A MKMOIH UPON THE GENUS 
1 I #1.,. -iiiiu* form US in the humerus of the Tapir. It is 
jrmitiT tulMTiiHit \ HIM 11 HI |)roce8ses are not as prominent as in the 
lapir. I he j,,id signs of division. The less^er 
iipir. 
''''“■ humeriniof tl,c Tapir; and d«» not extend a* far 
r.vtremity is also more pointed. The deltoid ridge is only 
- shaft is deep from before backward and strongly 
tulierosity is 
forwunl; its anterior 
slightlv murki.1. This part of t he shaft is deep troin betore oacKwaru anu s 
«.mpn.ss.Hl. The tns-hlear snrfiu-e of the Immen.s is the most charaeteristiyiart 
and its fom. ami the .livisions of tlie trochlem are quite different rom any that I 
haveexamincsl. altl.ougl. De lUainville’s figure of indicates that the 
tna-hlear surface of the hnmerus in that genus resembles that of Ltmnohyops It 
we i-oinimre the distal e.xtivmity of the humerus in this species with that of the 
Tapir (Fig. S, p. the diffeivnee in cliaracter is at once apparent. In L. 
latufps tim plane of the internal ti-ochlea is oblique to the axis of the Ixme and 
tnk«-s up mon* tliiin half of the articular surfiice. In the Tapir on the other hand 
this tns-hlea is more nearly hori/ontal, and there is no deep concavity of the face 
of the linmerus s«*parating the two trochlea*, hi Z. laticeps the external trochlear 
hiriiis nearly a right angle with the internal and is strongly convex and separated 
nnslially by a nninded keel The external slope is convex and obliipie, tapering to 
a toiigue-slnqicd sn|H*rior prolongation. In Paheothcruan the keel of the e.xternal 
iHM'Iden is not prominent, and in Ifyrachyus this character of the external slope 
of the triN'Idea differs from that of L. laticeps. The condyles are more prominent 
than in the hnmerus »»f the Tajiir, the internal being large and rough. The sujiin- 
at«ir ricigi* is well markial and longer projiortionately than that of the Tafiir. The 
anconeal and siipra-t ns-hlear fos.sa‘ an* very deep, but they contain no perforation. 
AW/«j, (X«». iD.tli:]), 1‘1. XII, figs. 20, 27. — This radius, with the 
ulna ass<H’iated with it lH*longs to the .same individual as a inanu.s, 
No. KMd.'h all lH*ing in the Princeton collection. Corresponding to the 
clom- siinilaritx- in form In'tween the humeral trochlea* of Limnohyops and 
/'altrof/ienum. we find the form «»f their radii similar. The head of the radius 
has the same form a.s in Palcrothcrium. Tlie section of its superior articu- 
lar surface is oval, the l.roadest part being internal and correspondinn- to 
the half tns'hh.a of the humerus. This trochlea is very oblique, and is sepa- 
rat.sl from tin* external by a ridge which is bordered anteriorly and pos- 
lenorlv by pronunent pus-esses. The external trochlea of the radius is con- 
cave ami narn.wer than the internal. It is narrow externally and bordered bv a 
pnamnent hm.k-hke pnn-e.Ks; posteriorly it is excavated deqdy by the external 
nuluMduar facet. I he anterior asia-ct of the shaft of the radius^is convex its pos- 
The 
just 
"■ not" A<'uv 2 by“a'ri,l'‘""''" 
f,,,,.. Tl„. „rtl.e sl.nft of the ra,li i/i, convex, it, p„l 
Its 
