SOTALIA LENTIGINOSUS. 



Measurement!^ of three slciiJls of Sotalia (jadamu. 



15 



] 477(1 



82. (1, 2, :j) 



573a 



Collection. 



Brit. Museum 



....do 



Cambridge Museum. 



Locality. 



India 



Kurrache Mus. 

 Wollougong ... 



Cm. 

 ?47.7 

 43.2 

 43.0 



Cm. 

 ?28. 7 

 25.3 

 25.4 



Breadth 



of beak — 



3 » 



Ctn. 

 10.6 



9.3 

 10.5 



Cm. 



5.2 

 5.0 

 5.8 



MM 



51 



3.0 

 2.7 

 3.2 



^.9 



5 1=1 'IS 



§ MP 



S S ft 



s ^-^ 

 te 5 cs 



£oa 



Cm. 

 8.0 

 7.6 

 7.6 



1477ft 



82.(1,2,3) 



573a 



Cm. 



20.7 

 20.4 



Cm. 

 6.7 



5.1 



Extremity 

 of beak to 



Cm. 



?32.8 



29.0 

 28.4 



Cm. 

 ?33.8 



29.8 



29.8 



Breadth 

 between — 



Cm. 

 18.5 



17.2 



19.0 



Cm. 

 13.7 



14.5 



15.6 



Temporal 



f0S8a3. 



Cm. 

 10.2 



Cm. 

 7.0 



6.3 



7.2 



Cm. 



35.4 



36.2 



0/n. 



*5.8 

 '5.6 



Cm. 



B a 



Cjrt. 



7.1 



26 + 25+ 



C 25-? 

 I 25—25 



25—25 



* This ia the length of the symphysis proper; the length of the rugose area is about 11,7 cm. 



SOTALIA LENTIGINOSA (Owen). 



Delpliinus (Steno) lentiginosus, Owen, Trans. Zool. Soc. London, vi, 18G6, p. 20, 



pi. V, figs. 2 and 3. 

 Sotalia lentiginosus, Flower, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1883, p. 489 and 513. 



The only specimens of this species which I found in the European 

 collections are the type skull (147Ga) with its mandible (1477a) and a 

 second broken mandible (1476«), all of which are in the British Museum. 



Sir Richard Owen showed his recognition of the true affinities of the 

 species by placing it in Gray's genus Meno, which, at the time he wrote, 

 included both species with united pterygoids and those with separate 

 pterygoids. lie very properly separated the present species from S. 

 (jadamu, in consideration of the difference in the relative length of the 

 beak, the number of teeth, and some other characters of the skull, ap- 

 parently of less moment. Professor Flower, however, seems to doubt 

 the distinctness of the two species. He writes : 



D. lentiginosus, Owen, from the same locality [as S. gadamii'}, described in the same 

 memoir, is a closely allied species, if distinct. (List, }). 489.) 



The doubt expressed in the last clause of this sentence I do not share. 

 In addition to the differences pointed out by Sir Richard Owen, viz., the 



