358 



MR. C. FORSTER-COOPER ON 



ridges, but the anterior seems to be weaker than the posterior, 

 while the preceding premolars seem to have no anterior ridges. 

 Chalicotherium sivcdense is like SGhizotherium in this respect, 

 according tq Falconer's figures in the ' Fauna Antiqua Sivalensis,' 

 plate Ixxx. 



There are other differences fi'om Macrotheriuon in the shape of 

 the various teeth, so that there are some grounds for Dr. Pilgrim's 

 separating them. 



Whether or not the Bngti specimens can be placed in any 

 other described genus is even more difficult to decide. Our com- 

 bined material is scanty and none too well preserved, so that 

 many characters remain unknown or at best uncertain, and for 

 the present it seems useful to retain the generic name of 

 Phyllot'dlou: 



The material forming the basis of the j)5^"esent description 

 consists of : — 



I 



1. A series of upper teeth, pm. 3-4, m. 1-2, much worn but 



giving the oiitline and general shapes of the teeth. 



2. A moderately worn third and fourth upper premolar. 



3. Thi-ee separate upper molars. 



4. A fourth upper premolar only a little worn. 



5. Fragmentary lower molars and lower jaws, sufficient when 



combined to give an outline of the middle portion of 

 the mandible. 



6. Some separate toe bones. 



The first and second specimens (text-fig. 1) supplement Dr. Pil- 

 grim's figure * in giving a better preserved shape of pm. 3 and 



Text-fiaure 1. 



PJii/llotilloii naricus. 3rd and 4tli premolars, 1st and 2nd molars, X i. 



in adding the shape of the second molar. The third premolar as 

 well as the fourth (this ou.tline filled in from the second specimen) 

 have, roughly speaking, a square outline ; the anterior outside 

 border is produced into a somewhat prominent style, more pro- 

 nounced than in Macrothermvi and to much the same degree as 

 in Moropus. In proportions the teeth, dift'er from other described 



* JMeui. loc. cit. pi. xii. lig. 



