| OCR Text |
Show 1396.] MAMMALS FBOM ECUADOB, 511 Cervidse," P. Z. S. 1878, p. 926, defining the genus Pudua, says "ascending rami of the prsemaxillae reaching the nasals " ; I do not know what specimen be had before him, but I cannot find this character in any of the skulls in the collections of the British Museum or of the Royal College of Surgeons ; and I should like here to express my thanks to Professor Stewart for kindly placing this latter collection at m y disposal. This character has unfortunately beeu laid down by subsequent writers as distinguishing tbe genus Pudua crauiologically from Coassus, whereas it is more particularly coassine. Gray, Cat. M a m m . iii. 1852, p. 240, says "Intermaxillary short, not reaching near to the nasal." Garrod, P. Z. S. 1877, p. 13, savs "the gap being filled up by the appearance, superficially, of portions of the nasal turbinal." The situation is explained in these two passages, but Professor Garrod ought to have added that the gap is more often filled up by an anteriorly projecting process of the maxilla: I find the space tilled up iu the two different ways in other genera, and also the premaxilla reaching the nasals, or not, even in members of the same species; there are instauces of this in the Museum Collection, in deer both of the Old and New World. I write this to show the worthlessness of this point as a generic or even a specific character; and, indeed, Sir Victor Brooke says he thinks Gray made too much of it ; so there is no doubt that if be had examined a larger number he would have seen how extremely variable it is ; but having found out as much as he had, I think it is a great pity he followed suit in making so much of this character. I have, examined the feet, and osteologically they agree with P. humilis, the ectocuneiform and navicular-cuboid bones being all in one. It will be seen that 1 have eradicated almost every distinguishing craniological character between this genus and Coassus, the much deeper lachrymal pit and the narrower middle incisors (a character 1 am unable to prove in the new species) alone remaining; so that if this animal is to be retained in the genus Pudua, Gray's definition will have to be modified to include both forms of skull as well as the outward differences in structure ; but I do not consider these characters of sufficient weight to justify a new genus being formed, for if this were done, the Pudus would have to be placed in a separate subfamily to do fair justice to the osteology of the feet, in which respect they differ so widely from all other New-World Cervidae ; but this couid not be justified, seeing that craniologically they are scarcely generically separable from either Furcifer or Coassus, wide as these two are apart inter se in the form of their horns, texture of the coat, and growth of the hair on the face, and in the tarsal tufts. Gray says the Pudus have tarsal tufts ; I have failed to find any trace among the specimens in the Museum collection. The genus Pudua may therefore be thus defined:- New-World group of Cervidae : Telemetacarpi. A complete septum divides tbe nasal cavity into two distinct chambers. |
