GRAMPUS GKISEUS. 



129 



si)ecies iu which the color is veiy variable), in osteological details aud 

 proportions, aud in the number of teeth (which number is also variable). 

 I believe, therefor, that there can be no reasonable doubt but that the 

 .grampuses of American and European waters are identical. 



Grampus souverbiamis Fischer. 



On page 209, M. Fischer briugs together the measurements of the 

 IiMigth of ten skulls of European specimens. The largest of these is 

 515mm long, and as this is presumably from a full-grown male, he ques- 

 tions whether another skull 530'"'" long (and having indications of 

 teeth in the upper jaw) nia\' not be that of a distinct and larger species. 

 He gives this skull provisionally the name of G. ^Sou verb i anus. But an 

 examination of the tables of measurements on p. 132, shows that six of 

 thirteen American skulls measured exceed 515'""', while the remaining 

 seven stand in a practically evenly-graded series below that length. I 

 do not think, therefore, that the skull called G. Souverbianus can be set 

 apart on account of its size. Its proportions are as follows : 



Measurements. 



Total length 



From extremity of beak to anterior wall of nasal fossa . . 



From extremity of beak to maxillar.y notches 



Breadth of head, between the lostorbital process of the 



frontal 



Breadtli o f the beak at its base 



Breadth of the beak at its middle 



G. Souverbi- 

 anus. 

 From Fischer. 



530 

 H7() 

 295 



375 

 235 



150 



Cape Cod. 



G. griseus. 



u. n. 



Mm. 



*540 

 390 

 299 



378 

 224 

 138 



* This i.s measured from the inferior margin of the foramen magnum, as seems to be 

 the case in all of M. Fischer's measurements, and not from the surface of the condj-les 

 as in mine. 



The teeth in G. Souverbianus are 3-2 ; in the Cape Cod specimen, 5-4. 



As regards the teeth in the upper jaw Fischer remarks: 



Ou voit des alveoles an niaxillaire siiperienr, maisleur foud est partie combl6. 



In all the largest skulls in the national collection there are signs of 

 these rudimentary alveoli, but it is my opinion that they are made by 

 the pressure of the mandibular teeth against the margin of maxilhe, and 

 that they do not indicate the previous i)resence of teeth. Indeed, in 

 skull No. IGISO, in which the mandible is present, it is demonstrable 

 that these pits are made by the mandibular teeth. 



The only character, therefore, brought forward by Fischer as distin- 

 guishing the type of G. Souverbiamis is the breadth of the beak, and no 

 one, I think, who examines the comparative measurements on p. 132, 

 will regard this of sufficient importance to entitle the skull to a distinct 

 specific name. I believe it to be only an oldish individual of G. griseus. 



Grampus Ricliaidsoni Gray. 



At first sight the measurements appear to show that this skull is 

 separable in -that it has a narrow beak and narrow intermaxiIl;Te, but in 

 18378— Bull. 36 D 



