4-0 REPORT ON ZOOLOGY, MDCCCXLIII. 



in this, that they are without the spines. They were sent 

 from Bahia. 



(a) Nelomys pictus (p. 203, tab. i and ii) : feet altogether as in Nelomys ; 

 upper molars almost exactly as in Dactylomys, lower precisely as in Nelomys ; 

 ears rounded, as broad as long ; tail thick, with tolerably large scales, which 

 arc concealed by the long and dense hair ; colour curiously variegated with 

 brown and -white. Head, nape, and upper part of neck dirty white ; an 

 elongated brown spot on the vertex, tapering off towards the point of the 

 nose. Back dark brown, which colour descends in a baud as far as the forearm. 

 Sides, belly, and hind feet, dirty white. Body 10", tail 12", hind feet 1" 9'". 



(b) Echinomys inermis (p. 207, tab. iiiaud v, figs. 3-8) ; dentition, like that 

 of Nelomys, ears large, slightly emargiuate on the outer edge, feet moderately 

 long ; tail with scales like those of the Rat, but almost entirely concealed 

 by the long and abundant hair ; fur soft. The whole of the upper surface 

 tawny brown, sprinkled with dark brown ; under surface and inside of the 

 legs yellowish white ; tail black, in the first half the under side whitish. 

 Body 74", tail 6*", hind-foot 1" 8'". 



In the ' VerhaucU. dcr Schweiz. Naturf. GeseUsch.' Zu Altsdorf, 1842, 

 p. 192, there is a notice that Pictet had exhibited some Rodents, sent from 

 Bahia. "Three of these animals appeared to him to present tolerably marked 

 characters, so as to demand the institution of three new genera : (1) the 

 genus Platytlirix, allied to Echimys ; (2) the genus Ptecilomys, allied to 

 Dactilomys ; (3) the genus Oryctcromys, differing from the Rats only in 

 some details in the dentition, and strong nails on the fore feet." 



Lund now regards his Nelomys sulcidens as a species of Aulacodus, which 

 he names A. TemmincJcii. (Dauske Vidensk. Selsk. Afli. ix, p. 135.) This 

 junction appears to me to be very doubtful. 



MURINA. Burmeister supposes (Hallesche Literatur- 

 zeitung, 1843, p. 524) that, in the characteristics of the 

 Families, I had paid regard merely to the cranium, and 

 consequently had overlooked, in the Murma, two important 

 characters of the skeleton ; viz. the enormous elongation of 

 the spinous process of the second dorsal vertebra, and the 

 union inferiorly of the bones of the leg. 



I freely confess, that with the skeletons of the exceedingly numerous 

 species, or even genera, of the Mouse family, I am much in the position of 

 the fox with the grapes, since I have not been able to obtain most of them, 

 though I perceive from the very sparing notices given by others on the 

 osteological conformation of these animals, that even in larger collections 



