On '' Desmalopex " and Pteralopex. 213 



and the larger a little beyond middle), posterior tarsi robust, 

 first joint long (second and third joints mutilated in type) ; 

 tegmina about two and a half times as long as broad, mode- 

 rately narrowed towards apices, which are rounded, apical 

 areas with the veins reticulate and prominent. 



Type, K. kafzensteini, Berg. 



Allied to Malianarva, vertex larger and of different shape 

 and structure ; posterior margin of pronotuui truncate, &c. 



Kanaima katzensteini. 



Tomaspis katzensteinii, Berg, Hem. Argent, p. 233 (1879). 

 Hab. Argentina, 



XXIII. — On the Characters and Affinities of " Desmalopex " 

 and Pteralopex. By Knud Andersen. 



The Differential Characters o/" Desmalopex.'' 



The fruit-bat described by Temminck, fifty-six years ago, 

 as Pteropus leiicopterus * has recently, by Miller, been made 

 the type of a distinct genus, Desmalopex f, stated to differ 

 from Pteropus by a series of cranial and dental characters. 

 Pteropus leucopterus appears to be rare in collections, the 

 only specimens recorded in literature being the type iti the 

 Leyden Museum (slightly immature) and two skins with 

 skulls in the British Museum (adults, one of them described 

 by Gray as *' Pteropus chinensis" J). I have carefully tested 

 all the differential characters of Desnia/opex pointed out by 

 Miller on these three skulls of Desmalopex and the whole 

 British Museum series of skulls of Pteropus, representing 



* Temminck, Esq. Zool. pp. 60-61 (1853) ; type locality unknown, 

 " Ton pr(5sunie une des iles Philippines." 



t Miller, ' Families and (ienera of Bats,' p. GO (29 June, 1907). 



X Gray, ' Catalogue uf Monkeys, Lemurs, and Fruit-eating Bats,' 

 p. Ill (1870). This specimen came to the Museum from Robert P^ortune, 

 who, from the spring of 1843 to late in 1845, travelled in the northern 

 provinces of China as a collector to the Horticultural Society of London ; 

 hence it was, very naturally, believed by Gray to be from China. But 

 the fact was apparently overlooked that Fortune also made an excursion 

 to Luzon (January to early in March, 1845 ; see his ' Three Years' Wan- 

 derings in the Northern Provinces of China,' pp. 332-345, 1847). When 

 to this it is added that no species of IHerojms is known to occur in China, 

 and that the type of Pt. chinensis differs in no essential characters from 

 the type of Pt. leucojilerus, there can be no reasonable doubt that the 

 former was in reality obtained by Fortune during his stay in Luzon, 



