456 SCIENCE PROGRESS 



the families Typottheriidce, Interatheriidce, and Hegetotheriidce. A 

 considerable amount of work has likewise been devoted to 

 the elephant-group, on both sides of the Atlantic. In Nature 

 (vol. lxxviii. p. 443) Mr. Lucas has discussed the height of the 

 mammoth and its relatives, pointing out that, while the former 

 seldom exceeded nine feet, the allied Elephas columbi was one of 

 the biggest of all elephants, towering to thirteen feet or even 

 more. A contemporary note on a mastodon skeleton discovered 

 near Chester, U.S.A., in 1817, is published by Mr. E. V. Hovey 

 in the April issue of the Annals of the New York Academy ; 

 while Professor Capellini has described (Mem. Ac. Sci. Bologna, 

 ser. 6, vol. iv., 1907) the collection of remains of the same 

 genus in the museum at Bologna. Some of the large dinothere- 

 teeth, for which Professor Stefanescu has suggested the name of 

 Dinotherium gigantissimum, are discussed by that palaeontologist 

 in the Comptes Rendus of the tenth Geological Congress, held 

 in Mexico in 1906. Of more general interest is an account, 

 by Dr. R. S. Lull, of the evolution of the elephant-group, 

 originally published in the American Journal of Science, but 

 subsequently issued as a guide-book to the Peabody Museum 

 of Natural History. More important than all is a memoir by 

 Dr. C. W. Andrews, published in vol. cxcix. of the Philosophical 

 Transactions, on the skull and milk-dentition of the Egyptian 

 Eocene genus Palaomastodon, with observations on the mode 

 of replacement of the cheek-teeth in the Proboscideae generally. 

 Attention is specially directed to the gradual elimination of 

 deciduous premolars (of which three pairs were developed in 

 the earlier forms) ; while another feature of more than ordinary 

 interest is the gradual development of the great supinator 

 ridge of the humerus of modern elephants, of which no trace 

 is visible in the pigmy Eocene Mceritherium. 



In this place reference may be appropriately made to a paper 

 by Professor H. F. Osborn, published in the Bulletin of the 

 American Museum of Natural History (vol. xxiv. p. 265), in which 

 the author describes several apparently new types of Eocene 

 mammals on the evidence of remains obtained during the recent 

 American expedition to the Fayum. Unfortunately, these remains 

 are so fragmentary that little or no information can be gleaned 

 from them in several instances as to the systematic position 

 of the creatures to which they pertained. For two of these 

 problematical forms the new generic names Apidium and 



