THE WHALEBONE WHALES OF THE WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC. 183 
all different. I believe them all to be correct, but that for No. 19 is certainly so, 
as it was obtained by very careful dissection of the foetus, after I had observed 
that the formule for the two preceding specimens did not agree. 
Tt will be noted that the formula for No. 1 is the same as for the Kiel speci- 
men, except that the latter has one less caudal vertebra. The formula of No. 14 
does not agree with any of the European specimens, but would accord with Gervais’s 
formule générale, if one vertebra were taken from the lumbar series and added to 
the dorsals. The formula of No. 19 is remarkable for the sixteen lumbars.1. The 
formula for the Ocean City whale is based on my own observations, but, as already 
stated, one vertebra should perhaps be taken from the caudal series and added to 
the lumbars, making fifteen lumbars in all, in which case this specimen, in so far as 
it is complete, would agree with Malm’s B. caroline. However this may be, as 
the last rib present is long, it is quite probable that one more pair, making sixteen 
in all, was present originally. In this case the number of lumbars might be con- 
sidered as reduced to thirteen, thus according with Gervais’s views. The Ocean 
City skeleton probably lacks one caudal between the sixteenth and seventeenth 
(?.¢., between the fifty-second and fifty-third vertebra as now placed), and probably 
the number of terminal caudals lacking is three. 
Until the limits of variation in the number and division of the vertebra in 
B. musculus are better determined, little reliance can be placed on the formule for 
the discrimination of the species from its nearest allies. The present indications are 
that the amount of variation is considerable. 
In this connection, it is interesting to observe the lack of harmony in the 
vertebral formule given for the South American Sulphurbottom. Gervais, who 
regards the southern species as the same as B. sibbaldii [= B. musculus (1..)] gives 
the formula C. 7, D. 16, L. 18, Ca. 29 (or 380) = 65 (or 66). Burmeister’s B. inter- 
media, regarded the same as B. musculus both by Gervais (51, m. 6) and by Lahille 
(63, 35), has, according to the original describer, the formula C. 7, D. 15, L. 16, 
Ca. 27 = 65. Lahille’s Sulphurbottom, which he regards as a separate species, 
B. miramaris, has the formula C. 7, D. 14, L. 14, Ca. 29 = 64. 
In the Ocean City skeleton the first vertebra in which the transverse process 
is perforated, or has a foramen at the base, is the forty-sixth (right side only). The 
transverse processes are last distinguishable on the forty-eighth vertebra, and the 
neural arch is obsolete on the fifty-fifth vertebra. 
SKULL. 
For the reasons stated on p. 179, a complete comparison of measurements of the 
skulls of Kuropean and American specimens can not be made. The figure of the skull 
of the Iceland whale published by Reinhardt (75, 188) appears to be accurate, except 
that the maxillz have sprung apart. Measurements made on this figure compared 
with those from the skull of the Ocean City whale show a close agreement, as follows: 
"Van Beneden (7, 265) gives the formula of a skeleton at Edinburgh as 7, 15, 16, 25 = 63. He 
states in another place that there are bones of four individuals in Edinburgh, including the North 
Berwick whale (7, 280), 
