BihliograpMcal Notices. 289 



mandible and its talons, the form of the occiput, the occasional 

 absence of the first cranial premolar, and approximation of the 

 second premolar to the canine. The author is disposed to believe 

 that the H. sinensis of Professor Owen may be referred to this species. 

 Hycena Colvini is also known from good materials, and is character- 

 ized by having the skull and mandible more slender than in H.felina, 

 by carnassial teeth of a more decided crocutine type, by the upper 

 true molar being tricuspidate, and other characteristics of the den- 

 tition. This species makes a marked approximation to the Ilycena 

 crocuia. It shows that Crocuta cannot conveniently be retained as 

 a separate genus ; and, as we have already noticed in other groups, 

 the development of the carnassial teeth is attended with the 

 diminished size of the first molar, or suppression of the first pre- 

 molar of the mandible. Hycena macrostoma is known from both 

 cranium and mandible : the first molar is large, the palate long 

 and narrow, the form of the posterior nares distinctive, the profile 

 of the sagittal crest is more convex than in allied forms. But while 

 the species is placed in the same genus with existing hysenas, it is 

 regarded as forming a link between that type and the allies of the 

 civets and dogs. From its slender and long jaws it is considered 

 likely that in its habits it maj'^ have more resembled the wolves than 

 the living hyaenas. Hucena sivalensis is not exactly the species 

 indicated by Mr. Bose from which a good many specimens are 

 separated. Its affinities are towards the species allied to Hycena 

 striata. It has the first molar relatively larger than in the H. ma- 

 crostoma, the premolar shorter and wider. From the large number 

 of species present, Mr. Lydekkcr is inclined to doubt whether the 

 characters which are made use of in defining the species have really 

 the value claimed for them. The author arranges the species 

 according to the specialization of the teeth, Hya;na crocuta standing 

 at one end of the series, with the third lobe of the fourth premolar 

 large and the first molar small; and in the mandible the first 

 premolar is absent, the cusp of the first molar absent, the talon 

 small, and the second molar absent. At the other end is Hycena 

 cluvretis, in which the cusp is present, and the talon large in the first 

 molar of the mandible. The author shows, first, a gradual increase 

 in the intervening species of the third lobe of the fourth premolar ; 

 secondly, a decrease in size of the first molar ; thirdly, a disappear- 

 ance of the second molar of the mandible and the first premolar ; 

 fourthly, a decrease in the talon and a decrease and eventual loss 

 of the inner cusp of the first mandibular molar ; and, fifthl_y, an 

 increasing width of the premolar teeth. The carnassials also be- 

 come larger as the series approaches Hycena crocuta. The author 

 draws attention to the parallelism which exists between these 

 modifications and those seen among the dogs, cats, and, in a minor 

 degree, among the bears. 



The relationship between the lower Hyasnas and Ictitheriiim is so 

 close that the distinction between the Hytenida} and Viverrida) seems 

 almost to vanish, while a new genus, which is desci'ibed as Lcpthya'na, 

 brings the Hyaenidac closer to the Cats. Lcpthycena w;)s originally 



Ann. & Mag. N. Hist. Ser. 5. Vol. xiv. ' 22 



