118 Gunther— Piinthophorus robustus. 
the present creation. Pictet compares Rhinellus with Belone, 
and refers it to the family of Hsocide as defined by Cuvier, who 
associated Belone with Hsox. But the position of the dorsal 
fin in the middle of the body is too important’a difference to 
admit such a union, either with the Hsocide proper, or with the 
Scomberesocide. 
EXPLANATION OF PLATE VI. 
The principal figure is reduced in size, in the proportion of the two lines 
drawn below it. One of the scutes, from the right abdominal series, is 
dvawn twice the natural size. 
ABSTRACTS OF FOREIGN MEMOTRS. 
—_+——__ 
Discovery or PaLorLoryERIuM UN THE ‘ CALCAIRE GROSSIER SUPERIEUR.’ 
1 the ‘Comptes Rendus,’ vol. lviii., No. 21, May 23, 1864, M. 
A. Gaudry states that the Museum of Natural History, Paris, has 
from time to time received from M. Geurin, of Coucy-le-Chateau 
(Aisne), many portions of Paloplotherium, which have been found 
in the ‘Calcaire Grossier,’ of Jumencourt. The remains consist of 
an almost perfect skull, the two rami of a lower jaw, several other 
jaws, the upper portion of a radius, an astragalus, some fragments of 
the pelvic arch, and of the scapula. 
Paloplotherium has hitherto been unknown in the ‘Caleaire Gros- 
sier. The type of the genus is P. annectens (Owen), from the 
lacustrine beds of Hordwell, Hampshire, to which species that from 
Coucy ‘bears a great resemblance. It has, however, four upper 
premolars, whilst the Hordwell species has three; the last upper 
premolar is a little narrower forwards, its external surface is not 
divided in the same way into two by a vertical ridge; the crown has 
no indication of a division into two parts; and the last lower molar 
has three lobes, whilst in P. annectens there are only two: still in 
a specimen from the Débruge, near Apt, referred by M. Gervais to 
that species, there are three lobes. 
Paleotherium minus, Cuvier, has been placed in the genus Palo- 
plotherium ; it is much smaller than the Coucy fossil, and has only 
three upper premolars, the last of which is divided into two lobes 
and bears a vertical ridge across the middle of its outer surface. 
The remarks of M. Aymard on the fossil of Puy, called by him 
Paleotherium ovinum, show that it ought to be placed in the genus 
Paloplotherium; but they are not sufficient for the determination of 
the species. Ifthe Puloplotherium of Coucy differs from P. ovinum, 
M. Gaudry proposes to name it Paloplotherium Codiciense. 
The principal differences in the species of Paloplotherium are as 
follows :— 
There are three upper premolars in P. annectens and P. minus, 
four in P. Codicrense. ‘The last upper premolar has four fangs in 
P. annectens, whilst there are three in P. minus and P. Codiciense. 
‘The hind molar in the lower jaw has two lobes in P. annectens; but 
