28 Bulletin Wisconsin Natural History Society. [Vol. 8, No. 1. 



Gulo luscus (Linnaeus). Wolverine. 



Gulo luscus Lapham, 1853 1 — Hoy, 1882. — Strong, 1883. — Hollister, 

 1909. 



Lutreola vison (Schreber). Mink. 



Putorius vison Lapham, 1853. — Strong, 1883. — Jackson, 1908. 

 Lutreola vison Snyder, 1902. 



Putorius cicognanii (Bonaparte). Bonaparte's Weasel. 

 Mustela pusilla Lapham, 1853.- 

 Putorius noveboracensis Lapham, 1853. 3 

 Putorius vulgaris Strong, 1883. 4 

 Putorius cicognanii Strong, 1883. — Jackson, 1908. 

 Putorius cicognani Snyder, 1902. 



Putorius rixosus ailegheniensis Bhoads. Alleghany Weasel. 



Putorius rixosus ailegheniensis Ward, 1907; 1909. — Jackson, 1908. 



Putorius noveboracensis Emmons. New York Weasel. 

 Putorius ricliardsonii Strong, 1883. 



Putorius noveboracensis Strong, 1883 5 — Snyder, 1902. — Jackson, 

 1908. 



Mustela americana Turton. Marten. 

 Mustela inartes Lapham, 1853. 

 Mustela americana Strong, 1853. — Jackson, 1908. 



1 Fxtralimital record. Following' the narrative of Long's second expe- 

 dition, on which the record is based, I find that the only wolverine mentioned 

 was killed in what is now Alberta. During the time spent by the explorers 

 in what is now Wisconsin, enroute from Chicago to Fort Crawford (Prairie 

 du Chien), but three quadrupeds were seen, one deer, one wolf, and a badger. 



- It is difficult to fix some of the names used for weasels in early lists 

 to any species. Mustela pusilla De Kay (not of Baird) is a synonym of 

 Putorius cicognanii, and is probably the species meant in the present case, 

 though the locality mentioned, Racine, makes it possible that the reference 

 should be placed under P. noveboracensis, the common species at that place. 



3 1 believe Lapham's reference to P. noveboracensis also belongs under 

 cicognanii. The record is extralimital at any rate and of very little conse- 

 quence. P. noveboracensis does not occur in the region referred to, while 

 P. cicognanii is generally distributed and abundant throughout the district. 



4 Strong evidently included all the names in use for the weasels of eastern 

 North America without much of an idea of the species. Some of the duplica- 

 tions may be attributed to Strong's having accepted and published names 

 furnished by Hoy without knowing that they referred to species which he 

 had already included under other names. The same complications exist in 

 other groups in Strong's list, especially among the bats. 



5 The great sexual difference in weasels, not well understood at the time, 

 may have misled Strong into listing four weasel names where he probably 

 had but two species. 



