568 MR. F. E. BEDDARD ON THE ANATOMY OF [May 26, 



impossible, as it would appear, to suggest any improvement in 

 the figures of Dr. Mitchell from this side of the question. 



Small Int. Large Int. Csecmn. 



Dendrolagus inihstus 2 H'' '^'^ ^ 



Trichosurus imlpecida (S 70| 81 155 



Maci'opus melcmops J 156 162 18 



„ giganteus 2 1"2 54 7 



,, hrachyurus § 52 21 2^ 



hillarcUeri 146 30 2| 



Hypsiprytnnus cuniculus $ ... 24 10 Ig 



,, gaimardi J ••• 40 28 2 



Apart from the relative lengths of the small and large intestines 

 and the form of the cfecum, or its absence, upon which I have 

 no new facts of my own to record in the present papei-, but 

 concerning which I take the opportunity of utilising a sei"ies of 

 measurements recorded by my predecessor Mr. W. A. Forbes (see 

 list above), the intestinal tract of martimals exhibits a series of 

 modifications in different groups and in members of those groups, 

 which may be considered under the following headings, viz. : — 



(1) The relationship of the various coils of the intestine to 

 each other. (2) The fixity or freedom of the loops of the small 

 intestine. (3) The permanent loops of the colon. 



Under all of these headings I have a few new facts to record 

 with respect to the Marsupials and to certain other mammals. 



(1) The relations of the coils of the intestine to each other. — It 

 is clear from the descriptions given by Owen *, that as a rule 

 at any rate t the intestinal tract in the Marsupials is a freely 

 movable tract throughout, having no mesenteric connections 

 between the colon and other regions. As Sir Richard Owen was 

 particular to describe such folds and connections when they 

 occur in other mammals (as for example Rodents), the absence of 

 any such statements in his papers upon Marsupials leads to the 

 infei'ence that such do not exist in those mammals ; a statement 

 which I am able to confirm from my own dissections. Other 

 observers have noted a similar series of facts. Prof. Grant in 

 describing the anatomy of Perameles nasuta X has noted the 

 dimensions of the several tracts of the intestine but has made 

 no comment upon any folds of the gut, which would certainly 

 have been mentioned (one assumes) had they been present, since 

 the same observer almost at the same time § carefully described 

 such folds in the Paca. Vrolik, in describing the anatomy |j of 

 Dasyurus ursinus, does not appear to have said anything about 



* On Dasyurus macrourus {=D. maculatus), P. Z. S. 1835, p. 7; on Macropus 

 parryi, ibid. 1834, p. 152 ; on DendroJagus inustus, ibid. 1852, p. 103. 



t This does not, however, seem to apply to the Wombat (see Owen, P. Z. S. 1836, 

 p. 49) which requii-es re-examination from this point of view. 



X Mem. Wernerian Soc. vi. 1832, p. 184. 



§ Loe. cit. & t. cit. p. 133. 



il Tiidschr. wis- en natuurk. Wetensch. 1851, p. 153; brieflj' abstracted in Ann. 

 Mag. Nat. Hist. ix. 1852, p. 245. 



