1^90.] 



SOUTH-AMERICAN CANID^. 



109 



To this paper Burmeister replied (Arch. f.Natur. xlii. vol. i. p. 116), 

 and after blaming Philippi for uon-atteutioii to his figures, lie 

 expresses his opinion that the animal from Chile, which Philippi 

 speaks of as the Chilla, is his G. ijrucilis. In his work on the 

 Argentine Zoology, vol. in. p. 150, he uses a note of interrogation 

 about it. Such is the literature of tiie subject, so far as I have been 

 able to ascertain, up to the present time. 



The varieties or species hitherto referred to seem to me to arrange 

 themselves in two sets, as regards the proportions borne by the 

 fourth upper premolar to the upper molars. In C. uzarce, C, griscus, 



Fig. 



Side view of skull of Caiiis urostictus. 



C. ijracUis, C./uluipes, aad C. entrerianus, and the C. vetulus of Lund, 

 it ranges from 100 and 107 up to 100 and 130. In C. vetulus of 

 Burmeister and the British Museum specimen like it (my C. parvi- 

 dens) it varies from 100 and 155 to 100 and 166. But there is in the 

 British Museum a very interesting skull ^ extracted from a skin, also 

 there preserved, which was bought of Claussen from Brazil. On its 

 label is a suggestion, made by an unknown author, that it may be the 

 C brasi/iensis of hund (I. c. p. 10, pi. xlii. figs. 1-3), but this it cannot 

 be. Lund gives a side view of the skull (probably life-size), which 

 shows not only a strikingly different configuration, but an extrenily 

 contrast as to the dimensions of the teeth. In his species the last 



' ^'o. 10. 1. -^b. 6. i.Uuo c, out of skill 11. .j. 7. 1. 



Proc. ZooL. Sue— Jb90, No. IX. 9 ' 



