OCR Text |
Show 1870.J ANATOMY OF THE PRONGBUCK. 335 2. The other feature is the constant endeavour to rearrange and place in natural systematic position ill assorted groups. The recent writings of Darwin and his opponents, doubtless, have stirred up the desire of investigating those seeming harriers of demarcation between forms ; while the onward accumulation of material and facts necessitates constant change and intercalation among groups but impartially known. A very good instance in point is the animal upon the anatomy of which the following notes have been made. The Cabrit or Pronghorn Antelope of naturalists has passed under several generic names, the most critical account of which is to be found in Dr. Richardson's ' Fauna Boreali-Americana,' p. 261. As my colleague Mr. Bartlett, however, has remarked, "None*, however, appear to have hesitated to place it among the hollow-horned Ruminants," until he himself offered evidence to prove " that the Prongbuck is not a true bovine animal." His reasons for adducing cervine, indeed multiple affinities to the Prongbuck instead of those previously accorded it, are based on the annual deciduous nature of its horns, and the total absence of false hoofs and glands-the former phenomenon having been first lucidly described and published by him in our 'Proceedings' for 1866. Dr. Grayf has called attention to a statement of Dr. Marsh's"]. as early as 1841, respecting this annual shedding of the horns; and it seems also that Dr. Canfield § informed Dr. Spencer Baird (of the Smithsonian Institution) in 1858 of the phenomenon. The hints given by these observers ||, however, were fruitless and not generally credited by naturalists until Mr. Bartlett led the way to the importance of the facts. Pondering over the apparent isolation of tbe characters of the animal in question, Dr. Sclater % suggested ranking it as a separate family of tbe order Ruminantia, under the title of Antilocapridee, equivalent to the Camel op ardalidee. About the same time Dr. Gray** made a somewhat similar proposition, and demonstrated with some care his ideas of the difference in nature of the horn of the so-called Antilocapridee, Giraffidee, and Cervidae. Under these circumstances the anatomical structure possesses some interest-and the more so as, excepting a very imperfect description of the skull by Dr. Richardson ff, and short cranial charac- * Blainville and Rafinesque excepted, who place it under Cervus-the former, Nouv. Bull. Soc. Phil. 1816, p. 80. t Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. 1866, vol. xviii. p. 324. t In a letter to Dr. Pickering, see U. S. Exploring Expedition, Ungulata, p. 63. 8 Proc. Zool. Soc. 1866, p. 105. || As also Weinland (Zool. Garten, 1863, p. 255) and Martin (" Die Hornbil-dung bei der Mazama Antelope," ibid. 1864, p. 254). The former considers the cast horns as abnormal; the latter that the new horn-tip grows downwards. Dr. Gunther has drawn m y attention to these observations, otherwise unintentionally overlooked by m e (vide his Record, 1865, p. 45). •fl" Brit. Assoc. Rep. 1866, and abstract Ann. and Mag. Nat, Hist. 1866, p. 401. ** Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. 1866, p. 326. tt Op. cit. p. 265. |