mA 
416 Scientific Intelligence. 
Dr. Leidy, however, in an essay just published (Proc. Acad., 
1868, P. nee in expressing his belief in the ae te. of the 
two genera, states that “teeth of like sha ape” (i. e., like Mega- 
losaurns), v4 referred “ me to Dinodon, alone belong to this ge 
_ nus,” and names the species represer nted by the truncate teeth, or 
i - ue Deioden hebridwie Aublysodon mirandus, He then goes 
ay: “Future discover ry may prove Lelaps and Dinodon 
identioal ” and on p, 1 * “ An enemy which may perhaps 
on nearer comparison of Bithesickatig parts prove to be another 
epee of the same genus, until now supposed to be different, un- 
rthe names of Dinodon and Leela aps.” It is thus sufficiently 
re ious that the proposition is to refer Lelaps as a synonym 0 
of Dinodon, It appears to me, onthe other hand, that is contrary 
to the rules of nomenclature, and the principles which a at 
their root, and that the name Awbdlysodon isa synonym 
nodon 
This is is, however, on the nei peete ae Leidy had left the 
question open or uncertain, as to w of the two forms of teeth 
was characteristic of his genus Dinsitn ink, however, he 
has not left it undecided, and I am supported i in is by the opin- 
ion of von Meyer. 
The teeth of Leelaps, both from New Jersey and Nebraska, do 
not differ from those of Megalosaurus, while those of Dinodon 
It was not to be supposed that Dinodon was established on 
in 
the Proc. Academy (p. 198), | that they are “identical in charactet 
with those of Mopelsbast rus. 
e, however, specifies that the truncate teeth of Dinodon ae r 
ally those that characterize it, in the following words: in 
the entire dentition of Megalosaurus has not yet been ascertain 
it may turn out to be the case that in other parts o 
those known it possesses teeth like the ones abo: 
euliar. Should, on future discovery, such a sondeaee hin 
be proved to exist, Dinodon would then cease to be anyt Ad 
The tre spate tee 
are then the “ peculiar” feature of Dinodon, and all that prevents 
vii, F ). 267) that while some of the teeth are identical ee vis 
of \ egalosaurus, “the others indicate such peer te - 
: tical grounds, 
* Falconer Says of fy s che — a difference rene eesngiee aie ged ete 
it goes, indicates the c: 
tion would = to arrest on in shi threshold the investigation of the means 
phical forms, presenting common characte 
Fist. 1 64, 
ciated from, acommon origin.—(Nat. Review, 363, | p. 64) 
