38 General Notes. 



On the proper application of the name Cambarus carolinus 



Erichson. 



In 1846, Erichson applied the name Cambarus carolinus to a species 

 of crayfish which had been collected by Cabanis in western North 

 Carolina. His description was very brief, and it was with some hesita- 

 tion that Hagen, in 1870, applied the name to specimens from the same 

 region which seemed to possess the characters ascribed by Erichson to 

 the species. Erichson's type was at the time inaccessible to Hagen as 

 it had been deposited in the Berlin Museum. A few years later he 

 was able to examine this type and in a note made at the time ex- 

 pressed the view that Erichson's C. carolinus was the same as his 

 (Hagen's) C. bartonii. In view of this doubt, Faxon, in his Revision of 

 the Astacida?, proposed the application of the name C. Jiac/enianus to 

 Hagen's species in case it should prove to differ from Erichson's G. 

 carolinus. 



Through the kindness of Dr. Thiele of the Berlin Museum I have 

 recently been furnished with an excellent photograph of Erichson's type 

 together with drawings of the first abdominal appendages and the right 

 chela. They show that the species is neither G. carolinus Hagen nor G. 

 bartonii Fabricius, but G. dubius Faxon. It will be necessary, therefore, 

 to substitute in most of the writings on this subject G. Jiagenianus Faxon 

 for C. carolinus, and G. carolinus Erichson for G. dubius Faxon. 



The extension of the range is slight as G. carolimis Erich, {^dubius 

 Fax.) has been collected in abundance in southwestern West Virginia, 

 and adjacent portions of Virginia. — W. P. Hay. 



Note on the names of the genera of Peccaries. 



My attention has been called to the nomenclature of the Peccaries and 

 my opinion asked. In my Arrangement of the Families of Mammals, 

 in 1873, I adopted Gray's genera Dicotyles and Notophorus, having 

 ascertained that the two groups were differentiated not only by their 

 skulls, but also by the leg bones. Recently (Proc. Biol. Soc, Wash., 

 XIV, p. 119, 1901), Dr. Merriam has also adopted the two genera, 

 but uses Fischer's name Tayassu (1814) for the genus Notophorus of 

 Gray and gives a new one {Olidosus) to the Dicotyles of Gray. 



It seems to me that we can with propriety retain both names, Tayassu 

 and Dicotyles. Dr. Merriam quite properly substitutes Tayassu for 

 Notophorus as both the nominal species of Fischer (pecari and patira) 

 belong to the genus to which the latter name was given. 



The name Dicotyles, however, originallj^ covered species of both genera 

 and Gray was justified by general usage in restricting the name as he 

 did, although he would have done better to have given a new name to 



