301 



SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS FROM THE INDIAN 

 MAMMAL SURVEY 



OF THE 



BOMBAY NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY. 



By R. C. Wroughtox, f.z.s. 



Part VII. 



{Continued from page 85 of this Volume.) 



Famil}^ II. — Cervid^. 



Two subfamilies are recognised which may be distinguished as 

 follows : — 



Key to the subfamilies of the Cekvid^. 



A. — Antlers, face, glands, and foot glands 

 (at least in hind limbs) present; no 

 caudal gland ... ... ... I. CERViNiE. 



B. — Antlers, face-glands, and foot-glands 



absent ; a caudal gland in male ... II. MosCHiN^. 



Subfamily I. — Cervine. 



Lydekker recognises onlj^ two genera, one of which however he 

 subdivides, into six subgenera. Thomas supports me in holding 

 that all these subgenera should be treated as full genera. One 

 of them is not represented in our region, but the remaining six 

 may be arranged in a key as follows : — 



Key to the genera of the Cervine. 



i. — Upper canines tusk-like in males ; 

 horns short ; pedicels as long as 

 horns, or longer, and continued down- 

 wards as prominent converging 

 frontal ridges ; no phalanges to 



lateral digits I. Muntiacus. 



II. — Upper canines (when present) not 

 tusk-like ; long horns on short pedi- 

 cels, which are not produced down- 

 wards on the face ; bony phalanges 

 present in lateral digits. 

 A. — A specialised gland forming a mo- 

 derately deep cleft on front of 

 hind pasterns ; antlers three-tined ; 

 tail lonsf. 



