ADDITIONAL SIWALIK PERISSODACTYLA AND PROBOSCIDIA. 33 
be so, the milk-molars mentioned above, and figured in plate XXXII. of the first 
volume, cannot belong to that species. Those teeth do not, moreover, belong to M. 
angiistidens ; and, for the reason mentioned above, it is improbable that thej belong 
to M. pandionis. This is confirmed by the valleys of mm. 4 (vol. I., pi. XXXII., fig. 
3) having no cement, being straight and very open, and the ridges low and nearly 
vertical. The cranium in which these milk-molars, together with m. 1 , are contained, 
shows, moreover, no signs of the presence of premolars,^ which there is every 
reason to believe were developed in M. pandionis, as in M. angiistidens. On this view 
it seems highly probable that the milk-molars referred in the first volume to M. 
falconeri, really belong to a fourth Siwalik species of trilophodont mastodon.^ 
The only other interpretation of the serial homology of the tooth represented 
in woodcut fig. 6, would be to consider it as pm. 4 . In that case it could not belong 
to either M. angiistidens or M. pandionis, of which the corresponding teeth are known 
(pi. V.): and if it belonged to M. faleoneri, then the milk-molars referred to that 
species in the first volume Avould have been succeeded by premolars, which was 
apparently not the case. It is, moreover, improbable, even if they were so succeeded, 
that they should be replaced by a tooth furnished with an entirely different kind of 
enamel : and on this view it thus seems probable that the above-mentioned milk- 
molars belong to a new species. 
From the resemblance of the tooth represented in woodcut fig. 6 to the lower 
teeth of the type of those represented in plate V., figs. 4 and 6, it is not impossible 
that some of those in which the first ridge is the most worn may be the homologous 
lower milk-molars of M. falconeri. 
Number of teeth known. — As the serial position of one of the teeth of this species 
figured in the first volume has been changed ; and as other teeth there referred to 
the same species have been shown to be either probably or certainly specifically 
distinct, it may be well to give a revised list of the known teeth ; viz . : — 
(?) Mm. 3 — Woodcut fig. 6, p. 32. MNi—Ibid, pi. XXXII., fig. 1. 
^ —Vol. I., pi. XXXIII., fig. 3. Wf^—Ibid, pi. XXXIII., fig. 4. 
It may be observed that some confusion has arisen on pp. 209-10 of vol. I. in 
comparing the teeth of the present species with those of M. angiistidens figured in 
pi. XL. of the “ F.A.S.,” owing to the circumstance that the latter are figured and 
described as upper teeth, when it appears that they belong to the lower jaw. The 
molars, as now restricted, of the present species appear to be very similar to those 
of M. angustidens ; the main distinction between the two species being the difference 
in the form of the mandible, the superior size of 31. falconeri, and the larger and 
taller talons of its lower molars. The Indian teeth of M. angiistidens show that no 
distinction can be drawn as to the relative height of the crowns of the molars of the 
two species. 
1 Ihid, p. 208. 
2 The taJons of the tooth represented in toI. I., pi. XXXII., fig. 3, are smaller than those of the tooth now regarded as 
of M. falconeri {Ibid, pi. XXXIII., fig. 3). 
I 
