130 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. tol. 45. 



behind orbits but perfect in front and with complete lower jaw. 

 (The skull figured by Schlegel and Miiller is perfect. It is possible 

 that the posterior portion of their figure was made up by analogy 

 from a Tupaia skuU. Anderson figures a perfect skull but I suspect 

 he copied Schlegel and Miiller's figures, transposing their lateral view 

 from right to left, and apparently the dorsal view also in the process 

 of lithographing. The skull was very incomplete in 1888 according 

 to Jentink.^ (See Plate 5.) 



Geographic distribution. — Known only from the type-locality, but 

 undoubtedly occuring elsewhere in Borneo. See B on map on page 

 133. 



Diagnosis. — Differs from Dendrogale frenata mainly in the smaller 

 size of hind feet, and if the illustrations of the skull are accurate, in 

 having much narrower nasals; and tail above different in color from 

 body. 



Color. ^ — "Underparts and under surface of tail dull light ochra- 

 ceous-buff. Upperparts the same but much darkened dorsally by 

 admixture of a dark broccoli brown. Tail an indefinite dark tawny 

 brown above, line of demarkation on tail sharp, but colors not form- 

 ing any strong contrast. Median line of tail below not different 

 from rest of its lower surface. At middle the hairs alongside of tail 

 are 5 mm. in length, at tip they are 10 mm. Outer surface of legs 

 slightly less yellowish than sides of body. Feet dark. A faint dark 

 shade passes from muzzle through eye to ear; above, it is bordered by 

 a light area 3 mm. wide behind eye, less distinct in front. Below, 

 the light border may be detected behind eye, but not in front." 



Slcull and teeth. — If the illustrations are to be relied on the skull of 

 Dendrogale murina would appear to bo much more angular and with 

 better developed temporal ridges than that of D. frenata, and to 

 have much slenderer nasals. The teeth in the two species are prob- 

 ably essentially the same; their measurements agree almost exactly. 



Measurements.' — ' ' Head and body, 115 mm. ; tail, 110; hind foot (dis- 

 torted), 22 (all from mounted specimen); least distance from orbit 

 to tip of premaxillary 13.6 (13.8);^ least interorbital breadth 9.8 (10); 

 zygomatic breadth (approximately) 17; mandible, 22 (22); max- 

 illar}^ tooth row (entire including incisors) 17.4." The maxillary 

 tooth row, including incisors, in the illustration is the same or nearly 

 so, and the measurement of the maxillary tooth row without the in- 

 cisors in the illustration is 12, the same as the maxillary tooth row 

 of D. frenata. 



RemarTcs.- — It is unfortunate that direct comparisons of Dendrogale 

 frenata and D. murina have not been made. The two animals 



1 Mus. Hist. Nat. Pays-Bas Cat. Osteol. Mamm., vol. 12, 18S8. 



s Quoted from manuscript notes made by Mr. G. S. Miller, jr. 



3 Measurements in parentheses are those made by Mr. Miller or the type of T. frenata. 



