OCR Text |
Show 532 MR. O. THOMAS ON T H E [May 3, B. Small, 2-4 inches. Last hind foot-pad circular.- MICE. c. Anterior edge of zygoma-root perpen dicular. y. 10 mamma /'. Tail as long as, or longer than, head and body. c". Colour rufous - brown, belly scarcely lighter; hind foot-62-*7. 7. M. urbanus, p. 544. d". Colour pale fulvous, belly white; hind foot -65-75 8. M. bactrianus, p. 546. g'. Tail shorter than head and body. (See also under Legyada buduya, p. 553.) e". Hind foot *6-*65 ; ear *41-*49 ... 9. M. cervicolor, p. 547. S. 6 mammae. h'. Tail as long as, or longer than, head and body; hind foot *82-*88 10. M. arianus, p. 548. d. Anterior edge of zygoma-root slanting. (See Plate LI. fig. 8.) i'. Tail rather longer than the bead and body; hind foot*75-*8 11. M. nitidulus, p. 550. II. Hind feet with only 4 or 5 properly developed foot-pads. e. 8 mammae ; tail about the length of head and body; hind foot about 1*0 12. M. mettada, p. 550. 5. MUS DECUMANUS. M. decumanus, Pall. Nov. Glir. p. 91 (1778). M. decumanoides1, Hodgs. J. A. S. B. x. p. 915 (sine descr.) (in part) (1841). *M. brunneus, Hodgs. Ann. & Mag. N . H . xv. p. 266 (1845). Hab. Cosmopolitan. No description is needed of this too well-known rat. It may always be distinguished from any specimen of M. alexandrinus by its short tail and ears, and its larger size. The following are the chief dimensions of a full-grown male:-Head and body 8*3, tail 7*1, hind foot 1*6, ear-conch 0*7, muzzle to ear 1*85. The type of Mus brunneus, Hodgs., is certainly a specimen of this species, as might be expected from his description. Though most certainly not indigenous, Mr. Blanford tells m e that these Rats are found on all the rivers of India, being carried up by the boats, and that by this means they might easily have got into the valley of Nepal, by way of the rivers Gunduck and Coosy. We now come to the truly indigenous Indian species of Mus. The first one that claims our attention is the common house- and tree-rat of the whole of India, the Mus rufescens, Gr., of Blyth and other authors. After careful comparison of a very large number of specimens from all parts of India, I have come to the conclusion that 1 In Horsfield's ' Catalogue of the Mammals in the India Museum ' (p. 140), he mentions a " Mus decumanoides, Temm." Temminck never decribed a Bat under this name, as far as I can find ; and Dr. Jentink, of the Leyden Museum, where Temminck's types are preserved, has kindly confirmed m y opinion on this point. |