ART. 16, TWO SQUALODONTS FROM MARYLAND—KELLOGG. 23 
Brandt. The tympanic and the tooth” were referred to Squalo- 
don ehrlichii by the same writer. Van Beneden,® also, considered 
that the tooth belonged to some squalodont. 
Herluf Winge® has reviewed the history of these genera, and has 
pointed out that Balaenodon lintianus is the type of Aulocetus Van 
Beneden.” However, Van Beneden referred to this material by a 
vernacular name ‘‘ Aulocete”’ in 1861, and the latinized form Auloce- 
tus' dates from 1875. Hence the Stenodon of Van Beneden would 
thus have priority over the subsequently proposed Cetotheriopsis 
linziana Brandt, and Aulocetus linzianum Van Beneden. If we accept 
the ruling that Stenodon is preoccupied by Steneodon,? then Cetotheri- 
opsis becomes the next availablename. This form represents a whale- 
bone whale and is included here only because of Von Meyer’s remarks. 
CETERHINOPS LONGIFRONS Leidy. 
Ceterhinops longifrons Leipy, J., Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, vol. 8, 
pp. 230-232, pl. 34, fig. 7, 1877. 
Type specimen.—Consists of a fragment of a skull, comprising por- 
tions of the “frontal, ethmoid, vomer, maxillaries, and intermaxillar- 
ies, all intimately coossified.”” Type, No. 11420, Academy of Natural 
Sciences of Philadelphia. 
Type locality—Ashley River phosphate beds, South Carolina. 
Edisto marl or Upper Miocene. 
Subsequent allocation.—This cranial fragment, composed chiefly of 
the bones surrounding the nasal passages, resembles Hurhinodelphis 
so closely that there appears no valid reason for separating this 
form from the latter genus. As remarked by Leidy the mesethmoid 
forms a thick partition separating the nasal passages and terminat- 
ing anteriorly at the commencement of the mesorostral channel. 
The presence of a second pair of openings leading into the brain case 
and originating at the posterior end of the mesethmoid channel is 
shown by Leidy’s figure. For the present, and in absence of a more 
complete skull, its exact specific allocation will best await further 
explorations in these deposits. The characters of this fragment, so 
far as they go, agree well with those of other Ceterhinops skulls 
from the Ashley River phosphate deposits and to a less extent with 
those of Arionius servatus. 
% Brandt, J. F., Mém. Acad. Imp. Sci. de St. Petersbourg, ser. 7, vol. 20, No. 1, p. 40, pl. 19, figs. 1-4, 
1873; vol. 21, No. 6, pp. 6-11, pl. 1, figs. 1-16, 1874. 
9 Brandt, J. F., Idem, pp. 42, 45-46, 333, pl. 31, figs. 4, 5. 
7 Brandt, J. F., Idem, pp. 38, 42, 324, 333, pl. 31, figs. 10, 10a. 
9% Van Beneden, P. J., Mém. Acad, Roy. Sci. Belgique, Bruxelles, vol. 35, pp. 76-77, text fig. 76, 1865. 
99 Winge, H., Vidensk. Medd. fra Dansk. naturh. Foren. Kigbenhavn, pp. 17-18, 19, 1909. 
100 Van Beneden, P. J., Bull. Acad. Roy. Sci. Belgique, Bruxelles, ser. 2, vol. 12, p. 480, 1861. 
1 Van Beneden, P. J., Idem, vol. 40, pp. 537-539, 1875. 
2 Croizet, Revue Encyclopédique, vol. 59, p. 86 (footnote), July-September, 1833. 
