262 
"8. Dicotyzes rorquatus, Cuy. Collared Peccary (?). 
A skull, with the following note, has been received :—‘‘ Esmeral- 
das, Nov. 1859. Tatabara. This is a species of Collared Peccary 
(D. torquatus), baving the collar, but is a very different colour in 
all other parts. It is more a solitary than gregarious animal; when 
hard pressed, retreats to its den, which is constructed beneath masses 
of dead vines. Feeds on palm-nuts, and grubs in the earth like a 
pig.” Mr. Fraser then goes on to observe, that in consequence of a 
strange idea of the natives, that if seasoning were added to the meat, 
or the latter boiled in a pot with a lid to it, their dogs would become 
for evermore useless for the hunt, they refused to allow him any 
eye of one of these animals, excepting the skull, after they had done 
with it. 
Mr. Waterton, speaking of the Peccary of Demerara, says, — 
“Three or four hundred of them herd together, and traverse the 
wilds in all directions in quest of roots and fallen seeds.” Mr. 
Fraser’s note would seem to refer to quite a different animal from 
this. 
9. DicoryLes ALBIROSTRIS, Ill. (?) ‘* White-lipped Peceary.”’ 
—Fraser, MS. Notes. 
D. labiatus, Schomb. Ann. Nat. Hist. v. 402. 
Of this species, obviously distinet from the last, a skull and ac- 
companying note are the only indications. Mr. Fraser says, ‘‘ White- 
lipped Peccary ; Xivarro name Und-paqui,—und meaning ‘ great,’ 
and paqui the name of the Collared Peccary, which is found in 
Gualaquiza.”’ 
10. TAMANDUA TETRADACTYLA, Linn. sp. 
Myrmecophaga tetradactyla, Linn. Syst. Nat. xii. 
Tamandua tetradactyla, Less. 
Myrmecophaga bivittata, Geoff. 
The note which accompanies this beautiful specimen is as fol- 
lows :— Esmeraldas, Nov. 1859. Aso milero. Said to subsist on 
ants, bees, their honey, and other insects, and to live among the 
branches of trees,—not on the ground. It is eaten by these people, 
who are a very distinct race from any I have seen elsewhere.” 
11. HesprerRomMys MACULIPES, Pictet ? 
I am not able to determine this species with certainty, and prefer 
to leave it undecided for the present, merely noting that it is closely 
related to the H. maculipes of M. Pictet, but nevertheless differs 
sufficiently from it to excite a suspicion that it may prove to be of a 
distinct species. 
12. HesprEROMYS ARVICOLOIDES, Pictet. 
Although M. Pictet has himself referred this species to the H. 
renggeri of Mr. Waterhouse, I find M. Wagner subsequently giving 
