326 University of California Piiblications in Zoology V^ol. 21 



features, as follows : Frontals not bul^inp: clorsally but flattened, and 

 with no marked median sulcus (see Merriam, 1901, p. 590) ; nasals 

 longer and nasal profile sloping gently, not "humped"; jaw less 

 massive and less undershot ; skull throughout, smaller than in oregon- 

 ensis: dentition weaker; canines notably slenderer. (See pis. 9, 10.) 



Measurements.— Oi male, no. 31252, data as above : Total length, 

 6 feet, 61/4 inches; tail, 2 feet, 6I/2 inches; hind foot (from heel), 11 

 inches; ear, height from crown, 334 inches; height of animal at 

 shoulder, 281^ inches. Of female, no. 31251, probably mate of preced- 

 ing, same place, July 16, 1920 (orig. no. 7923, J. D.) : Total length, 

 6 feet, 41/2 inches; tail, 2 feet, 6 inches; hind foot (from heel), 11 

 inches; ear, height from crown, 3i^ inches; height of animal at 

 shoulder, 271/^ inches. 



For cranial measurements, see accompanying table. Comparisons 

 should be made with figures given for Fells oregonensis hippolestes 

 by Roosevelt, 1901, p. 435, and Merriam, 1901, p. 587; for F. 0. 

 oregonensis by Swarth, 1912, pp. 98-99 ; and for F. 0. hrowni bv Grin- 

 nell, 1914, p. 253. 



Distribution. — The metropolis of this subspecies lies within the 

 state boundaries of California. Its range appears to be limited on 

 the east by the sage plains of the Great Basin and by the Mohave 

 and Colorado deserts. To the south it occurs as far at least as the 

 Cuyamaca Mountains of San Diego County and it is possiblj^ this 

 form that extends south into the San Pedro Martir Mountains. To 

 the northward, we do not know what happens beyond the Oregon line ; 

 but we think it quite likely that mountain lions formerly occupied 

 the territory continuously across Oregon into Washington and British 

 Columbia and that complete intergradation between californica and 

 oregonensis took place. We have no material at all from Oregon. 



Life zone, chieflj^ Transition. 



Comments.— Thirty skulls of mountain lions from California have 

 been before us at one time for study. The first impression gained 

 from a survey of this series is that a very great amount of variation 

 exists. But persistent study brings to the fore the facts that (1) 

 there are great differences between the sexes, and that (2) aging is 

 accompanied hy conspicuous changes in proportions as well as by 

 general massiveness of skull. Taking fully into account these two 

 factors, sex and age, we come to the precise conclusion that Merriam 

 (1901, p. 579) did, namely, that "the limits of variation for adults 

 of each sex fall within surprisingly narrow bounds." 



We have read closely the criticism by Elliot (1904, pp. 454-455) 

 of Merriam 's "Revision." It is curious that anyone with the oppor- 

 tunities and wide experience that Elliot may be supposed to have 

 enjoyed could have so failed to apprehend the facts. We take this 

 occasion to defend Merriam 's paper as an admirable piece of system- 

 atic work, one which involved a very careful and correct distinguish- 



