56 PROCEEDINGS OF THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY. [NoV. 4^ ■ 



Italian Fox (Canis melanogasfer*). The fossil Canis differs also 

 from these and from every existing species of Dog, Wolf and Jackal 

 with which I have been able to compare it, in the greater develop- 

 ment of the anterior and posterior tubercles at the base of the crown 

 of the third and fourth premolars. 



The singular Hyaenoid subgenus of Canis, represented by the 

 South African species {Lycaon pictus), presents the above character 

 of the fossil, with the notches of the hinder tubercle or talon, more 

 marked even than in the fossil Canis of CEningen. The sectorial 

 or carnassial tooth of the fossil (m V) has a shorter antero-posterior 

 extent of crown than in any known existing species of true Canis ; 

 the subgenera Megalotis and Proteles are of course excepted from 

 this comparison, the one differing in the excess of number of true 

 molars, the other in the deficient number, small size and simple 

 form of those teeth +. 



The second and third true molars of the lower jaw of the CEningen 

 Canis, which are preserved in the left moiety of the skeleton, show 

 as well-marked differences of form and proportion as the teeth above 

 described : the second (m 2) is relatively smaller, the third (m 3) has 

 a more pointed conical crown. This latter character might be modi- 

 fied by age ; the other characters deduced from the shape and size 

 of the teeth are not explicable on any known effects of age or range 

 of variety hitherto observed in existing species of Canis. More- 

 over, in the shape and proportions of the premolars and of the first 

 true molar, there may be perceived a nearer affinity in the fossil to 

 the closely-allied genus Viverra than is manifested by any existing 

 known species of Canis ; and one might regard the single tubercu- 

 late molar of the lower jaw of Viverra civetta as the homologue of 

 the two small tuberculate molars of the fossil, coalesced into one 

 tooth. 



M. de Blainville, in alluding to the fossil in question in the fasci- 

 culus of his admirably illustrated ' Osteographie' relating to the 

 genus Canis, says± : " II n'admet aucun doute sur son analogic avee 

 le Renard qui existe encore dans nos contrees, comme I'a parfaite- 

 ment reconnu M, Gideon Mantell dans I'examen de cette espece de 

 cadavre desseche et tout entier. La proportion des os du metacarpe 

 et du tarse donnee par les figures, semble cependant indiquer une 

 espece plus robuste, pent etre un Chacal." 



A more important character than general breadth of the feet in 

 proportion to their length, which is greater in a marked degree in 

 the fossil than in any Jackal or other species of Canis, is the dif- 

 ferent proportion of the digits amongst themselves, particularly the 

 greater development of the pollex or innermost digit of the fore- foot 

 (fig. 3. ml). 



In the Jackal the metacarpal bone of the pollex is two-fifths the 



* I am indebted to the Prince of Canino for the opportunity of making the 

 comparison with this species, which has been accm-ately defined by that distin- 

 guished naturah'st. 



tSee my ' Odontography,' p. 476, pi. 125. + Page 106. 



