OCR Text |
Show 416 MR. R. LYDEKKER ON THE [Apr. 6, since to suggest that they might be regarded as specifically the same, so far as dental and cranial characters are concerned." Later on in the same paper it is stated, in reference to remains of a Bear from the Gibraltar bone-caverns, " that the preponderance of its characters is in favour of its being closely related to U. fossills sive prisons, or to a form intermediate between that and U. arctos var. isabellinus." Although I confess to great difficulty in distinguishing between the teeth of Old World and American Brown Bears, I think it will be admitted that, if we trust Mr. Busk's conclusions, the Pleistocene Brown Bear of Europe must have been the common ancestor of the existing Brown Bears of both the Eastern and Western Hemispheres. Passing over certain other writers, I have next to mention that in 1881 Fitzinger l, if I understand him rightly, came to the conclusion that most of the so-called species of Brown Bears described from Europe and Asia w7ere mere colour-phases or other varieties of U. arctus. He, however, recognized the so-called " halsband " Bear-the U. collaris of F. Cuvier-as a distinct species, inhabiting Kamschatka and Siberia. And he regarded the "golden" or " silver" Bear of Europe as a subspecies, under tbe name of U. arctus aureus; considering U. formlcarlus of Eversmann (=U. longlrostrls, Schinz, and Myrmarctos eversmannl, Gray) as inseparable from this variety. Eight years later Dr. E. Scharff2, in a paper on the skull-variation of U. arctus, came to the conclusion that Myrmarctos eversmannl is only a variety of the former species, with which he also identified U syriacus, U. isabellinus, and U. piscator. With regard to U. syriacus and U. Isabellinus, the same view is held by Mr. Blanford \ but Mr. W . L. Sclater 4 regards them as together forming a distinct species, and uses the latter name. This will suffice for the Old World Brown Bears, and I have now to quote two papers referring to those of the New' World, in which totally opposite views are expressed. In the first of these, Mr. A. E.Brown5 considers that U. americanus, U. cinnamomeus, U. luteolus, and U. horribilis are nothing more than varieties of U. arctus, the first and second being more distinct than is the last. On the other hand, Dr. C. H . Merriam6, comes to the conclusion that not only are all the North-American Bears (exclusive of tbe Polar Bear) distinct from those of the Old World, but that the Black Bears, of which four forms are recognized, should be separated subgenerically from the members of the U. arctus group. Of the latter no less than five species and one or two subspecies are recognized as inhabiting the North American continent. From the structure of the lower carnassial tooth, Dr. Merriam seems to have made out pretty clearly 1 SB. Ak. Wien, vol. lxxxiv. pp. 1-22 (1881). 2 Archiv f. Nat. 1889, vol. i. pp. 244-267. 3 Fauna of Brit. India, Mamm. p. 194 (1888). * Cat. Mamm. Ind. Mus. pt. ii. p. 302 (1891). 5 Proc. Ac. Philadelphia, 1894, pp. 119-129. 6 Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, vol. x. pp. 65-83 (1898). |