34 Records of the Indian Museum. [Vol. Ill, 



soles. Since this species has been excluded from a recent compila- 

 tion of the genus Gerbillus (or Tatera [13]), it is probable that the 

 name given in the Fauna of British India has not been accepted. 

 The reason for this is not obvious, for the skull of the species is 

 scarcely to be distinguished from those of the Gerhilli found through- 

 out India. 



Qta. I— 



The collection contains a number of Nesokice which, with one 

 exception, ver}' closely resemble one another in size, proportions 

 and quality of fur. It has not been found easy to identify these 

 with any particular species of Nesokia. Thej^ are a different race 

 from the Ncsokics found in the Amritsar district. They can best 

 be described in comparison with these latter. The fur is longer, 

 much more abundant, and of a lighter shade in the Quetta 

 race. 



Unfortunately measurements of the freshly killed specimens 

 are not available, but it is likely that the}' are somewhat larger and 

 have a slightly shorter tail than the Amritsar rats. One of them 

 is shown in plate ii, fig. i. The feet are certainly not larger than 

 those of the other race. The skulls of the two races are indistin- 

 guishable, the large incisor teeth and the short palatine foramen 

 being the peculiar feature in both. Judging from the stuffed 

 specimens the average measurements of the race seem to be about 

 180, 95, 30, 18. 



Qta. 2 — 



One specimen differs from the others in two respects : the fur 

 contains numerous long bristles 45 mm. in length, and the tail is 

 somewhat longer. The latter point is not of much importance, but 

 the former constitutes a striking difference, for all the others are 

 quite devoid of bristles. Because of these peculiarities, it was at 

 first sight suspected of being a Gunomys, but examination of the 

 skull shows that it is a typical Nesokia, that is to say, it has a short 

 palatine foramen. 



In regard to the question of the absence of Mus rattus from 

 Quetta, the following passage may be quoted from the Bo^nhay 

 N. H. S. Journal, vol. xviii. No. 4, 1908, page 942 : " Mr. Ander- 

 son enquired if anyone had seen in Quetta the Indian house 

 rat (Mus rattus). The reply was in the negative." The question 

 was put to the members of the Baluchistan Natural History 

 vSociety at Quetta. 



The Rats of the Himalayas. 



These must be considered together, for they collectively pre- 

 sent certain differences from the rats of the plains. Moreover, 

 there are among th^m several distinct races which are easily 

 recognisable from one another. This enquiry has shown that the 



