Teeth in the Centetide. 543 
f.1. In connexion with this process C. exhibits all grada- 
tions from the typical development down to complete agree- 
ment with the surrounding incisors or premolars.’? In his 
subsequent paper the author in question states that Hchinops 
is the only member of the Centetide that has taken this 
direction. 
A somewhat similar state of things is found among 
Centetide also in the case of Microgale Dobson’ and 
Limnogale. Besides, in the various genera that here come 
under consideration we are confronted with slightly different 
processes, which must be kept distinct. A commencement in 
the direction of Hehdnops is already perceptible in the case 
of Hriculus, since the upper /.1 and the lower 7.2 have 
increased in strength, although they do not, as in Echinops, 
surpass the corresponding C. In both genera L.1¢nf: has 
been but little affected, though the upper and lower 7.3 (and 
I.d. 3 previously) have suffered all the more and have been 
completely suppressed. ‘The case is much the same with 
regard to MW. Dobsoni. It is true that here we still have three 
incisors above and below, but the lower /.3 is a very incon- 
spicuous tooth, which in old individuals may be wanting on 
one or both sides. ‘The upper J. 1 and the lower J. 2 are very 
powerful; the former is longer than C., as in Eehtnops, but 
L,2 inf. also overtops considerably the lower C., while in 
LEchinops both teeth are of equal strength, and in Hriculus C. 
is the larger—In Limnogale the conditions are somewhat 
different. Here also the lower J. 2, like the upper I. 1, have 
been more powerfully developed than C.; but in the upper 
jaw the two posterior /., the canine, and the anterior premolar 
have all become practically equivalent in size and form, have 
assumed almost the shape of canines, with recurved tips. The 
corresponding milk-teeth of Limnogale differ to no very great 
extent from the permanent ones, but are somewhat more 
dissimilar in themselves. ‘The same statement applies to the 
lower J. 3, C., and P.3. The latter, which otherwise through- 
out the Centetide, with the exception of MZ. pusilla and now 
and then of Hchinops, has two roots, in Limnogale (I have 
only one adult specimen before me) has a single root. Its 
precursor in the milk-dentition possesses in one instance two 
closely approximated roots ; in a second example it, like P. 3, 
is single-rooted. Hven the middle lower premolar (P.2, 
Hens.) of Limnogale shows an approach to the form of the 
antemolars in front of it, and, like its precursor P.d. 2, it is 
without the internal cusp (‘‘ metaconid ”’). 
The analogy between Limnogale aud Potamogale in the 
condition of the antemolars is obvious. In both genera we 
