OCR Text |
Show 1892.] MR. O. THOMAS ON THE GENUS ECHINOPS. 501 unnecessarily renamed it Echinogale), by Peters1, by Mivart2, and by Grandidier3; but unfortunately Dr. Jentink, in an exhaustive and otherwise most useful paper on the group, deceived by the small size of the type, put it down4 as a young specimen ofEriculus setosus, an example followed by Trouessart5 and Dobson6. The latter no doubt overlooked the type now in the British Museum, and the two former had not of course the opportunity of examining it. Of this type specimen the cranium, figured by Mr. Martin, was unfortunately lost before the Museum of the Zoological Society was transferred to the British Museum, but the skin, the lower jaw, and the bones of the trunk are still preserved. These confirm in every way the accuracy of Mr. Martin's description and figures. The Museum has now received several specimens of this group collected by Mr. J. T. Last at Manumbu, S. Madagascar, which clearly belong to two different species, a larger and a smaller, also differing from one another by the number of their teeth. The former of these is clearly Ericulus setosus, and the latter is by its dentition an Echinops, a genus which I now propose to reinstate, but on the description of which by Martin and Mivart I shall not try to improve, except with regard to the homologies of its cheek-teeth, which will be referred to later. It may, however, be noted that, apart from the general size, not always easily determinable in these animals, the two forms m a y be readily distinguished externally by the great difference in the size of the claws, those of Ericulus attaining a length in front of about 6 mm., and behind of about 7 mm., while those of Echinops scarcely exceed 3 in front and 4 behind, with a proportionate reduction in thickness. As to the species to which Mr. Last's Echinops belongs I am more doubtful. Firstly, it appears to be smaller than E. telfairi, and to have smaller teeth, but the difference is very slight. Secondly, the type of the older known species has the spines all quite black-tipped and becoming gradually paler to the roots. O n the other hand, M r . Last's specimens, four in number, all have white-tipped spines, the white extending over the terminal 2 or 2\ m m . of the spine7. In view of the great variability of Ericulus setosus in the colour of the spines, this character must be looked upon with great hesitation ; but at the same time the difference in appearance is so very great that I think it should be recognized by name, and I propose to call M r . Last's Echinops a new subspecies, giving it the name of E. telfairi pallescens. The following are the measurements of the typical skull of the new form, the largest of five :- Basal length 34*1; greatest breadth (between points of maxillary 1 MB. Ak. Berl. 1865, p. 286. * N. L. M. i. p. 140 (1879). 2 P. Z. S. 1871, p. 73. 5 Le Nat. 1880, p. 178. 3 Eev. Mag. Zool. (2) xxi. p. 338 (1869). 6 Mon. Insectiv. p. 70 (1882). 7 M.Grandidier (I. c.) describes a,s"E. mivarti" an animal which is " noiratre et plus fonce que E. telfairi "; but the latter being superficially quite black, it is probable that he has mistaken the form to which the name E. telfairi belongs and that his mivarti is really telfairi, and his telfairi the one now described. |