364 NOTES OjST the caniile of the white river oligocene. 



the conules are relatively smaller than in the modern representatives of the family, which 



goes to confirm the conclusion that the name protocone should be given to the innermost 



cusp and that in Can in the middle part of the crown has undergone a special increase in 



complexity. 



CYNODICTIS Gervais. 



Amphicyon Leidy, Marsh, in part. Cards Cope, in part. Galecynus Cope, non Owen. 



It is with much hesitation that I employ the name of this European genus for North 

 American species, for there are certain constant differences which Schlosser ('88,) 

 appears to consider as being of generic value. An actual comparison, however, of the 

 American forms with specimens of Cynodictis lacustris, Gervais' type species, and from 

 the typical locality, Debruges, has failed to reveal any important differences between the 

 two, and, therefore, for the present at least, I retain the name of the Eurojiean genus for 

 the American species, which an- very closely allied, if not positively referable to it. 



The structure of these small carnivores, especially of the John Day species, is much 

 better known than that of Daphamus, though our knowledge of the White River species 

 has hitherto remained very incomplete, and even of the better known John Day forms 

 only Cope's brief descriptions have as yet been published. Despite the fact that Cyno- 

 dictis is one of the commoner White River fossils, well-preserved specimens are com- 

 paratively rare and of these the greater part consist only of skulls. The bones of the 

 skeleton are so small and so fragile that it is exceedingly difficult to obtain more than 

 fragments of them. By dint of great care and attention paid to these small forms, 

 Messrs. Hatcher and Gidley have succeeded in gathering some very fine specimens for 

 the Princeton Museum, and others I owe to the kindness of Mr. John Eyerman. 

 Together, these various individuals represent nearly all parts of the skeleton and enable 

 us to reconstruct the animal ami to compare it with the better preserved and more 

 abundant species of the succeeding John Day formation. 



I. Tin />< i it'll 'inn. 



The dental formula of Cynodictis is: I :.;. (' j. P }. M H, differing from that of 

 Daphcenus only in the absence of the third upper molar. 



A. Upper Jaw. — The incisors are very small, simple and antero-posteriorly com- 

 pressed, giving them chisel-shaped crowns: they increase in size from the first to the 

 third, but the latter does not greatly exceed the others ; no! nearly so much, for exam- 

 ple, as in Canis or Daphainus, and hardly more than in the viverrines. A very short 

 diastema separates the lateral incisor from the canine. 



The canine has a -t iut, gibb ms fang, which produces a marked convexity upon the 

 side of the maxillary; it~ crown is quite elongate and somewhat recurvedahd much com- 



