1897.] MYOLORY OF THE TEUBESTRIATi OARTVIVOBA. 391 



latissimiis dorsi teudon aud occasioiaally, as in the case of one 

 specimen of Ursus americanus (49), Viverricula malaccensis (15), 

 and JS^asua (60), gives off the dorso-epitrochlearis. 



Teres minor. — This muscle is sometimes very closely fused with 

 the infraspinatus, sometimes fairly distinct. We are not inclined 

 to lay any stress on this condition, since it varies in different 

 specimens of the same animal ; moreover, that which to one observer 

 would be fairly distinct might be indistinct to another. Meckel 

 (XXXIX.) says that the teres minor is absent as a distinct muscle 

 in most Carnivora. In the following animals the muscle is 

 described as distinct : — Fells leo (1), F. eatus (6), Cryiitoproeta (10), 

 Viverra civetta (12, 13), Genetta (18), Hi/ama striata (26), Hycena 

 crocuta (29), Cards familiar is (31, 39), Lycaon pictus (44), tJrsus 

 maritimus (45), Procyon lotor (53), Galictis harhara (64), Mxtstela 

 jmtoriiis (65). In the following animals the teres minor was 

 inseparable from the infraspinatus : — Proteles (25), Hyama striata 

 (28), Ursus americanus (49), Frocyon lotor (54), Cercoleptes (61), 

 Lutra vulgaris (74), and Liitra cinerea (78). To these must be 

 added the animals on which Meckel fovmded his generalization 

 and probably many of those in which no mention is made of the 

 muscle. 



Biceps cubiti. — In by far the greater number of Carnivora this 

 is a single-headed muscle, the Ursidse, as will be seen, forming a 

 marked exception. When only one head is mentioned it is the 

 one from the top of the glenoid cavity which passes through the 

 shoulder- joint. In the following animals the biceps had only one 

 head: — Felisleo (1, la), F. tigris (3), F. catus (6, 7, 7a), F. caracal 

 (8), Cymeluru-s juhatus (9), Cryptoprocta (10, 11), Viverra civetta 

 (12, 13), Genetta (16, 16a, 17, 18), Paradoxurus (19, 21), Herpestes 

 (24), Proteles (25), Hycena striata (26, 28), Hycfna crocuta (29), 

 Canis familiaris (31, 34, 35, 36, 37) (see fig. 8, p. 390), Canis 

 aureus (42), Lycaon pictus (44), Canis vulpes (42), Ursus americanus 

 (50), U. arcios (47) (on left side), Procyon lotor (54, 55), P. cancri- 

 vorus (57), A'asua (58, 59, 60, XXXIX.), Galictis vittata (03), 

 Mustela pmtorius (65), M. foina (66), Ictonyx (69, 70), Meles taxus 

 (71, 72, 73), Lutra vtdgaris (74, 76), L. cinerea (78). In describing 

 the biceps of the Civet both Macalister (IX.) and Young (VIII.) 

 speak of the single head as rising from the coracoid process. We 

 found the same arrangement in Herpestes (24), but were convinced 

 that this head corresponds not to the short but to the long one of 

 human anatomy; our chief reason for this is that it passes through 

 the shoulder-capsule aud bicipital groove. 



In the following animals a second head \\ as found rising from 

 the coracoid process with the coraco-brachialis ; Paradoxurus (20), 

 Ursus maritimus (45, 46), Ursus arctos (47) (on right side), Ursus 

 americanus (48, 49, 52), Procyon lotor (53) (very feebly marked), 

 Cercoleptes (61, 62). The insertion is, in most cases, into the 

 radius only, though in the Hysenidse it is described as going to the 

 radius and ulna. As a rule, there is very little insertion into 

 fascia, though Shepherd describes a strong bicipital fascia in 



