398 



R. 8. Lull — New Camels in 



to the roots. The proximal portion of a left metatarsal 

 is also present. There is, however, no direct evidence 

 that the two bones pertain to the same individual. 



The second specimen is Cat. No. 10922, Y. P. M., col- 

 lected in 1875 by L. S. Davis from the same level in Hay- 

 stack valley 10 miles below the Cove on the John Day 

 River. It consists of a right mandible, dorsal centra, 

 astragalus, and both femora and tibiae, all four incomplete 

 as to their shaft. 



Distinctive characters. — Canine caniniform, sharply 

 recurved, the section ovate. P^ two-rooted, separated 

 from the preceding and following teeth by extensive 



/0^/7, Y. p. M. 

 Fig. 4. — Paratylopus cameloides (Wortman). Crown view. X 3/5. 



diastemata, of w^hich the posterior one is somewhat the 

 longer. Crown compressed, rounded by wear, with a 

 distinct posterior cutting edge. P^ sub-triangular, exter- 

 nal buttress inconspicuous. M^ characterless through 

 wear, markedly smaller than the succeeding molars. M- 

 and M^ with well developed mesostyles, external but- 

 tresses, and rather pronounced internal basal pillars. On 

 M^ the internal style may have been present, but if so, has 

 been worn away. Enamel of teeth rugose. Muzzle 

 rather slender. Marked depression above and behind P^ 

 Infra-orbital foramen above posterior margin of P^. 

 Palatine foramina not preserved. 



Compared with the type lower jaw of P. cameloides, 

 there is a close agreement, as the molar teeth fit accur- 

 ately. There is in the type, however, no trace of external 

 basal pillar corresponding to the internal basal pillars in 

 the present specimen, but this has been shown to be an 

 inconstant feature within a species."^ The teeth in the 

 type also appear more hypsodont, but the Yale specimen 

 shows a much greater degree of wear. With the referred 

 superior dentition (No. 7915, A. M. N. H.), however, there 



^ See E. S. Lull, this Journal (4), 50, 104, 1920. 



