386 XOTES 0~S THE CANID.E of the white kivee oligocene. 



The unciform facet is large and plane and does not rise so high upon the head as in the 

 modern genus. On the radial side we find no distinct facet for the trapezoid, which, as 

 already mentioned, thins to a mere edge toward the magnum, but there is a well-defined 

 facet for the projection from the head of the second metacarpal, which is proportionately 

 larger than in Canis. On the distal end of the magnum is a narrow facet for the third 

 metacarpal, a facet which is less concave in the dorso-palmar direction than in the case 

 of the last-named genus. 



The unciform is viverrine rather than canine in character, being much narrower 

 in proportion to its vertical height than iu the recent dogs. The facet for the scapho- 

 lunar, which in Canis has an almost entirely proximal position, is in Oynodictis much 

 more nearly lateral. The pyramidal facet is also decidedly more steeply inclined than 

 in the existing genus, the two articular surfaces meeting at a very acute angle and mak- 

 ing the proximal end of the unciform narrow and wedge-shaped. On the radial side is 

 a large facet for the magnum and a small one, confluent with it, for the extension from 

 the head of the third metacarpal. The distal facets, for the fourth and fifth metacarpals 

 respectively, are narrower than in Canis, contracting especially toward the palmar side. 



The metacarpals, five in number, are remarkably short, slender and weak and have 

 but little resemblance to those of the recent dogs. 



The first metacarpal is very small, but is, nevertheless, proportionately much less 

 reduced than in Canis, taking the length of mc iii in each genus as a standard of 

 comparison. The head is thicker and relatively heavier than in Canis and on the radial 

 side, internal to the trapezium facet, is a tubercle for the attachment of the lateral liga- 

 ment. The facet itself is much less deeply concave transversely than in Canis, but 

 more convex in the dorso-palmar direction. The shaft is short, slender, arched toward 

 the dorsal side, anterc-posteriorly compressed and of oval section, tapering considerably 

 toward the distal end. The distal trochlea is very small, but formed entirely like those 

 of the other metacarpals ; it is strongly convex, almost hemispherical and bears a dis- 

 tinct carina upon the palmar face, just as in Daphmnus. In Canis, on the other hand, 

 this structure is of an entirely different character, forming an asymmetrical hemicy- 

 linder, with a broad shallow groove placed somewhat internal to the median line, and 

 thus resembles the trochlea of a phalanx rather than that of the other metacarpals. 



The second metacarpal is represented in the collection only by a single imperfect 

 specimen, consisting of the proximal end. This shows a much stouter shaft than mc i, 

 being of about the same diameter as the corresponding portion of mc iv, and more slen- 

 der than that of mc iii. The head is narrow and bears a saddle-shaped facet for the 

 trapezoid, but sends out a projection which rises more above the head of mc iii than in 

 Canis and articulates with the magnum by a larger facet than in that genus. 



