﻿466 
  PROCEEDINGS 
  OF 
  THE 
  NATIONAL 
  MUSEUM 
  vol. 
  103 
  

  

  Nomenclature 
  

  

  The 
  generic 
  name 
  Tapirus 
  employed 
  here 
  is 
  from 
  Brunnich, 
  1771. 
  

   Scopoli's 
  use 
  of 
  Tapirus 
  in 
  1777 
  is 
  next 
  available. 
  For 
  rejection 
  of 
  

   Brisson's 
  Tapirus 
  and 
  other 
  Latin 
  names 
  in 
  his 
  "Regnum 
  Animale," 
  

   1762, 
  see 
  Hopwood 
  (Proc. 
  Zool. 
  Soc. 
  London, 
  vol. 
  117, 
  pp. 
  534-536, 
  

   1947). 
  Tapirus 
  Brunnich 
  is 
  adopted 
  here 
  on 
  the 
  same 
  authority, 
  a 
  

   copy 
  of 
  the 
  "Zoologiae 
  Fimdamenta 
  . 
  . 
  . 
  ," 
  where 
  the 
  generic 
  name 
  

   appears, 
  not 
  being 
  available 
  in 
  this 
  country. 
  Merriam 
  (Science, 
  new 
  

   ser., 
  vol. 
  1, 
  p. 
  376, 
  1895) 
  employed 
  an 
  ingenious 
  device 
  in 
  his 
  attempt 
  

   to 
  validate 
  Tapirus 
  Brisson. 
  He 
  combined 
  his 
  own 
  with 
  Brisson's 
  

   (Regnum 
  Animale, 
  p. 
  81, 
  1762) 
  monomial 
  specific 
  Latin 
  designation 
  

   for 
  "Le 
  Tapir" 
  to 
  produce 
  the 
  custom-made 
  binomial 
  Tapirus 
  tapirus. 
  

   This 
  combination 
  is 
  valid, 
  to 
  be 
  sure, 
  but 
  dates 
  from 
  its 
  originator, 
  

   MeiTiam, 
  1895, 
  and 
  not 
  from 
  Brisson. 
  The 
  question 
  that 
  has 
  arisen 
  

   over 
  the 
  basic 
  date 
  of 
  publication 
  of 
  the 
  "Regnum 
  Animale" 
  is 
  en- 
  

   tirely 
  subordinate 
  to 
  the 
  fact 
  that 
  the 
  system 
  of 
  classification 
  em- 
  

   ployed 
  therein 
  is 
  incontrovertibly 
  non-Linnaean. 
  Hence, 
  Brisson's 
  

   Latin 
  names, 
  really 
  classical 
  rather 
  than 
  technical, 
  are 
  not 
  available. 
  

  

  Bibliographic 
  references 
  and 
  citations 
  to 
  generic 
  synonyms 
  are 
  given 
  

   under 
  the 
  subgeneric 
  headings. 
  Synonymies 
  under 
  specific 
  headings 
  

   include 
  references 
  to 
  all 
  original 
  descriptions 
  and 
  to 
  selected 
  taxonomic 
  

   works. 
  

  

  Classification 
  

  

  Cranial 
  and 
  external 
  differences 
  between 
  living 
  species 
  of 
  American 
  

   tapirs 
  are 
  such 
  as 
  to 
  warrant 
  full 
  generic 
  rank 
  for 
  each 
  of 
  the 
  recog- 
  

   nized 
  forms. 
  Simpson 
  (Bull. 
  Amer. 
  Mus. 
  Nat. 
  Hist., 
  vol. 
  86, 
  pp. 
  

   40-41, 
  1945) 
  agreed 
  with 
  this 
  in 
  theory 
  but 
  found 
  it 
  impractical 
  to 
  

   recognize 
  a 
  multiplicity 
  of 
  closely 
  related 
  monotypic 
  genera 
  of 
  Recent 
  

   and 
  Pleistocene 
  tapirs. 
  Accordingly, 
  he 
  grouped 
  all 
  species 
  in 
  the 
  

   genus 
  Tapirus. 
  The 
  simplified 
  nomenclature 
  can 
  be 
  justified 
  in 
  this 
  

   special 
  case 
  because 
  whatever 
  hierarchic 
  terminology 
  is 
  employed 
  in 
  

   classification 
  interrelationships 
  remain 
  the 
  same. 
  However, 
  the 
  real 
  

   separation 
  between 
  each 
  of 
  the 
  species 
  should 
  be 
  emphasized 
  by 
  adding 
  

   to 
  Simpson's 
  system 
  the 
  available 
  subgeneric 
  names. 
  

  

  Living 
  and 
  fossil 
  tapirs 
  were 
  first 
  reviewed 
  in 
  a 
  classical 
  study 
  by 
  

   Hatcher 
  (Amer. 
  Journ. 
  Sci., 
  ser. 
  4, 
  vol. 
  1, 
  art. 
  17, 
  1896). 
  Simpson 
  

   (op. 
  cit.) 
  summarized 
  much 
  of 
  the 
  information 
  since 
  accumulated 
  and 
  

   described 
  and 
  analyzed 
  the 
  osteology 
  of 
  North 
  American 
  Recent 
  and 
  

   Pleistocene 
  tapirs. 
  Concerning 
  modem 
  American 
  species, 
  these 
  au- 
  

   thors 
  agreed 
  that 
  terrestris, 
  bairdii, 
  and 
  pinchague 
  (roulinii) 
  are 
  repre- 
  

   sentative. 
  Other 
  named 
  forms 
  were 
  regarded 
  as 
  either 
  absolute 
  syno- 
  

   nyms 
  or, 
  at 
  best; 
  subspecies 
  of 
  one 
  or 
  another 
  of 
  the 
  three 
  species 
  cited. 
  

  

  