36 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. VOL. 62, 
PHOCOCETUS VASCONUM (Delfortrie). 
Zeuglodon vasconum DELrortRi£, E., Actes de la Societe Linneenne de Bordeaux, 
ser. 3, vol. 9, pp. 113-117, text figs. A, B, OC, D, 1873. 
Type specimen.—This supposed zeuglodont was described from a 
single imperfect molar tooth. The specimen was formerly in the 
private collection of Dr. E. Delfortrie at Bordeaux, France. 
Type locality.—Bone breccia of Saint-Médard-en-Jalle, near Bor- 
deaux, France. This deposit is referred to the Middle Miocene by 
Tournouer.® Upper Oligocene. 
Subsequent allocation.—Gervais ® proposed a new genus, Phococetus, 
for this form. Stromer®™ has suggested that certain peculiarities 
possessed by this tooth, such as the conformation of the enamel 
crown and the union of the roots, are quite like those exhibited by 
molars of Kekenodon onamata. The lack of more complete material 
representing both Phococetus and Kekenodon hinders detailed com- 
parisons. The marked resemblance, however, between some of the 
molars of Dorudon serratus and the published figures of Phococetus 
and Kekenodon is strongly suggestive of a close relationship. At any 
event Abel ® is justified in remarking that Phococetus is at least an 
offshoot of zeuglodont stock. 
It should be noted that Costa™ has published a figure of an im- 
perfect tooth obtained in Italy which compares favorably with 
Delfortrie’s specimen. 
GRAPHIODON VINEARIUS Leidy. 
Graphiodon vinearius Leipy, J., Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia [vol. 22], 
p. 122, 1870; Report U. 8. Geol. Surv. Terr., Washington, D. C., vol. 1, p. 337, 
pl. 22, fig. 7, 1873. 
Type specimen.—Original description was based on a single tooth 
which was thought to bear resemblance to a mosasauroid. Type, No. 
875, Division of Vertebrate Palaeontology, United States National 
Museum. 
Type locality.—‘‘ Miocene Tertiary deposit of Gay Head, Marthas 
Vineyard,” Massachusetts. Upper Miocene. 
Subsequent allocation.—It was, no doubt, in part the supposed 
resemblance in form of this tooth to those of the mosasauroids that 
induced Leidy to suggest such a determination. The peculiar shape 
of the tooth and the unusual type of sculpturing present on the 
enamel crown are unlike any known fossil or recent cetacean. It dif- 
fers in like manner from the mosasaurs. As teeth with large gibbous 
roots are characteristic of certain members of the Physeteridae, this 
69 Tournouer, R., Actes Soc. Linn. de Bordeaux, ser. 3, vol. 9, pp. 119-161, 1873. 
60 Gervais, P,, Journal de Zoologie, Paris, vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 64-70, text figs, 2, 1876. 
61Stromer, E. von, Beitrige zur Paliaont.u. Geol, Oster.-Ungarns u. d. Orients, Wien, vol. 15, p. 87, 
1903. 
62 Abel, O., Denkschr. Kais. Akad. Wiss. math.-naturw. IX]. Wien, vol. 90, p. 209, 1913. 
63Costa, O. G., Atti dell’ Accad. Pontaniana, Napoli, vol. 8, Appendice, pl. 5, fig. 7, 1864; Capellini, 
G., Mémorie della Accad. delle Sci. de}!’Istituto di Bologna, ser. 3, vol. 9, fasc. 2, p. 242, pl. 2, fig. 5, 1878. 
