KUNGL. SV. VET. AKADEMIENS HANDLINGAR. BAND 48. N:0O 5. 21 
| | | I 
| Distribution Distribution] Nairobi | | 
lof genus or Jorspeciesand Forests-mammals xerophile Escarp- | Kenia Meru 
| subgenus closely allied FE rent | 
forms. | | | 
A E (We) | Mungos sanguineus orestes HELLER . . .. . oc 4 : S : - 
» A IHleCrS AD AT GUSPIGEN: sid fe LR ks a EA ST EFG SKE, a : | : | + 
| At. | E Eeliosciikuar kenics I NEOMmANN VER. UD kk : ES FF 
| A | » Paraxerus jacksoni DE WINTON (capitis THOS.) . . . | fR 27 | 
» » » » Kakan (ELELEER) 1 o4 de Ål å å g | I 
Ea We | E Wc Otomys irroratus elgonis WROUGHTON. . . .. . . a | : ; + 
A | » Dendromys, YNstgmMs. LHOMAS: = e « s « sp 6 s e jo & | å + | ; 5 | 
» | > Kpinvyskjacksom "DE WINTON. ec . 6 = e se eo es e « å : | + | 
| » | » » dennie THOMAS . .. 2 
> » ILreggada triton THOMAS . . . . » « 0 & STUTESIRR: Lol | + 
At. | EE. (At) Cricetomys gambianus kenyensis OsGoop + | 
» | E Wc Lophuromys aquilus zena (DOLLMAN) . . » « «= « > «| 7: + + 
A | E Wc (At) | Arvicanthis pulchellus massaicus (PAGENST.) . . +» «+ «| 4 : | + | 
| » | Es » pumälio diminutus THOMAS . .» » » » > | 4 + | 
| Eno | E. Lophiomys ibeanus 'TMOMAS . » ss ss cv IOSOLA I ; | Mau | 
| A | » Procavia (Dendrohyrax) crawshayi THOMAS . . . . . : | + (CE) | 
| » | E (a) (Blephas africanus peeli LYDEKKER). . . . « . s «+ 5 | ; I GE) 
» | » Potamocherus cheropotamus kenie LÖNNBERG . . « « + S lut) FEED 
WE | E (W) Hylocherus meinertzhageni THOMAS. . . . . . sc v : a | + | | 
; A | E. Cephalophus harveyi keni:<e LÖNNBERG . ..... å | ä + | + | 
| » | = Cephalophus sp. . . « « e « SORG RSK SENS 5 | (EE) | É | : | 
| Es | E (s) Nlesotragus' moschatus Vv. DUBEN . ee ee se 6 ov | + | : | + | + | 
A | E Tragelaphus haywoodi THOMAS . . « . « . + HESTEN + | + + | | 
I OW (At) ; E (W) Boocercus! eurycerusi isaaet THOMAS . dk sc. . 5 å (+) 4 
| A E (8) Buffelusi caffer:radeliffet .IHOMAÅS, .mjåll . « Ben | z | y I (+) 
A short discussion of the geographical distribution of these animals collected 
or observed by this expedition in British East Africa may not be out of the way. 
Before this is begun, however, a few words ought to be said about some of the 
principal zoogeographical systems applied to the African continent. The perhaps 
best known is that of WALLACE! from the year 1876. He proposed »three great 
continental subregions» cutting off from the Ethiopian region the land to the north 
of Sahara,” which was laid to the Palearctic region. These three subregions were: 
1:o the East African, which principally included »the open pasture lands of interior 
tropical Africa»? — — — — — »with a hot and dry climate and characterised by 
a grassy vegetation interspersed with patches of forest»; 2:o the West African »being 
almost wholly dense forests where not cleared by man, and having the hot moist 
1 Geographical Distribution of Animals. Vol. I p. 251. 
>? This proceeding is of course artificial and arbitrary. As far as the mammals are concerned at least, 
North Africa is (or has been) a border-land which has received contingencies as well from the Palearctic as from 
Ethiopian regions and its fauna is mixed containing still elements from both, but probably the Ethiopian ele- 
ments formerly have been more numerous than tbey are in the present time. 
3 Or »all the open country of tropical Africa south of Sahara» — (I. c. p. 258). 
