20 PROFESSOR FLOWER ON RISSO’S DOLPHIN, 
known to science by that naturalist, or even to keep it as a vernacular appellation for 
the entire species, and thereby continue to associate his name with it. 
Systematic Position—In Baron Cuvier’s time this species, with a vast number of 
others now generically separated, was included in the genus Delphinus. Mons. F, Cuvier 
constituted of a group of short-nosed Dolphins the genus Phocwna, embracing with 
the species now under consideration the Common Porpoise, the Killer (Orea gladiator), 
the Round-Headed Dolphin (Glodicephalus melas’), and even the Beluga (Histoire des 
Cétacés, 1836). 
The genus Globicephalus*? was formed by Lesson‘ for a still more restricted group, 
from which Dr. Gray has separated the present animal and its most immediate allies 
under the name of Grampus*. 
My first impression, obtained from an inspection of the external appearance of the 
animal, was that it resembled Globicephalus melas so nearly as hardly to warrant 
generic separation. There was the same rounded form of forehead, and the same 
elongated pointed pectoral fins placed low down on the sides of the thorax. It is true 
that these were developed in a less exaggerated degree than in Globicephalus, and the 
dorsal fin was more anterior in position and more elevated; but such characters can 
hardly be considered generic, unless accompanied by other and more important structural 
differences, The teeth, again, have much the same size and form as those of (Glodi- 
cephalus, and are also confined to the anterior part of the jaws; and I was not then 
aware that the absence of maxillary teeth was congenital, but supposed that it was due 
to their being deciduous, a circumstance frequently observed in Globicephalus at a late 
period of life. Consequently in the preliminary notice of the capture of this specimen® 
the generic name of Globicephalus was assigned to it. 
After a closer examination of the characters, especially of the skeleton and teeth, of 
both forms, I am now inclined to think that they may fairly be treated as distinct 
although closely allied genera, and subjoin the following comparative table of diagnostic 
characters :-— 
GuopicerHaLus.—T¢eeth in both jaws, 9 to 12 on each side, confined to the anterior 
half of the rostrum and corresponding portion of the mandible; sometimes deciduous 
in old age. 
Vertebre. C. 7, D. 11, L. 12 to 14, C, 27 to 29, total 58 or 59. 
‘ This species was first correctly described and figured by Trail, under the name of Delphinus melas 
(Nicholson’s Journ, xxii. 1809, p. 21). Cuvier, unacquainted with Trail’s memoir, described and figured it 
again in the “ Rapport sur divers Cétacés,” frequently referred to above, as Delphinus globiceps (Annales du 
Muséum, t, xix. 1812). Lacépéde’s Catodon svineval (Hist. Nat. des Cétacés, 1804, p. 216) may have been 
founded on some vague idea of this animal ; but the description is almost altogether inaccurate. 
? Often spelt Globiocephalus. 3 Compl. de Buffon, i. 1828 (fide Agassiz, Nom, Zool.). 
* Zoology of ‘ Erebus’ and ‘ Terror,’ p. 30 (1846). Grampus, Gray, Spic. Zool. 2 (1828), was a heterogeneous 
group, comprising Grampus griseus, Globicephalus melas, Delphinus acutus, D, heavisidii, and D, obscurus. 
§ Pp. Z. 8. 1870, p. 128. 
