1896.] MAMMALS raOM ECUADOR, 511 



Cervidce," P. Z. S. 1878, p. 926, defining the genus Puclua, says 

 " ascendiug rami of the praBiuaxillie reaching the nasals " ; I do not 

 know what specitaen he had before him, but I cannot find this 

 character in any of the skulls in the collections of the British 

 Museum or of the lloyal College of Surgeons ; and I should like here 

 to express my thanks to Professor Stewart for kindly placing this 

 latter collection at my disposal. This character has unfortunately 

 been laid down by subsequent writers as distinguishing the genus 

 Pudua craniologically from Coassus, whereas it is more particularly 

 coassine. Gray, Cat. Mamm. iii. 18.52, p. 240, says "Intermaxillary 

 short, not reaching near to the nasal." Garrod, P. Z. S. 1877, p. 13, 

 says " the gap being filled up by the appearance, superficially, 

 of portions of the nasal turbiual." The situation is explained in 

 these two passages, but Professor Garrod ought to have added that 

 the gap is more often filled up by an anterit)rly projecting process 

 of the maxilla : I &pA the space tilled up in the two different ways 

 in other genera, and also the premaxilla reaching the nasals, or 

 not, even in members of the same species ; there are instances of 

 this in the Museum Collection, in deer both of the Old and New 

 World. I write this to show the worthlessness of this point 

 as a generic or even a specific character ; and, indeed, Sir 

 Victor Brooke says he thinks Gray made too much of it ; so 

 there is no doubt that if he had examined a larger number he 

 would have seen how extremely variable it is ; but having found 

 out as much as he had, I think it is a great pity he followed suit 

 in making so much of this character. I have examined the feet, 

 and osteologically they agree with P. Jiumilis, the ectocuneiform 

 and navicular-cuboid bones being all in one. 



It will be seen that I have eradicated almost every dis- 

 tinguishing craniological character between this genus and 

 Coasstts, the much deeper lachrymal pit and the narrower middle 

 incisors (a character I am unable to prove in the new species) 

 alone remaining ; so that if this animal is to be retained in the 

 genus Pudua, Gray's definition will have to be modified to include 

 both forms of skull as well as the outward differences in structure ; 

 but I do not consider these characters of sufficient weight to 

 justify a new genus being formed, for if this were done, the Pudus 

 would have to be placed in a separate subfamily to do fair justice 

 to the osteology of the feet, in which respect they differ so widely 

 from all other New-World CervidsB ; but this could not be justified, 

 seeing that craniologically they are scarcely generically separable 

 from either Furcifer or Coassvs, wide as these two are apart inter se 

 in the form of their horns, texture of the coat, and growth of the 

 hair on the face, and in the tarsal tufts. Gray says the Pudus 

 have tarsal tufts ; I have failed to find any trace among the 

 specimens in the Museum collection. 



The genus Pudua may tlrerefore be thus defined : — 



New- World group of Cervidse : Telemetacarpi. 



A complete septum divides the nasal cavity into two distinct 

 chambers. 



