ANNALS OF THE QUEENSLAND MUSEUM, No. 5. 
11 
been crushed inwards and downwards so that a deep and 
well-defined area of impression has been left, Ba., and that impression 
is a mould in the soft bone of the surface of the tooth of a young 
Thylacoleo. On the inner side, opposite to this is another impression, 
Bb. 1, but shallower and with irregular vertical ridges and groovings just 
as clearly produced by the opposite tooth of the same jaw. The 
kangaroo mandible has unquestionably been grasped transversely by 
Thylacoleo jaws, which have vainly attempted to crush it between them. 
In addition to these signs of the work done bv the premolars, the 
caniniform incisors of Thylacoleo have also left sufficient evidence of 
their destructive function. The subject of Plate VI., figs. B., a and 
h, is the distal end of a tibia. On one side of it is a deep circular pit, 
Ba, sunk through the substance of the bone by a conical body, which, in 
its passage, has thrush inwards the surface of the bone ; opposite to 
this, on the other side, B b, are two simil ar pits. Pits like these are by no 
means infrequent, and can hardly be ascribed to any other agent than 
Thylacoleo. The ascription is, of course, open to the objection that 
they might have been caused by conical teeth other than those of 
Thylacoleo, crocodilian for example; but as on some bones they are 
found accompanying the transverse cuts — for example, on Plate VI., 
Fig. B« — it is difficult to suppose that the two kinds of toothmarks 
had different origins. 
Whoever is inclined to think that the conclusions drawn from the 
two classes of data adduced in the preceding notes are as veritable as 
the facts on which they are founded are verifiable will have no 
difficulty is summarising the results as follows : — That in the old 
fauna there was a Dasyuridine animal of bulk commensurate with that 
of the skull called Thylacoleo ; that this beast, though probably 
carnivorous, was also habitually ossivorous — in fact, a marsupial hyaena; 
that the marks of its teeth upon bones are such as could be made by 
the teeth of Thylacoleo ; that in the absence of positive proof, or 
indeed any evidence to the contrary, we cannot reasonably refuse to 
accept that kind of evidence in this case, which in so many analogous 
cases we allow to direct our judgment, circumstantial and inferential, 
and decide that Thylacoleo was a beast of prey belonging to or nearly 
akin to, the Dasyuridae. 
In brief, one might suggest that, systematically, Thylacoleo shouid 
be placed under Dasyuridse as a sub-family Thylacoleonina. 
