripes boldly contrasting with a white or pale tan ground-color (fig. 3, A). The first pair of stripes is on the 1st scale-row; the second pair, on the 3rd and 4th scale-rows; the third pair, on the 7th row; the fourth pair (when present), on the 8th row. Ontogenetic change in coloration consists of the splitting of the second pair of dark stripes in the juvenile. Additional stripes may form later on the 2nd and/or 10th rows of dorsal scales. _Remarks._--Savage (1949:483-486) stated that his specimen of _C. l. dunni_ (from Honduras) resembled _l. lineatus_ in having secondary stripes on the 2nd and 8th rows and dark pigmentation throughout the length of the 2nd row. As can be seen from the preceding discussion of variation, a specimen having this color pattern is clearly within the observed range of variation of _l. dunni_. The specimen in no way represents an intergrade between _C. l. dunni_ and _l. lineatus_. A specimen in the British Museum (Natural History), catalogued in 1853 (no. 53.2.4.16), has the locality listed as "México." Since this specimen is of _C. l. dunni_ and this subspecies occurs only south of México, the locality must be considered erroneous; possibly the locality as recorded referred only to the fact that the specimen came from tropical Middle America.