1 86 FIELD COLUMBIAN MUSEUM ZOOLOGY, VOL. XI. 



Peromyscus dyselius. 



Peromyscus dyselius. Elliot, Pub. Field Columb. Mus., 1898, i, 

 p. 207, Zool. Elliot, Syn. N. Am. Mamm., 1901, p. 138. 

 Two examples from Grant's Pass, Oregon. 



RHITHRODONTOMYS. 

 Rhithrodontomys longicaudus. 



Rhithrodontomys longicaudus. Baird, Mamm. N. Am., 1857, p. 

 451. Elliot, Syn. N. Am. Mamm., 1901, p. 151. 



Eleven specimens: i, Nicasio; 8, Petaluma (topotypes); i, Mendo- 

 cino; i, Eureka, California. 



Eureka, I believe, is the most northerly locality in which this 

 species has been obtained. 



Rhithrodontomys klamathensis? 



Rhithrodontomys klamathensis. Merr. , N. Am. Faun., No. 16, 

 1899, p. 93. Elliot, Syn. N. Am. Mamm., 1901, p. 152. 



One specimen from Grant's Pass, Oregon. 



General character: Smaller than R. klamathensis, tail and hind foot 

 shorter, rostrum long. 



Color: General color grayish buff; back of head and back heavily 

 lined with black causing the dorsal region to be almost black; narrow 

 lateral line ochraceous; under parts white, plumbeous of under fur 

 showing through; feet and hands white; tail above dusky, beneath 

 white, ears pale brown. 



Measurements: Total length, 130; tail vertebrae, 63; hind foot, 

 18; ear, 15; skull, occipito-nasal length, 21; Hensel, 15; zygomatic 

 width, ii ; interorbital constriction, 3; length of nasals, 8; palatal arch 

 to alveoli of incisors, 8; length of mandible, angle to alveoli of 

 incisors, 9. 



The only species that this form can be compared with is R. klama- 

 thensis, from central northern California and Klamath County, Oregon, 

 from which it differs in its smaller size and much shorter tail, and in 

 its darker coloration on upper parts. The specimen is a young adult, 

 and this may possibly account for the smaller measurements. I refer 

 it provisionally to R. klamathensis Merr. 



SUBFAM. NEOTOMIN.E. 



NEOTOMA. 

 Neotoma fuscipes. 



Neotoma fuscipes. Baird, Mamm. N. Am., 1857, p. 495. 

 Elliot, Syn. N. Am. Mamm. ,1901, p. 158. 



