254 ZAGLOSSUS. 
name Echidna for Tachyglossus. Dubois (1881) considered Acanthoglossus 
sufficiently distinct from Acanthoglossa but in case this view were not accepted, 
he proposed the name Bruynia instead, with ¢éridactyla as the specific name. 
In the Zoélogical record for 1882, Thomas amends this to Bruijnia, and adopts 
the combination Bruijnia bruijnii, though in the year following he reverts to 
Proechidna bruijnii which is the name finally used in his Catalogue of the Mar- 
supialia and Monotremata in the British museum (1888). More recently, in 
conformity with his adherence to the ‘one-letter rule,’ Mr. Thomas (1907) has 
considered Acanthoglossus bruijnii the correct name, but Palmer (1895) has 
called attention to the name Zaglossus of Gill, which though long overlooked, 
must evidently take precedence if the Proechidna be considered generically 
distinct from the Echidna. On this latter point there has been much difference 
of opinion, but as later detailed, there seems sufficient ground, as modern 
generic conceptions go, to keep the two apart. 
There is still some doubt as to the number of local races or species of Proe- 
chidna in New Guinea. Under the name Proechidna villosissima Dubois (1884) 
figured and described an animal from northern New Guinea which he believed 
to represent a second species. It was evidently an immature specimen from its 
small size (total length, 390 mm., rostrum 61), had a nearly straight beak, and 
a very woolly thick pelage of a uniform dull brown. The spines are described 
as white and needle-like, not exceeding 19 mm. in length, and almost completely 
hidden in the fur, except that their extreme tips project from the woolly covering 
at the sides of the neck and in the caudal region. There were sixteen pairs of 
ribs, one less than recorded by Gervais, but a number probably normal for the 
genus as I shall later show. Owing to the evident youth of this specimen it 
has been regarded by most authors (and I think rightly) as merely an immature 
bruijnii. Gill (1885) in calling attention to his earlier use of the name Zaglossus, 
includes Zaglossus villosissimus as a second species of the genus, but evidently 
he had not seena specimen. Rothschild (1892) considered it a variety of bruijnii 
and later (1905) in reviewing the genus recognized it definitely as a subspecies 
of that animal. This review was based on a study of nine specimens, more than 
had previously been brought together by any investigator. Rothschild be- 
lieved that three forms were recognizable: — (1) Zaglossus bruijnii with brownish 
black or black hair, and white spines; (2) Zaglossus bruijnii villosissima with 
pale brown hair, thick, long, and woolly, hiding the spines except on flanks and 
shoulders; and (3) Zaglossus bruijnii nigroaculeata, described by the same author 
in 1892 as Proechidna nigroaculeata, which has uniformly dark, long, thin, and 
