l92 Dii. C. J. iOllSlXil MAJOli, OX .UIOCEXE SliUIlUlELS. [l^eb. 26, 



from the Malay region and Borneo, whicb are both, from the 

 conformation of their molars, not to be distingnisbed from 

 >Scluropferi. I present an enlarged sketcli of the fossil molars, 

 together with the first molar of 'SV. tephromi'la^. The few small 

 differences shown by the comparison of the fossil ^ith the recent 

 species consist in a somewhat larger development of the anterior 

 vallev, and some minor details in the rugosities of the enamel. 

 The cusps also, bordering the basin-shaped crouii. are somewhat 

 stouter in the fossil. 



Length of the four grinders: — m^ 4, m^ ;j'o, m, o, p, 2*5 milliin. 



This is the first fossil of Sciurojiterns recorded. However, 1 

 am of opinion that Sciurus sansaaiensis, Lart., from the Middle 

 Miocene of 8ausan, is but a smaller species of Sciwo/deni.s, judging, 

 at least, from au enlarged figure of a molar published by Pilhol'. 



Depcret has described and figured as a s])ecies of Scwroides an 

 inferior molar from the Lower Pliocene of Koussillon ", which so 

 nuich agrees with the homologous molar in some >Sdnropteri (cf. 

 .SV. volaii~-<), that L think I am right in considering the Roussillon 

 tooth a third fossil form of Hcioroj items. 



But this is not all : under the name of AUo)ti>/s (Ilenlscomijs), 

 Marsh ' and Cope ' have made kuo\\n remains of Rodentia from 

 the Miocene of Oregon. Marsh considers them as "probably 

 related to the Flying-Squirrels,"' adding that the teeth are some- 

 what like those of L^ngulates. 



Cope states' that "the characters of the dentition of this 

 genus (i.e. Meniscomt/s) resemble those of the genus FU'rvmi/s."' 



The figures given by Cope are insufficient for close comparison, 

 as has already been pointed out by 8chlosser : but it nould 

 appear from the description that one of the species, JI, cavatus, 

 a[)pri)aches Scinropterua and especially Sc. pearsoni. The crowns 

 of the inferior molars are described as basin-shaped ; " and 

 although the enamel is crinkled in a complicated manner, the 

 wrinkles are not elevated as in the other species of the genus. 

 Thus the inferior molars more nearly resemble those of ordinary 

 Sciarklo' than do those of the other species of 2Iciilscoin>/s " ''. In 

 the characters mentioned, these other species would form some 

 approach to Pterouiys. 



When comparing the upper teeth of his Alio mi/s )i if ens with those 

 o£ Ungulates, Marsh doubtless refers to the angulate conformation 



^ H. Filhol, ' Etudes siir les Maiumiferes fossiles de Sausan ' (Paris, 1891), 

 pp. 36, 37, pi. i. fig. o. 



-' Cli. Deperet, " Les aniiiiaux pliocenes de Roussillou." Alein. Soc. Geo), do 

 France, Paleontologie, t. i. (Paris, 1890). p. 49, pi. vii. figs. 3d, 39«. t. iii. 1892, 

 p. 121, pi. xii, fig. 14. (The text quoted in the last instance refers to an upper 

 molar figured, but there is no fig. 14 on pi. xii.) 



' O. C. Marsh, " Notice of some new Vei'tebrate Fossils" (Amer. Jourii. ol" 

 Science aud Arts, vol. xiv. 1877, p. 253). 



' E. D. Cope, " The Yertebrata of the Tertiary Formations of the West." 

 Book 1. 1883 (Rep. Uu. States Geol. Survey of the Territ. vol. iii., Wasliingtou, 

 1884). 



' i.e. p. 827. 



« L. c. p. 831. 



