526 



PHTLLOSIOMIDJE. 



25. STENODERMA. 



Stenoderma, Geofroy, Desor, de VEgt/pte, ii. p. 114 (1812). 

 Artibeeus, Oei-vau (non Leach), Exp6d. du Conite de Castelnau, 



Zoologie, p. 34 (1855). 

 PhyUops, Peters, MB. Ahad. Berl. 1865, p. 356. 

 Anteus, Oray, P. Z. S. 1866, p. 117. 

 Histiops, Peters, I. c. 1869, p. 399. 

 Stenoderma, PhyUops, Peltorhinus, Peters, I. c. 1876, p. 433. 



Crown of the head slightly elevated ; muzzle very short and broad, 

 in length considerably less than the distance between the eyes ; ears 

 and general form of the uose-leaf as in Artibeus ; interfemoral mem- 

 brane short. 



Dentition. Inc. ^, e. y^j^, pm. ^^, m. g^^ or g^. 



Molars very broad, with concave crowns, as in Artibeus ; palate 

 extremely wide and short, deeply emarginate behind, owing to the 

 absence or imperfect development of the horizontal plate of the 

 palate-bones. 



Mange. The AntUlean Subregion. 



The species of this genus agree so closely in external characters, 

 and even in dentition, with those of Artibeus, that it would be im- 

 possible, from a consideration of these characters alone, to separate 

 them into a distinct genus. The skiill, however, shows remarkable 

 differences in its structure, the horizontal plate of the palate-bones, 

 which is so well developed in Artibeus, being here either partially or 

 wholly absent, and the length of the jaws being so much diminished 

 in proportion to their width, that both the upper canine and first 

 premolar are in a plane considerably internal to the second premolar. 



The habits of the species of Stenoderma appear to be similar to 

 those of Artibeus (see p. 514). 



The three species which represent this genus are by Dr. Peters 

 considered genericaUy distinct, and a separate genus has been formed 

 by him for each, the three genera constituting a group. The cha- 

 racters by which these genera are, according to Dr. Peters, defined, 

 will be understood from the Synoptical Table below, in which I use 

 them for distinguishing the species. The presence or absence of the 

 last minute upper molar can scarcely be considered even of specific 

 value (as I have shown in the allied genus Artibeus) ; the obtuse 

 outer cusp of the inner incisor in S. achradojphilum is represented 

 by the projection near the middle of the outer side of the same tooth 

 in S. rufum and S. falcatum, and the concavity of the frontal bones 

 in S. rufum differs in degree only from that of the same parts in S. 

 falcatum, while the similarity of the dentition of the two species 

 indicates their near affinity. 



This genus, founded by Geoffrey on a single badly-preserved spe- 

 cimen {S. rufum), was long confounded with Artibeus, and Dr. 

 Peters, on examination of the type (from which the skull had been 

 removed), believed that it was identical with his genus Vampyrops ; 

 subsequently, however, he has shown that the missing skull was de- 

 scribed and figured by Gervais under the name of Artibceus undatus 

 {vide MB. Akad. Berl. 1876, pp. 429-433). 



