SIWALIK AND NARBADA CARNIVORA. 
15—192 
common [L. vulgar is~], as well as in tlie Indian otter, the frontal narrows from behind 
the post-orbital process, in the shape of a triangle, up to its junction with the brain- 
case proper ; but in the fossil the part between the post-orbital processes of the 
frontal and the cranial cavity is wider and is of uniform breadth throughout, so as 
to be quadrangular instead of triangular.” This shows (the specimen being fully 
adult) that the fossil belonged to one of the smaller weak- jawed otters (like Tmtra 
leptonyx ), in which (as in the smaller Gcmidce ) the temporal ridges never unite in the 
middle line to form a sagittal crest (as in L. vulgaris ), but remain permanently 
separate, and enclose a persistent ‘ sagittal area,’ as the intervening space is termed 
by Professor Huxley. 
In L. sumatrana 1 the palate is absolutely both shorter and wider than in the 
Indian fossil. The narrower form of the skull and the lesser development of the 
tubercular portion of the carnassial distinguishes the latter from L. simung (monticola) . 2 
It appears, therefore, that the fossil skull is distinguished from the skulls of 
such of the existing species of India and the adjacent countries, of which the skulls 
are known, by its much narrower form. It does not appear, moreover, that any 
existing species from other countries agrees in this respect with the fossil. The 
whole length of the latter is 3 -57 inches, while that of a full-grown male skull of 
L. nair is 4*07 inches. The fossil, therefore, belonged to a rather small species of 
otter, which from the elongated form of the skull may be pretty safely referred to 
the long-clawed, or typical, division of the genus. 
With regard to the various fossil species given in the foregoing list it will be 
found that the specimen under consideration differs from L. bravardi by its generally 
smaller size, by its much narrower palate, and by the shortness of the true molar. 
From L. affinis the Indian fossil must be distinguished by the characters distinguishing 
it from L. vidgaris. With L. campani, as will be apparent in the sequel, the present 
specimen has not the slightest affinity ; and it must be considerably smaller than 
L. dubia. The distinction of the specimen from L. lorteti will be noticed under the 
head of the mandible. As L. piscinaria is described merely upon the evidence of the 
tibia, there are no means of comparing it with the Indian fossil. 
From the foregoing comparisons it will be seen that this form of Siwalik otter 
cannot be identified with any other described form, and is, therefore, entitled to 
rank as a distinct species. As already said, its • affinities appear to be nearer to the 
long-clawed, than to the short-clawed otters, but there are no characters indicating 
special relationship with one species more than another. 
Mandible . — In figures 2 and 2a of plate XXVII. of the present memoir there is 
represented the left ramus of the mandible of an otter from the Siwaliks, originally 
drawn in plate P., figure 2, of the supplemental plates to the “ Fauna Antiqua 
Sivalensis,” and referred by Dr. Falconer to his Lutra palceindica : it is now in the 
British Museum (No. 37,152). There is no evidence to show whether this specimen 
l Anderson, op. 'fit'. ) pi. XII., fig. 5. 2 IU<>, pi. XII., fig. 2. 
