88 OLDFIELD THOMAS 



the ultimate arrangement of these various annectent species, it 

 seems better for the present to call the new form a Scotophilus 

 on account of its dental formula, irrespective of the shape of 

 the teeth, rather than to consider it a member of the large 

 genus Vesperugo, in which the number of its teeth would ne- 

 cessitate the foundation of a new subgenus for its reception. 



There is another bat whose claim to generic distinction is 

 considerably weakened, if not, as I believe, altogether removed, 

 by the discovery of Scotophilus albofuscus, namely the American 

 species called by D.'" H. Allen (^) and others " Nycticejus crepu- 

 scularis „. This bat's sole, or at least chief, generic characteristic 

 lies in the uncrushed state of its anterior lower premolars, a 

 peculiarity which as already stated, S. albofuscus shares with it, 

 while geographical considerations would prevent the two species 

 from being regarded as specially closely related. It may also 

 be noted that since Rafinesque's Nycticejus humeralis (^) is, as 

 D.^' Allen has suggested, no doubt identical with Le Conte's 

 " N. crepuscularis „ (^) and is earlier in date, the species ought 

 to bear the former instead of the latter specific name (^). Its 

 proper designation would therefore appear to be Scotophilus 

 humeralis, Raf. 



(1) Mon. Bats N. Amer., p. 12, 1864. 



(») Am. Month. Mag. HI, p. 445, 1817; Journ. Phys. LXXXVm, p. 417, 1819= 



(3} Mc. Murtrie's Cuv. An. K. I., p. 432, 1831 (ftde Allen). 



(0 If N. humeralis, being the type species of the genus Nycticejus, be not iden- 

 tical with N. crepuscularis^ it is evident that the name Nycticejus could not rightly 

 be used for the latter at all, since the genus could not have been founded on a 

 species not discovered until twelve years after its own description. 



