1907.] 



RECENTLY IN THE SOCIETY S GARDENS. 



671 



the palatal liin of the posterior nares ; also to the width across the 

 occipital condyles and to the distance between the posterior edge 

 of the canine and the posterior edge of the last cheek-tooth {m^) of 

 the maxilla. The auditory meatus also is correspondingly large. 



So far as dentition is concerned, the skull presents a marked 

 difi'erence from those of F. ocreata and F. sylvestris in the reduction 

 of the inner cusp of the maxillaiy carnassial to a small rounded lobe. 



The following measurements will show some other differences 

 between the skulls of examples of F. nigripes, F. ocreata, and 

 F. sylvestris. 



The chief differences between the skulls of F. nlgripes and 

 F. ocreata may be tabulated as follows * : — 



a. Inner cusp of maxillary carnassial large ; length of auditory 

 bulla much less than the length of the space between its 

 antei'ior border and that of the mesopterygoid fossa and about 

 equal to the length of the 2nd and 3rd maxillaiy premolars, 

 less than the width across the occipital condyles ... ocreata. 



a . Inner cusp of maxillary carnassial reduced to a small lobe ; 

 length of auditory bulla about equal to the length of the 

 space between its anterior border and that of the meso- 

 pterygoid fossa and to the distance between the socket of 

 the canine and the posterior border of the 2nd premolar 

 of the maxilla and to the width across the occipital 

 condyles nigripes. 



The diminutiveness of F. nigripes suggests that it is a d war-fed 

 species ; and its resemblance to F. ocreata further suggests that it 



* Mr. W. L. Solater says that the skulls of i^. n'ujfipes and F. ocreata cafra 

 resemble each other except in the matter of size. It seems hardly likely that the skull 

 and teeth of F. nigripes vary to the extent necessary for the reconciliation of this 

 statement and that made above embodying the ditlerences. Hence it must be 

 supposed that Mr. Sclater never saw the skull of this species, but was merely quoting 

 Dr. Matschie's remarks. 



Proc. Zool. Soc— 1907, No. XLV. 45 



