OF THE RATEL AND THE WOLVERENE. 



187 



The vulva.— -1 have no notes on the female generative organs 

 of Mellivora ; but in Gulo the vulva is a naked piriform pro- 

 minence a little below the anus, from which it is separated by a 

 band of hair, and the orifice is a vertically elongated slit. (Text- 

 fig. 18, A.) 



Co7iclusio7i. 



From the characters above described it is evident that there 

 is no particular resemblance in any respect between Mellivora 

 and Gulo. The differences, on the contrary, are profound. 

 Miller's suggestion, therefore, of kinship between the two genera 

 must be dismissed, and it appears to me that the evidence on 

 this head supplied by the skulls confirms that of the external 

 characters here discussed. 



To what genera of Mustelid^e, then, are Gido and Mellivora 

 related? Gulo, in my opinion, might be described broadly but 

 with much truth as a gigantic heavily-built Marten (Maries), 

 I can find nothing in the structure of the skull and teeth opposed 

 to the view that these two genera are related, and tolerably 

 closely related *. There are also no difterences of moment 

 between them in the structure of the ear, of the rhinarium, of 

 the upper lip, of the anus, and of the external genitalia ; and the 

 feet of Gulo are little more than broad, short editions of those of 

 JIariesf, the claws, pads, disposition of the digits, hairiness of 

 the soles, etc., being strikingly alike in the two animals. Finall^^ 

 it does not appear to me that Gulo differs much more from 

 Martes than Maries differs from Musiela or Vormela, the three 

 genera which constitute the subfamily Mustelinse as defined in 

 Miller's volume. If this be true, the subfamily Gulonin^e can 

 hardly be considered a defensible group. 



Mellivora is much more difficult to classify. The position 

 assigned to the genus by authors will depend upon their views 

 regarding the plasticity of the skull and teeth as compared with 

 the plasticity of the ears, feet, and other extei-nal organs described 

 in this paper. I cannot agree with de Winton that the genus is 

 closely related to Ictonyx, and I doubt its near affinity Avith the 

 South American genus Galera ; and although the feet and 

 rhinarium and general form are very like those of Meles, and the 

 pouched anus occurs in both the genera, the structure of the 

 skull and teeth should, I think, exclude Mellivora from a place 

 in the Melinae, despite the heterogeneity of that subfamily as 

 constituted in the current text-books. The best way of dealing 

 with the genus at present seems to me to follow Gill in making 

 it the type and sole representative of a special subfamily, the 

 Mellivorinse. 



* The tip of the baculum is also asymmetrical in structure in Martes and 

 Charronia as it is in Mvstela. 



f For figures and descriptions of the feet and ears of Martes martes and 

 M.foina, see my paper on these two species (Proc. Zool, Soc. 1914, pp. 1062-1068). 



