NOTES ON THE CANIDJ3 OF THE WHITE KIVEE OLIGOCENE. '.W. I 



the phalanges of the two genera. As compared with the ungual of Daphcenus, it has a 

 somewhat less concave proximal trochlea, a smaller subungual process, and a much less 

 extensive bony hood reflected over the base of the claw. Indeed, this hood is rudi- 

 mentary and can hardly be said to exist at all. The phalanx is also slightly thicker and 

 has more convex faces. Comparing this ungual with that of Canis, we find it to be 

 decidedly sharper, narrower and more compressed and to have a more deeply concave 

 trochlea. In the modern genus the bony hood is almost as well developed as in Daphcenus. 



VII. The Hind Limb. 



The pelvis approximates more nearly to the modern canine type than does that of 

 Daphcenus, though still retaining a number of primitive characters. A conspicuous 

 difference from the recent members of the family consists in the elongation of the post- 

 acetabular portion of the pelvis, which in Cards is short, and in the consequent change 

 of shape of the obturator foramina. The ilium is fairly elongate and in shape is rather 

 more viverrine than canine ; the peduncle is short and laterally compressed, but of con- 

 siderable dorso-ventral breadth. The anterior expansion of the ilium is less extensive 

 than in Canis, in which genus the ilium widens gradually to the free end, or crista, while 

 in Cynoclictis it attains nearly its full width immediately in front of the peduncle, and 

 from this point forward the dorsal and ventral (or ischial and acetabular) borders pursue 

 an almost parallel course. The widening is almost confined to the ischial border, being 

 very feebly marked on the acetabular border, and owing to this the shape of the ilium is 

 much as in the modern Herpestes. The gluteal surface does not display the wide and 

 simple concavity which is seen in Canis, but, as in Daphcenus and Dinietis, there is a 

 narrow dorsal depression and beneath this a convex ridge, but this ridge is not so 

 prominent as in the other White River genera which have been mentioned. The iliac 

 surface is short and narrow, and the sacral surface is small and placed far back, so that 

 the ilium projects well in front of the sacrum. When viewed from above, the two ilia 

 are seen to curve outward less, and to diverge less anteriorly than in the modern dogs. 

 The acetabular border ends in a well-marked tubercle and the ilio-pectineal process is 

 also quite prominent. 



The ischium is relatively long and its anterior portion is slender, but posteriorly it 

 expands into a broad plate. This posterior portion is much less decidedly everted and 

 depressed and occupies a more vertical position than in Canis, and the ischial tuberosity, 

 just as in Daphcenus, is much more feebly developed than in the existing Ounidce. On 

 the other hand, the spine of the ischium and the ischiadic notch are much more distinctly 

 shown and are placed farther behind the acetabulum than in the latter, though not so far 

 back as in Herpestes. The obturator foramen is narrower and more elongate than in 



