NO. 7 MAMMALIA FROM THE ALMY FORMATION GAZIN 7 



pared, for example, with P. dubius, which this form approaches in 

 length of lower molars. Moreover, although the trigonid is narrower 

 at its base than in P. dubius, the apices of the cusps are more widely 

 spaced transversely, and in Mi the paraconid is farther forward. In 

 M2, however, the paraconid is not farther forward with respect to 

 the metaconid than in P. dubius. 



The peculiarities outlined above tempt speculation on the possibility 

 that an undescribed genus is represented. I believe, however, that the 

 differences here noted are probably of no greater significance than 

 (and quite opposite in general tendency to) the markedly sloping 

 outer walls of lower cheek teeth seen in the P. jepsenl-P. anceps- 

 P. rex group, presumably no more than subgeneric in importance. 



MEASUREMENTS IN MILLIMETERS OF LOWER TEETH IN SPECIMENS OF 



Plesiadapis? pearcei 



U.S.N.M. 



No. 20787 U.S.N.M. 

 Type No. 20786 



Ml, anteroposterior diameter 3.1 3,2 



Ml, transverse diameter of trigonid 2.1 2.0 



Ml, transverse diameter of talonid 2.5 2.5 



Ma, anteroposterior diameter 3.4 



Mj, transverse diameter of trigonid 2.4 



Mj, transverse diameter of talonid 2.8 



CARPOLESTIDAE 



CARPOLESTES, cf. DUBIUS Jepsen, 1930 



Plate I, figure 4 



A carpolestid P4 (U.S.N.M. No. 21280) in the collection can be 

 closely matched in size by specimens of Carpolestes dubius. The tooth 

 shows a high, uniformly convex crest in lateral view with scarcely 

 discernible vertical ridges. There would appear to be about eight 

 feeble serrations in advance of the position of the heel which is broken 

 away. In lingual view the vertical ridges are a little more visible and 

 the height of the crown is less, but with possibly less difference in 

 height between the two sides than in the Polecat Bench material. The 

 posterior portion of the lingual surface is gently concave, whereas the 

 labial wall is slightly convex in vertical profile. In a dorsal view the 

 crown appears slightly bilobed with the greatest width across the 

 posterior portion. There is no distinct cingulum labially, and lingually 

 a cingulum is perhaps feebly defined posteriorly. 



The Almy tooth is distinctly larger and higher crowned than the 

 corresponding tooth in Carpodaptes haselae. It also has a greater 



