ON A PLEISTOCENE CAVE DEPOSIT— GIDLEY. 



99 



also is less expanded at base, with more perpendicular anterior face. 

 The metaconid is larger and higher placed, while the protoconid is 

 less broad and full, as seen from the inner side. The carnassials as a 

 whole suggest those of the jackal, fox, or coyote rather than those of 

 the wolf. The anterior functional premolars are relatively small and 

 have no accessory tubercles, while 7)4 is full}^ as heavy and robust as 

 in the wolves and carries, besides the usual secondary cusp, an extra 

 posterior basal cusp in addition to the cingulum, as in the jackals and 

 coyotes. In the wolves and dogs (see figs. 4, 4a) p^ has but one 

 secondary cusp and a cingulum heel, but P2 ^^^^ Pa usually have a well- 

 developed posterior secondary cusp. 



Fig. 3.— Canis armbrusteki. 



Cat. No. 7661, portion of right lower jaw. 

 SIZE. a. Superior \qEW, nat. size. 



Outer view, 2-3 nat. 



ADDITIONAL NOTES ON THE LOWER TEETH OF THE CANIDS. 



The carnassials in the canids, except within the narrow limits of 

 individual variation, are very constant in character and present 

 certain modifications which for the most part readily determine the 

 group to which they belong. These, taken together with the com- 

 bined characters of the other teeth, are clearly diagnostic, not only of 

 the various larger groups of the family, but even of groups now 

 included in the genus Canis. Thus in the true wolves and domestic 

 dogs the heel of the lower carnassial is short (being less than one- 

 fourth the total length of the crown) and is narrower than the 

 talonid; the paracoid is relatively large, with antero-posteriorly 

 lengthened base, so that the anterior face slopes backward at a con- 



