Holland: Fossil Mammals. 229 



two in each interval, almost touching each other, and rising to a 

 height sufficient to make their upper surfaces subject to the same 

 wear as the transverse ridges. The anterior tooth was much smaller 

 and only the roots remain imbedded in the alveole. The shape and 

 the curvature of this fragment show that the animal had a short lower 

 jaw, the first tooth of the series being only removed at its anterior 

 margin a relatively short distance from the symphysis. 



The structure of the teeth, so far as preserved in this particular 

 specimen, seems to confirm the statement made by Schlesinger^° that 

 the South American species representing the group are more nearly 

 related to M. angiistidens than to other European species. However, 

 the apparent shortness of the lower jaw seems to indicate a nearer 

 approach to M. americanuni than apparently is the case with other 

 remains which have been described from South America, most of 

 which have been referred to Cope's genus Dihelodon. The specific 

 reference to any of the species, which have been .described from the 

 South American Pleistocene, does not seem possible, and it may be 

 said with certainty that the specimen undoubtedly is not conspecific 

 with M. hoUvianus or M. chilensis of Phillippi, and certainly not with 

 the species described from the Pliocene by other writers, and which 

 have been, as already pointed out, referred to Dibelodon. It is quite 

 probable that we are dealing in this case with a hitherto undescribed 

 brachygnathous form, and at the risk, perhaps, of creating a synonym, 

 I venture to propose for it the specific name M. ivaringi, in honor of 

 the collector of these remains. 



Another fragment is the distal extremity of the right tibia of a 

 Mastodon of considerable size, No. 11033^. This bone shows a fresh 

 fracture and undoubtedly more of the specimen might have been 

 recovered, had the workmen realized the value of the material which 

 they were taking up. 



Genus? sp.? 



There is a fragment of a tooth which suggests in a very general 

 way that it may have belonged to a Proboscidean, (No. 11033/)- but 

 I am not able to identify it with anything heretofore figured or de- 

 scribed. Mr. Peterson has in conversation urged that it may possibly 

 be a part of the tooth of a young Mastodon, but I disagree with him. 



^^ Schlesinger, Die Maslodonten des K. K. N aturhistorischen Hofmusetims, Denk- 

 schriften des K. K. Naturhistorischen Hofmuseums, Band I, Geologische-Pala- 

 ontologische Reihe I, 191 7, pp. 229-230. 



