General Notes. 143 



Cariis brasilieyisis Schinz ;il.so refers exclusively to the Agouarachay and 

 does not supersede Maximilian's azarae as supposed by Allen * and 

 Thomas. Examination of the description by Schinz shows that it is 

 based wholly on the Agouarachay , in fact being scarcely more than an 

 abridged translation of the characters and measurements given by Azara. 

 This name therefore becomes a synonym of Fischer's gymnocercus , as 

 does also the recent azarica Thomas. Canis azarae of Maximilian will 

 thus stand for the crab-eating dog of eastern Brazil selected by Thomas 

 as the genotype of Cerdocyon. The synonymy of the two species will be 

 as follows: 



Canis (Pseudalopex) gymnocercus Fischer. 



L' Agouarachay, Azara, Quad. Paraguay, I, pp. 317-323, 1801. 

 Procyon gymnocercus Fischer, Zoognosia, III, pp. 178-179, 1814, 

 Canis hrasiliensis Schinz, Das Thierreich, I, p. 220, 1821. 

 Canis azarae of various authors; not of Maximilian. 

 Pseudalopex azarica Thomas, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. (8), XIII, pp. 

 350-360, 1914. 



Canis (Cerdocyon) azarae Maximilian. 



Canis azarae Maximilian, Beitr. Naturg. Bras., II, pp. 338-343, 1826. 

 Cerdocyon guaraxa Smith, Jard. Nat. Lib., Mamm., IX, pp. 262-263, 



1839. 

 Canis brachy teles Blainville, Osteogr. Mamm. (g. Canis), pp. 30, 32, 47, 



151, fasc. XIII, 1843. 

 ? Canis melampus\ Wagner, Wiegmann's Archiv. f. Naturg., I, p. 358, 



1843. 

 Canis melanostomus Wagner, Wiegmann's Archiv. f. Naturg., I, p. 358, 



1843. 

 ? Canis thous angulensis i Thomas, Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist. (7), XII, 



p. 460, Oct., 1903. 

 Canis thous riograndensis von Ihering, Rev. Mus. Paulista, VIII, p. 217, 



May, 1911. 



— Wilfred H. Osgood. 



•Mamm. Patagonia, p. 158, footnote, 1905. 



t Whether this name is synonymous with azarae or not is doubtful; possibly it 

 should apply to the form described from the same region (Matto Grosso) as Cerdocyon 

 mimax (Thomas. Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist. (8), XIII, p. 3.55, 1914). 



t The form to which this name applies is of somewhat uncertain status, since it is 

 probable that it ranges into the state of Rahia, which, being the only specific locality 

 mentioned by Maximilian, may be regarded as the type locality of azarae. 



