1891.] MR. F. E. BKDDARD ON HAPALEMUR GRISEUS. 461 



5. The Crurceus arises from nearly the whole length of the femur. 

 All these four muscles are attached to the fascia ; they are merely 



mentioned in order to show that there is nothing abnormal about 

 them. 



6. Biceps femoris. — This muscle arises by a long strong tendon 

 from the ischial tuberosity ; it is inserted by a long, flat, and 

 excessively thin tendon on to fascia covering legs and on to tibia ; it 

 is connected at its origin with 



7. Semitendinosus. — The Semitendiyiosus is a thin muscle fleshy 

 at its origin ; it is inserted by a long flat tendon, more than one 

 inch in length, on to the cnemial crest of tibia in front of and below 

 insertion of sartorius. 



8. The Se?)iimembranosus is a much larger muscle ; it arises from 

 the ischium, behind the origin of the semitendinosus, but is sliglilly 

 overlapped by that muscle in the front portion of its origin ; its 

 insertion is by a strong, flat, but short tendon on to the head of 

 tibia. 



9. The Gracilis arises from the symphysis pubis ; it is fused near 

 its insertion with sartorius, and both are inserted by a common 

 tendon along with the semitendinosus. 



10. 11. Gastroc7iemius and Soleus appear to form one muscle 

 with three heads ; the soleus arises from the fibula by a flat ribbon- 

 shaped tendon. 



The Plant aris was totally absent. 



12. The Tibialis posticus ends in a long tendon inserted into 

 tarsus at base of great toe ; its origin is hidden below flexors. 



13, 14. The Flexor longus hallucis and the Flexor digitorum 

 both give off a tendon to the hallux ; they blend before the division 

 of the latter into the tendons of digits. 



15. The Tibialis anticus arises from the tibia only, and not from 

 the femur also. 



16. The Extensor proprius hallucis is long and slender; it 

 supplies last phalanx of hallux. 



There are, as in other Lemurs, four Peroneals. 



The account of the myology given above so far as it goes lends 

 sup|)ort to Messrs. Mivart and Mune's conclusion that " there is 

 nothing of a very singular nature in the muscles distinguishing any 

 one genus from its fellows." 



There is no peculiarity that I have been able to discover which is 

 distinctive of the genus Hapalemur. 



Where the genera of Lemurs differ among themselves, Hapalemur 

 nearly always comes nearest to Lemur. This is the case with the 

 majority of the muscles dissected by me, but it is not invariably so ; 

 a comparison of my descriptions will show a few points of agreement 

 with genera other than Lemur : for example, the absence of a 

 Pectoralis secundus alHes Hapalemur not to the genus Galago, but 

 to Galago alleni only ; in the absence of a plantaris muscle Hapa- 

 lemur agrees with Loris, Nycticebus, Perodicticus, and apparently 

 also Galago peli. 



Proc. Zool. Soc— 181)1, No. XXXL 31 



