4G(i 



HI I.I.KIIN: MISKIM OF ( C»M 1' AHA I 1 VK ZOOLOGY, 



mon Indian Doj; in \\\v sniallor size of the individual teeth as well as 

 in the shorter tooth-nnv. Yet the eontrast is not always very strik- 

 ing and no douht there was more or less intercrossing of the two types. 

 The teeth of the smaller dog are usually more close-set than those of 

 the larger, and on comjiarison, the carnassial tooth is seen to he de- 

 cidedly smaller, its metaconid sometimes (|uite ohsolete, and with a 

 distinct tendency for the outer of the two cusps of the heel (hypo- 

 conid) to become enlarged and trenchant. As in the Common Indian 

 Dog, and in American aboriginal dogs generally, it is common if not 

 usual, for the first lower premolar to be lacking, and the same is 

 freciuently true of the first upper premolar. Such an anomaly is 

 occasional in all domestic dogs. Indeed, Bourguignat (bS75) founded 

 liis genus Lycorus on such a fossil canid jaw — probalily of a wolf — 

 from a caveni-deposit in France. In his specimen the first premolar 

 was lacking in each ramus. 



Loomis and ^'oung (1012) mention sitnilar small jaws from Indian 

 sites in Arkansas. 



Of liml)-bones referable to the Short-legged Dog it is particularly 

 desirable to obtain specimens for comparison with the other breeds. 

 Among limb-bones in the Amherst collection from Maine are several 

 longer and shorter. The latter in the lack of evidence to the con- 

 trary, may be reganled as having come from the present type. Of 

 two humeri, one is nearly perfect and appears to be that of an adult 

 animal, with its epiphy.ses throughl\- fu.sed to the shaft. Its ole- 



