﻿476 
  PROCEEDINGS 
  OF 
  THE 
  NATIONAL 
  MUSEUM 
  vol. 
  loa 
  

  

  According 
  to 
  Crandall 
  (Animal 
  Kingdom, 
  Bull, 
  New 
  York 
  Zool. 
  Soc, 
  

   vol. 
  44, 
  no. 
  1, 
  pp. 
  3-8, 
  1951), 
  the 
  specimen, 
  from 
  the 
  CordiUera 
  

   Oriental 
  of 
  Ecuador, 
  lived 
  "as 
  a 
  village 
  pet 
  in 
  a 
  hamlet 
  called 
  Borja, 
  

   sixty 
  miles 
  [kilometers 
  is 
  surely 
  intended] 
  to 
  the 
  east 
  of 
  Quito 
  at 
  an 
  

   elevation 
  of 
  about 
  6,000 
  feet. 
  . 
  . 
  . 
  'Panchita', 
  as 
  the 
  villagers 
  

   called 
  the 
  animal, 
  had 
  been 
  captured 
  higher 
  up 
  the 
  Andean 
  range 
  

   while 
  stUl 
  in 
  her 
  striped-and-spotted 
  coat 
  of 
  tapir 
  infancy." 
  The 
  

   second 
  captive 
  tapir, 
  a 
  male 
  from 
  Papallacta, 
  east 
  of 
  Quito, 
  Ecuador, 
  

   about 
  3,150 
  meters 
  above 
  sea 
  level 
  on 
  the 
  eastern 
  slope 
  of 
  the 
  Cordil- 
  

   lera 
  Oriental, 
  was 
  received 
  June 
  19, 
  1952, 
  by 
  the 
  same 
  zoological 
  park 
  

   (cf. 
  Animal 
  Kingdom, 
  Bull. 
  New 
  York 
  Zool. 
  Soc, 
  vol. 
  45, 
  Nos. 
  1, 
  2, 
  

   1952). 
  It 
  had 
  been 
  sent 
  by 
  Charles 
  Cordier, 
  the 
  dealer 
  who 
  also 
  

   secured 
  the 
  first 
  live 
  tapir. 
  

  

  Contrary 
  to 
  all 
  ruling, 
  previous 
  authors 
  have 
  attempted 
  to 
  replace 
  

   the 
  first 
  valid 
  name, 
  pinchaque 
  Koulin, 
  with 
  Latin 
  names 
  of 
  which 
  the 
  

   earhest 
  and 
  most 
  commonly 
  cited 
  is 
  rovlinii 
  Fischer. 
  The 
  specific 
  

   name 
  pinchaque 
  was 
  properly 
  proposed 
  in 
  combination 
  with 
  the 
  

   generic 
  synonym 
  Tapir 
  as 
  technical 
  name 
  for 
  the 
  wooUy 
  tapir. 
  

   Roulin 
  expUcitly 
  borrowed 
  pinchaque 
  from 
  the 
  vernacular 
  term 
  

   apphed 
  by 
  some 
  Colombians 
  to 
  a 
  large 
  legendary 
  animal, 
  possibly 
  

   the 
  extinct 
  mastodon. 
  In 
  an 
  advance 
  notice 
  of 
  the 
  discovery 
  of 
  the 
  

   wooUy 
  tapir, 
  Cuvier 
  (supra 
  cit.) 
  discreetly 
  used 
  "pinchaque" 
  strictly 
  

   as 
  the 
  vernacular 
  term 
  for 
  the 
  new 
  species, 
  leaving 
  the 
  formal 
  proposal 
  

   of 
  a 
  technical 
  name 
  to 
  Roulin. 
  

  

  Published 
  descriptions 
  and 
  figures 
  of 
  misidentified 
  species 
  of 
  

   American 
  tapirs 
  have 
  led 
  to 
  some 
  garbled 
  accounts 
  in 
  current 
  litera- 
  

   ture. 
  External 
  characters 
  attributed 
  to 
  the 
  woolly 
  tapir 
  by 
  G. 
  M. 
  

   Allen 
  (supra 
  cit.) 
  are 
  derived 
  from 
  a 
  figure 
  and 
  description 
  by 
  Sclater 
  

   (Proc. 
  Zool. 
  Soc. 
  London 
  (1878), 
  p. 
  631, 
  pi. 
  39, 
  1878) 
  of 
  a 
  Uving 
  ex- 
  

   ample 
  of 
  T. 
  terrestris 
  exhibited 
  in 
  the 
  London 
  Zoological 
  Gardens. 
  

   The 
  individual 
  was 
  first 
  misrepresented 
  as 
  "Tapirus 
  roulini.*' 
  Later, 
  

   as 
  the 
  result 
  of 
  a 
  post 
  mortem, 
  Sclater 
  (ibid. 
  (1885), 
  p. 
  718, 
  1886) 
  

   discovered 
  his 
  error 
  and 
  emended 
  the 
  name 
  to 
  Tapirus 
  americanus 
  

   (=T. 
  terrestris). 
  Tapirs 
  secured 
  by 
  Buckley 
  at 
  Sarayacu, 
  eastern 
  

   Ecuador, 
  and 
  mentioned 
  by 
  G. 
  M. 
  Allen 
  are 
  also 
  misidentified 
  repre- 
  

   sentatives 
  of 
  T. 
  terrestris 
  (cf. 
  antea, 
  in 
  synonymy 
  of 
  T. 
  terrestris 
  

   terrestris) 
  . 
  

  

  An 
  early 
  revision 
  of 
  tapirs 
  by 
  Gray 
  (Proc. 
  Zool. 
  Soc. 
  London 
  (1872), 
  

   pp. 
  483-492, 
  pis. 
  21, 
  22, 
  1 
  fig., 
  1872) 
  has 
  been 
  a 
  popular 
  but 
  confusing 
  

   and 
  misleading 
  source 
  of 
  information. 
  The 
  work 
  is 
  characterized 
  by 
  

   numerous 
  typographical 
  errors, 
  misquotations 
  of 
  authors, 
  contra- 
  

   dictions, 
  and 
  assumptions 
  derived 
  from 
  specimens 
  mislabeled 
  as 
  to 
  

   sex 
  and 
  locality 
  and 
  mismatched 
  as 
  regards 
  skins 
  and 
  corresponding 
  

   osteological 
  material. 
  Gray's 
  description 
  of 
  external 
  characters 
  of 
  

   the 
  adult 
  leucogenys 
  may 
  be 
  that 
  of 
  terrestris, 
  but 
  the 
  skull, 
  as 
  analyzed, 
  

  

  