io KM'I» AVDKUSI-V 



1892. Uipposiderus diadema (not Gooll.), Thomas, Ann. Mus, Civ. Genova 

 (2) X. p. 924. — Rlianió, Upper Burma (oneoCtlie specimens men- 

 tioned below). 



l'JU.x Ilipitosiderus lankadiva Kel., Knud Andeisen. Ann. & Mag. N. II. 

 (7) XVI. pp. 5nn-.5()2, 507 (1 Nov. I90.'3). — //. lankadira slwnvn 

 lo be dillerent from //. diadema. 



a, b. 9 imm., Q jun. (in ale). Bliamó, Upper Burma. Collected by Sr. Leo 

 nardo Fea (1885 and 1886). Genoa Museum. - Skulls of both spe- 

 cimens extracted. 



//. lankadiva is easily distiii^Miishcd from //. diadema (with 

 wliicli it lias till recoiitly Ih'cii confused) by the following' four 

 characters : — 



The upper aspect of the facial portion of the skull directly in 

 front of the sagittal crest (i. e. the region bordered 1)eliin(l by the 

 front of the sagittal crest and externally by the supraorbital ridges) 

 is distinctly convex or tiattened, not concave as in diadema. The 

 mesopterygoid space is narrower, the palation angle acute or 

 su})acute; in diadema the niesoj)terygoid space is broader, the 

 [)alation angle broadly rounded off. The upper border of the 

 posterior nose-leaf is trilobate, i. e. there is a median glol)ular 

 })rojection, separated on either side by a very distinct emargination 

 from the convex-margined lateral parts of the leaf; in diadema 

 the upper border of this leaf is almost evenly convex, as a segment 

 of the circumference of a circle. Of the three vertical ridges on 

 the front face of the posterior leaf, the lateral ones are (piite as 

 strong as (or, if anything, stronger llian) the median one; in 

 diadema the lateral ridges are always considerai)ly less prominent 

 than the median ridge , sometimes so much reduced as to l)e 

 almo.st obliterated; this difference; in the development of the ridges 

 is probably a consequence of the difference just mentioned in the 

 sha])e of tiu^ posterior leaf. — In addition to these points, the 

 cranial rostrum of H. lankadiva is comparatively narrowi'r, and 

 the ears comjiaratively smaller than in H. diadema. 



The above characterization is based on an examination of 7 

 II. lankadiva ((> skulls) and ;}!2 //. diadema (pv skulls). 



The sjUM'ies was hitherto known from Ceylon only (see my 

 paju'r, 1. s. c. , p. *)()1). It is therefore of much interest now to 

 liiid its range extended as far as iSurma. Tufortunately the only 

 two examples obtained by Leonardo Fea in this latter jilace ai-e 



