1900.] guypothebium; (neomylodon) listai. 65 



discovery is thus unique in the histoiy of palaeontology, on account 

 of the remarkably fresh state of preservation of all the remains. 

 Some of the new specimens exhibit no indication whatever of 

 having been buried. Many of the bones retain their original 

 whitish colour, apparently without any loss of gelatine ; while 

 both these and other bones, which have evidently been entombed 

 in brownish dust, bear numerous remnants not only of the dried 

 periosteum, but also of shrivelled muscles, ligaments, and cartilages. 

 Very few of the bones are fossilized, in the ordinary sense of the 

 term. 



An admirable brief description of this collection has already 

 been published (oj). cit.) by Dr. Roth, who was the first to recog- 

 nize the generic identity of Neomylodon with Grypoiherium. Some 

 of the specimens, however, are worthy of a more detailed examina- 

 tion ; and Dr. Moreno has kindly entrusted them to me for study 

 in connection with the collections in the British Museum and the 

 Royal College of Surgeons. The following notes, supplementing 

 Dr. Roth's original memoir, are the result of this further investi- 

 gation. 



I. Remains or Grypothebium listai. 



Number of Individuals. 



Among the fragmentary bones of the Ground-Sloth, it is easy to 

 recognize evidence of three individuals, which do not differ much 

 in size. There are three distinct examples of the occiput (nos. 1, 

 2, 3), and fragments of the dentigerous portion of three mandibles. 

 It is also noteworthy that the three malar bones preserved (no. 8) 

 are all different in shape, while three corresponding fragments of 

 the acromial process of the scapula differ in size. One portion of 

 maxilla (no. 5) seems to represent a fourth individual, being 

 probably too small for either of the skulls to which the occiputs 

 belong. Finally, as Dr. Roth has pointed out, one shaft of a 

 humerus (no. 22), which appears to be the bone of an adult, belongs 

 to a much smaller animal than is indicated by any other specimen 

 in the collection. 



Remains of three individuals are thus recognizable with certainty ; 

 two others can probably be distinguished ; while some of the 

 fragments may even belong to a sixth specimen. It must also 

 be noted that other portions of jaws are said to have been dis- 

 covered by E. Nordenskjold l . 



sSkull and Mandible. 



The largest portion of cranium (no. 1) is not stained in any way, 

 and does not retain a trace of the material in which it was buried in 

 any hollow or crevice. It is shown of nearly one-half the natural 

 size, from the right lateral and inferior aspects, in the drawing 

 (PI. V. figs. 1 , 1 a). It does not appear to have been damaged during 



1 E. Hauthal, op. cit. p. 4. 

 Peoo. Zool. Soc— 1900, No.Y. 5 



