OCR Text |
Show 1890.] MR. W. L. SCLATER ON SOME INDIAN MURID.E. 525 although there are in the Museum large collections of Rats and Mice from Sikhim, there are no examples that can be referred to this species. The only specimens in the Museum are the two originally sent by Major Berdmore to Mr. Blyth from Burmah, of the skull of which I send figures (Plate XLIV. fig. 1). 11. Mus JERDONI (Blyth); Thomas, P. Z. S. 1881, p. 537. This is a very distinct species of Rat; it can be at once identified by its tail, which is brown above and white below, and very long. There are in the Museum examples of this species from Darjeeling and from Cherra Punji in the Khasi hills. 12. Mus NIVEIVENTER, Hodgson ; Thomas, P. Z. S. 1881, p. 540. There are in the Museum two old stuffed specimens from Landour near Mussoorie, which were originally identified by Blyth with this species ; he afterwards, however, in his Catalogue considered it to be identical with Mus rufescens. An examination of the specimens rather confirms Blyth's second thought: the tails do not show any sign of white below so characteristic of this species, and the dimensions are large for Mus niveiventer. The skulls, however, are so broken up that it is impossible to make anything of them. There are no other examples of this species in the Museum, and I should be very grateful to any one who could procure specimens for us. 13. Mus BLANFORDI, Thomas, P. Z. S. 1881, p. 541, pi. 50. There is nothing to be added to Thomas's excellent description of this distinctly marked species ; the Indian Museum has recently received an example from the Shevaroy hills in the Madras Presidency, collected by Mr. William Daly ; this adds another locality, as the original specimen was found at Cudapah, also in the Madras Presidency. 14. Mus BERDMOREI, Blyth; Thomas, P. Z. S. 1886, p. 62. This species was first described by Blyth (J. A. S. B. xx. p. 173), from a single flat skin and skull procured in Mergui; he, however, afterwards merged it with his Mus robustidus, which has since been shown by Blanford and Thomas to be indistinguishable from Mus rattus rufescens, the common Tree-Bat of the whole of India. Mr. Thomas has since (l.s.c.) applied Blyth's old name to a peculiar Rat forming part of the H u m e Munipur collection, which Rat, according to Mr. Thomas, agrees so well with the original description of Mr. Blyth, that he has no hesitation in identifying the two, and this notwithstanding the fact that Blyth's specimen was from Mergui, which is a long way off, and has a very different fauna from Munipur. The flat skin which is mentioned in Mr. Blyth's Catalogue of the Mammals of the Asiatic Society's Museum has unfortunately disappeared ; the skull, however, though not complete, is still in the |