PRODELPIIINU.S FRa-:NATU.S. 69 



<4i'ay species, called Dauphin a pctifcs pectomles. Gray {Catalof/ne, page 

 230) states that it was lioui JJaiula, Singapore, but on what autliority 

 1 have been uuable to determiue. In the tigure of the exterior the 

 pectoral fius are entirely too small. Tiie measurements in the text 

 agree well with those given by Lessou for B. malayanus. Further- 

 more, the skull figured on plate 23, figs. 7 and 8, very closely resem- 

 bles the skull which Schlegel identified with I), malayanus. It is a 

 little smaller and has rather smaller temporal fossie, but otherwise 

 agrees with Schlegel's skull in details of structure. 



From S'ich evidence as presents itself it seems to me probable that 

 Schlegel was correct in his identification, and that 1). malayanus Les- 

 son and />. hrevimanus Wagner are identical. 



That this species is distinct Irom P. attcnuatus, though closely related, 

 is apparently indicated by the differences in the proportions derived 

 from the measurements given on page 72. 



In 18G5 Gray, in the Catalogue, page 398, described a species under 

 the name of Clymene punctata from a specimen in the Public Museum, 

 Liverpool. Through the kindness of Mr. Moore, I examined the orig- 

 inal material upon which this species was based. My time was so 

 limited, however, that I could only examine and measure the skull 

 and note the colors in the original sketch of the exterior. 



The skull very closely resembles P. fra'nafus both in size and pro- 

 l)ortions, and I thiuk there can be little doubt that it is identical with 

 the latter specifically. The exterior is as Gray figured it (datalorjue, 

 page 398, fig. 101). The upper parts (see diagnosis, p. 1G6) are black, the 

 under surface, the lower jaw, pectoral fin, and the band over the tail 

 are very dark slate-gray. There are numerous white spots on the 

 sides. The measurements and locality are correctly quoted by Gray 

 from the original. 



The exterior in this species is plainly different from that of F. malay- 

 anus, while, as already stated, the skull is precisely like P. froenatus. 



The skull of P. atienuatus closely resembles two others, namely, one 

 called I), psciulodelphis Wiegmann, in the Leyden Museum, and the type 

 Steno capensis Gray. I examined in the Leyden Museum a skull which 

 in all probability is that leferred to by Schlegel in the Ahhandlungen 

 as I), pseudodelphis. It closely resembles Gray's *V. attcnuata, and if 

 Schlegel's identification is correct, I), psenciodelpliis would, therefore, 

 seem to be identical with Gray's species. If the identification can be 

 l)roven correct, ])sendodelphis would supplant attcnuata as the name of 

 the species under consideration. 



The type skull of Steno capensis, Gray, scarcely differs at all from S. 

 aftenuata except in size. It is about an inch longer than the type-skull 

 of the latter species. Professor Flower holds that the two species are 

 "not distinguishable" {Char, and Div., p. 498), and there is every reason 

 to regard this opinion as the correct one. 



