40 KNiri ANDER.'^EN 



The lypc, in tlic Calcutt.'i Museum, of tliis very rcin;irkal)lo 

 species is from Jolioi'o, Malay Peninsula. The individual obtained 

 )jy Dr. Dohrn is of much interest as lu'in^ only the second spe- 

 cimen (m record, and as showing' the ran<,'e of the species to 

 extend to Sumalra. 



The skull and dentition of Ch. johorensis were hitherto 

 undescribed, the affinities of the species therefore not quite clear. 



Skull. — So similar, in general shape and even in size, to 

 that of Ch. plicafus, Buch. Ham. (^), as to differ only in points 

 of very subordinate importance: — the upper aspect of the rostrum 

 is decidedly flatter, in plicatus markedly convex; the sagittal and 

 lambdoid crests less prominent, and the former not produced so 

 far forwards (individuals of the same age, of joliorensis and 

 plicatus, have been compared); the facial foramen, which is situated 

 directly in front of the anterior point of the sagittal crest, is, 

 owing to the shortness of this crest in johorensis , more Ijack- 

 wards in position than in plicatus; the anterior nares are not 

 directed so much upwards as in plicatus; the palate is slightly 

 narrower (as, on the whole, the skull is perhaps a trifle slenderer). 

 The premaxillary region as in plicatus (no inter-premaxillary 

 space; incisive foramina small and rounded; &c.). 



Teetii. — • Number and general characters of the teeth as in 

 Ch. plicatus: -^- incisors, -|- })remolars. Upper incisors conside- 

 rably shorter (vertical extent) , and stoutiu' at ])ase , than in 

 plicatus, but otherwise not differing; upper canines shorter; 

 anterior upper premolar smaller; the principal cusp (cusp ii) ot 

 posterior upper premolar shorter (not so much projecting beyond 

 the level of the molar cusps); molars quite as in plicatus. Lower 

 incisors as in plicatus (lateral much slenderer than median ])air~); 

 lower canines shorter (compare upper canines) ; anterior lower 

 premolar lower and markedly smaller than in plicatus: cross 

 section at l)ase in johorensis ratlun- smaller, in plicatus larger, 

 than that of posterior premolar. — All these details, it will easily 

 be seen, indicate only a small difference in the relative size of 

 the front teeth, and can be summarised in these few words: the 

 upper incisors, upper and lower canines, upper premolars, and 



(1) The skull of Ch. plicatus with which I have compared tliat or C/i.joiiorcnsis 

 of a Java specimen (cf ad., teeth unworn), Brit, Mus. no. 46. 4. 21. 21. 



