;I,M 



' ;•! 



m 



512 



MONOGRAPHS OF NORTU AMERICAN RODENTIA. 



over, it so Imppens tliiit (lie left ear of the type is in sufiiciently good preser- 

 vatitm to enable me to clearly recognize the pecnliar conformation whicli 

 distinguishes the present species from the others. 



To this same species I am also inclined to refer two specimens recently 

 collected l)y Mr. H. W. llenshaw on Otter Creek, in Utah. These are appar- 

 ently young aninmis, hut, as they are not accompanied witii the skulls, the 

 iiict cannot be determined.* The tail of each has been skinned, and is now 

 so shrivelled tliat nothing can be predicated as to its length, cither relative or 

 absolute. The specimens are quite small ; they have been overstufled, meas- 

 uring now about 2J inches, but were probably not much, if any, ()ver 2, witb 

 a hind foot of 0.80 ; in fact, they might be taken at first sight for Criceiodipus. 

 But the soles are naked along a nariow strip quite to the heel; the autitragus 

 has a very prominent lobe; and even from the dried skins I detdrmine,-with 

 no appreciable chance of mistake, that the ear has the other peculiarity oi P. 

 monficola. Tlie pelage is remarkably sotl; (he coloration is different from 

 that of any other Perognathi I have seen, being plumbeous (like the plum- 

 bago-colored specimens of Geomys and Tliomomys), with little admixture of 

 lighter color; and the soles show a decided fulvous stripe. But these speci- 

 mens exhibit the fore leg colored quite to the wrist, and I am inclined to 

 attribute the dark color to their immaturity. I shall therefore assign them to 

 P. monticuln. 



The four specimens noticed are the only ones which have come under 

 my observation. To sum the case in a few words, we have here an anitnal 

 unquestionably- distinct from any of the other species descrii)ed in this paper, 

 the only question being whether all the specimens referred to it are specifi- 

 cally identical. They ostensibly diflTer to a degree that might have caused 

 them to be described as distinct at the period when Professor Baird's work 

 was prepared. This question must await the reception of additional material 

 for its satisfactory solution. I can only say that I am at present unable to 

 see more than one species. Should the contrary be determined, the present 

 article is to be held as based upon the Fort Crook specimen, for which I 

 have suggested the name of P. mollipilosus as a provisional designation. 



* Since tliis was writteu, Mr. Henabaw tells Die the animals are very yonnf; iudeetl— tbey bnd not 

 left tbe nest when captured. These nr» the speoiinens donbtfully noticed by Dr. Yarrow and myself, in 

 Wheeler's Report, «. o. 



