1906.] ox TUE XUDIBRANCHS OF SOUTHERN IXDIA AXD CEYLOX. 999 



wliich may be appi'opriately named Ursus oncdayanus ivardi, the 

 figured skull being taken as the type. 



[Since this paper was read I have received from the Director of 

 the Bergen Museum some notes on the Bruang purchased from 

 Rowland Ward Ltd., together with a photograph of the specimen. 

 The skin and hair are wholly black, with the exception of the nose, 

 which is ferruginous, the chin, which is greyish white, and the 

 cream-coloured gorget. Although the head is shortei', the genei-al 

 appearance of the animal seems very like that of U. torquatus, the 

 ears being much lai'ger than in U. tnalayanus. In fact, had I not 

 been assured by Rowland Ward Ltd. that both skin and skull 

 came together, I should hav(} thought that a skull of the last- 

 named species had been mounted in a skin of the former. As 

 it is, I hesitate to draw any further conclusions with regard to 

 the distinctness of the Tibetan Bruang from the characters of 

 the skin.] 



G. On the Nudibranchs of Southern India and Ceylon, v^^ith 

 special reference to the Drawings by Kelaart and the 

 Collections belonging to Alder and Hancock preserved 

 ill the Hancock Museum at Newcastle-ou-Tyne. — ^No. II. 

 By Sir ( ^HARLEs Eliot, K.C.M.G., F.Z.S. 



[Received December 11, 1906.] 



Subsequently to the publication of my paper on the Nudi- 

 branchs of Southern India and Ceylon, which appeared in the 

 Society's ' Proceedings' (Proc. Zool. Soc. 1'906, pp. 636-691), the 

 authorities of the Haiicock Museum at Newcastle-on-Tyne were 

 fortunate enough to discover a considerable collection of micro- 

 scopic slides belonging to Alder and Hancock, and most courteously 

 j)laced the same at my disposal for examination. The objects 

 preserved are almost entirely the buccal organs of nudibranch. 

 from various parts of the world, and I have lost no time in 

 examining such of them as concern the Indian and Cingalese 

 nudibranchs mentioned in my previous paper. It is a pity that 

 it should have been published before the radulee were discovered, 

 but the results indicated in it are not materially affected, though 

 several of the identifications are confirmed. The present notes 

 should be regarded as a supplement to it. The same abbreviations 

 are used, and references are not repeated except where it seems 

 necessary. 



Some of the slides bear full names, but others inscriptions 

 like Boris 113, or a simple number. In most cases it is pos- 

 sible to give the name with certainty, for the number I'efers 

 to the bottle in which the specimen is preserved. Thus Doris 

 113 corresponds to the bottle marked " No. 113. Doris for mosa — 

 Madras, Walter Elliot, Esq!' No notice has been taken of those 



Peoc. Zool. Soc— 1906, No. LXYL 66 



