SIWALIK AND NARBADA CARNIVORA. 
131—308 
causing the 1 cusp-line ’ to be oblique, instead of transverse. As in H. striata , there 
is a well-marked cingulum on the outer side of the anterior lobe of the blade ; and, 
as in that species, this cingulum becomes perforated at an early stage by the 
attrition of pm. 4 . The talon of the former tooth is proportionately larger than in 
II. striata. The last premolar has its anterior talon rather smaller than in that 
species ; and very much smaller than in JrL macrostoma ; the cingulum on the inner 
side of the hind talon having a more distinct cusp than in either of the other forms. 
In the two preceding teeth the anterior talons also appear slightly smaller than in 
II. striata ; while the width of pm. 3 is less, instead of greater, than that of pm. 4. 
The incisors and canine are smaller than those of II. striata or II macrostoma ; and 
the middle incisor is not thrust above the level of the other two. 
Another specimen of the anterior part, of the right ramus of the mandible, 
figured in “F.A.S.,” plate M, figs. 4, 4a, showing the incisors, canine, and early 
premolars, appears to belong to the present species. 
Distinctness and affinities. — In the preceding description it has been shown that II. 
sivalensis is a species showing affinity only with those species whose teeth are formed 
on the plan of those of II. striata ; its specific distinctness from the latter having 
been already sufficiently indicated. II. brunnea is in the main distinguished by the 
same characters : the talons of the premolars are, however, smaller, and, therefore, 
more like those of the fossil ; while m. 1 is, at all events in some instances, 1 placed 
slightly behind pm. 4 , and thereby approximates to II. sivalensis , although always of 
much smaller size : the inner cusp of m. i is also more like that of the fossil, being 
smaller, and placed farther back than in II. striata 2 : the talon of this tooth is, 
however, smaller than in that sj)ecies, and therefore different from the fossil. Many 
of the points distinguishing the latter from II. macrostoma have already been pointed 
out ; but it may be added that in II. sivalensis m. 1 is relatively larger ; the premolars 
shorter and wider ; the intervals between the canines and pm. 1 and pm. 2 shorter ; the 
palate shorter and narrower (especially anteriorly), and the opening of the posterior 
nares ellipsoidal instead of triangular ; and pm. I absent. On the superior aspect 
the postorbital processes of the frontals are considerably more developed, and the 
orbit consequently less open posteriorly ; while the temporal ridges make a more 
sudden curve towards the middle line, and unite more anteriorly to form a better 
developed sagittal crest. It is not known whether m. 2 was present in H. macrostoma. 
The present species is probably distinguished by the same characters from H. cheer etis : 
while from II. arvernensis it is distinguished by the same points as from II. striata. 
In all the other species mentioned in the list on pp. 276-7 there is no inner cusp to 
m. 1< 
In II. grceca , 3 however, m. 2 is present, and m. 1 unusually large; on account of 
which it has been referred to the distinct genus Hycenictis. The absence of any trace 
1 See De Blainville, “ OsteograpMe,” Genus Hysena, pi. III. (£T. fusca). 
2 Ibid., pi. VT. {E. fusca). 
3 See Gaudry, “ Animaux Fossiles et Geologie de l’Attique,” pi, XV., figs. 6-S. 
