176 



REPORT 1880. 



In the following table tlie measm-ements of eight specimens are given, 

 the localities of each, the position of the second lower pi-emolar, the place 

 of attachment of the wing membrane to the posterior extremities, and the 

 nominal specific title of each being indicated beneath : — 



In 1, 2, 3, and 4, the second lower premolar stands in the tooth-row, 

 and is distinctly visible without the aid of a lens, in 5 it is half external, 

 in 6 and 7 it is three-fourths external, in 8 it is quite external to the 

 tooth-row, scarcely visible without the aid of a lens and the first and 

 third premolars are closely approximated. But neither the form of the 

 noseleaf nor the size of the individual corresponds to these differences ; 

 in 2 and 4, the largest and smallest respectively, this premolar stands in 

 the tooth-row and can be easily seen with the naked eye ; in 1, 2, and 5 

 the noseleaf corresponds exactly in form, in 4 and 8. the posterior con- 

 necting part of the sella develops a long, very acutely pointed, process, 

 while in G and 7 the form of the same part is intermediate. Again in 1, 

 2 and 8 the wing-membrane is attached to the tibia immediately above 

 the ankles, while in 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 it extends to the ankles or even to 

 the tarsus ; 1 is the type of Bh. minor ; 2 (from Japan) undoubtedly 

 represents Bh. cormdus, Temminck ; 4 Bh. garoensis, Dobson, while 3, 

 6, 6, 7, and 8 should, accoi'ding to Dr. Peters, be referred to Bh. 'pusiUus, 

 Temminck. 



The specimens from Japan differ from the type of Bh. minor only in 

 being larger throughout ; but, as I have shown in the table above (in 

 columns 6 and 7), in this respect intermediate forms (from Tsagine, 

 Upper Burma, collected by Dr. Anderson) are found, while the shape of 

 the nose-leaf, and the development and position of the second lower 

 premolar, are again intermediate between these forms and that of which 

 the measurements are given in column 8, and which would be regarded as 

 a typical Bh. pusilhis. 



For these reasons I have considered all these forms as but different 

 phases of the same species ; for, although individuals like those of which 

 the measurements are given in columns 2 and 8, appear to differ so widely 

 in size in the development and position of the second lower premolar, and 

 in the form of the posterior connecting process of the nose-leaf, yet such 

 perfectly intermediate examples are found that it becomes imjDossible to 

 say under which title the latter should be classed. 



