48 THE UNIVERSITY SCIENCE BULLETIN. 



No. 2 of the preceding table has a quite thick deposit of cement; 

 that of No. 1 has been dissolved off. A second molar (M2), which 

 belongs with No. 2, has also a deposit of cement. 



The two upper milk-molars are each worn only slightly on its 

 front lobe. One (pi. I, fig. 8) has the anterior face broken off, but 

 it was evidently somewhat smaller than the other tooth. Both 

 have prominent external styles, front, median and posterior. 

 The edges of the anterior and median are directed pretty strongly 

 forward. The middle of the outer face of each lobe forms a promi- 

 nent rounded ridge. 



Measurements of upper milk-molars in millimeters. 



Tooth. Height. Length Length Width 



*• of summit. near root. at base. 



1 43 45± 32 23 



2 45 48 32 23 



Of the three lower third milk-molars, two belong to the left 

 side, one to the right. One of those of the left side is in a fragment 

 of the jaw (pi. II, fig. 6), and it seems to have belonged to the 

 same individual as the tooth of the right side. Each has a little 

 accessory column, 15 mm. high, just behind the median style of 

 the inner face. This column is absent on the other tooth of the 

 left side. The height of the milk-molar figured is 43 mm.; the 

 length at the summit, 54 mm. ; near the base, 40 mm.; width at the 

 base, 16 mm. 



On Spring creek there were obtained two upper phalanges of 

 camels. They pertained probably to the front limbs. The fol- 

 lowing measurements are given to aid in making comparisons 

 with other like materials. 



Measurements of phalanges in millimeters. 



No. 1. No. 2. 



Length along outer border 130 115 



Width across the upper articulatory surface 49 . ■ • ■ ■ 



Fore-and-aft diameter at middle of length 29 . 5 24 . 5 



Side-to-side diameter at middle of length 23 21 



Width across lower articular surface 38 32 



Cams occidentalis '^ Richardson. 



In the collection is an injured lower right first molar of a wolf 

 which was found on Spring creek, near Meade. This tooth is re- 

 ferred with some doubt to the species above mentioned. Un- 

 fortunately, the outer face of the principal cone and that of the 

 anterior cone have been split off and lost; also the front border of 

 the anterior cone is missing. Comparison of the tooth has been 



