PALMOS YOPS LEIDY, AND ITS ALLIES. 
3(11 
lunar of allied species. The superior face is convex from before backwanl, and is 
separated from the posterior by a slight depression externally. A deep vertical 
fossa borders the facet above. The lunar-scaphoid facets are long and narrow, the 
upper one being deeply concave, the lower more nearly plane and continuous with 
the lunar-magnum facet. The facets of the inferior lace of the lunar juv very char- 
acteristic of this species. The whole of the lower part of the inferior face is j)ro- 
longed into a beak-like process which penetrates posteidorly nearly to the distal fice 
of the cai'pus, and thus the magnum and unciform appear to be nearly sepanited 
from each other upon viewing the carpus anteriorly. The jxj.sterior prolongation 
of the lunar is not subdivided equally, its uhiar side being much larger than its radial. 
The lunar-magnum facet is nearly vertical in position, its posten>-suiK*rior part 
curving upward and backward to become continuous with the lunar-.scaph(jid 
facet, which, at its posterior part, is very narrow and nearly shut off from tlie |m)s- 
terior facet for the pivot of the magnum. The facet on the lunar for the j)ivot of 
the magnum is much more nearly vertical in position than in P. paludosus, and not as 
concave. The lunar-unciform facet is large and dceirly concave; tlie anterior 
part of the lunar bordering on this facet is very obli(jue in iM)sition running down- 
ward and inward to meet the lunar-magnum facet and form the beak of the lunar. 
In comparing the carpus of Linmohyops laticeps with that of other forms 1 can find 
no Perissodactyle in which the lunar is so widely prolonged between the elements of 
the distal row as in this genus. In Hyrachyus the lunar-maginmi facet is lateral 
in position and more vertically placed than in L. laiiccps, but nevert hele.ss its distal 
extremity is not prolonged as in this species. Iscctolophus shows a ])rolongation 
of the lunar distally, but in that genus the two distid facets of this l>om- an“ more 
nearly equal, and have about the same angle of inclination to ejich other. In 
Tapirus and Palceotherium the lunar does not cx’oss the middle plane t)f tin* carpus 
(at least in P. medium, see De Blainville). Titanothcruwi approaches /’. paludosus 
more nearly in the form of its lunar, its lunar-magnum and unciform ndn- 
tions being about the same. There are a numher of other lunars in the tadlection 
which belong to a form closely allied to L. laticeps, Imt as they aiv m)t asscwiated 
with any other bones of the skeleton I cannot identify them with certainty. In 
these lunars the proportions in the size of the lunar-magnum facets undergo gn*at 
variation. In the most extreme form, No. (>, this facet is nearly vertical, when-as 
in No. 5 it is more oblique and very much reduced in size. 
Ciineifoimt . — The cuneiform of Z. laticeps has about the same shape as that of /’. 
paludosus, although rather more compressed. Its ulnar face is slightly concave and 
the cuneiform-phsiform facet is long and narrow. Its unciform face is rather bi-oad. 
and more concave than m P. paludosus. 
Pisiform . — The pisiform is unusually well preserved in this carpus ; its form is 
long and compressed, its distal extremity being rough and compivssed finm side to 
side. The neck of the pisiform constricts the tuber from the articidar snri'ace which 
presents a narrow facet for the cuneiform. The pisifonn-ulnar facet is triangidar in 
