NIV.OF .DRONTO LIBRARY Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2009 http://www.archive.org/details/fieldiana14fiel V^Mda-^o n^TuTc^l filSTcTV / Publications I OF FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY > (zoological series Volume XIV Chicago, U. S. A. 192 1 - 1925 ,-!^^ ^ QL \ Field Museum of Natural History Publication 246 Zoological Series Vol. XIV, No. 4 CONTENTS TO VOLUME XIV NUMBERS I to 3 Wilfred H. Osgood Curator, Department of Zoology EDITOK Chicago, U. S. A. 1928 CONTENTS A Monographic Study of the American Marsupial, Caenolestes. By Wilfred H. Osgood 1-156 The Brain of Caenolestes obscurus. By C. Judson Herrick 157-162 Review of Living Caenolestids with Description of a New Genus from Chile. By Wilfred H. Osgood 163-172 The Brains of the South American Marsupials Caenolestes and Orolestes. By Jeannette Brown Obenchain 1 73~232 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS PLATES I. CaenolesUs obscurus. II. External characters. III. General musculature after removal of superficial fascia. IV. Muscles and glands of the head and neck. V. Muscles of the legs. VI. Muscles of throat and inner side of thigh. VII. Parts of alimentary system. VIII. Reproductive organs. IX. Dissections of male organs. X. Parts of reproductive, alimentary and respiratory systems. XI. Cervical vertebrae. XII. Bones of sternum, hind leg and thoracic region. XIII. Scapula, pelvis and lumbar vertebrae. XIV. Sacral and caudal vertebrae. XV. Humerus, ulna and radius. XVI. Manus and pes. XVII. Longitudinal section of skull. XVIII. Dentition and hard palate. XIX. Fig. I. Mounted skeleton ot NesogaU dobsoni. Pig. 2. Mounted skeleton of CaenoUstts obscurus. XX. Skull of CaenolesUs. XXI. Dorsal and lateral surfaces of brain. XXII. Ventral view of brain. XXIII. Figs. I, la, lb. Skull of Caenolestes obscurus. Figs. 3, 3a, 3b. Skull of OrolesUs inca. Figs. 3, ja, 3b, 3c. Skull of RkynckoUstes rapkauurus. XXIV. Orolestes inca. Dorsal view of brain. XXV. Orolestes inca. Ventral view of brain. XXVI. Orolestes inca. Fig. 3. Lateral view of brain. Fig. 4. Median section of brain. XXVII. Median surface of hemisphere. Fig. 5. Orolestes inca. Fig. 6. Caenolestes obscurus. XXVIII. Figs. 7-10. Cerebella of Caenolestes, Notoryctes and Perameles. Fig. II. Development of mammalian "hippocampal figure." XXIX. Figs. 12-15. Reconstructions of hemispheres. Fig. 16. Ventral diverticulum of recessus superior. XXX. Fig. 17. Dissected diagram of hippocampus of Caenolestes. Fig. 18. Temporal hippocampus of Didelphts. XXXI. Temporal recurving of hippocampus. Fig. 19. Hypsiprymnus. Fig. 20. Rabbit. Fig. 21. Felis leo. Fig. 22. Notoryctes. XXXII. Transverse sections of brain of Caenolestes. XXXIII. Transverse sections of brain of Caenolestes. XXXIV. Transverse sections of brain of Caenolestes. XXXV. Transverse sections of brain of Caenolestes. XXXVI. Transverse sections of brain of Caenolestes. MAP Records of Caenolestes and Orolestes. Page 16 Field Museum of Natural History. Publication 207. Zoological Series. Vol. XIV, No. i. A MONOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE AMERICAN MARSUPIAL, C^NOLESTES. BT Wilfred H. Osgood, Assistant Curator of Mammalogy and Ornithology. A Description of the Brain of CiENOLESTES. BY C. JuDsoN Herkick, Professor of Neurology, University of Chicago. Charles B. Cory, Curator, Department of ZoOlogy. Chicago, U. S. A. MAY, 1 92 1. A MONOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE AMERICAN MARSUPIAL, OENOLESTES. By Wilfred H. Osgood. CONTENTS. rAGB Introduction 4 History 6 Distribution 15 Habits 17 External characters 19 Measurements 21 Myology 22 Muscles of the skin 22 Muscles of the back 24 Muscles of the head 30 Muscles of the neck 32 Muscles of the thorax 34 Muscles of the abdomen 35 Muscles of the sacrum 36 Muscles of the tail 38 Muscles of the anterior limb 40 Muscles of the forefoot 46 Muscles of the hind limb 47 Muscles of the hind foot 56 Sununary of myological characters 59 Urinogenital System 61 Male organs 62 Female organs 66 Alimentary Canal 69 Glands 73 Respiratory System 76 Circulatory System 77 Skeleton 77 Cervical vertebrae 77 Thoracic vertebrae 82 Limibar vertebrae 84 Sacral and caudal vertebrae 84 Ribs and sternum 86 Pectoral girdle 87 Pelvic girdle 88 3 4 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. Skeleton — Continued. Arm and forearm 89 Bones of the hand 92 Thigh and leg 93 Bones of the foot 95 Summary of skeletal characters 97 Sloill 99 Summary of cranial characters 109 Dentition iii Number and homologies of teeth 112 Upper incisors 116 Lower incisors 118 Canines 118 Upper premolars 119 Upper molars 120 Lower premolars 126 Lower molars 127 Origin of Diprotodonty 128 Relationships of Wynyardia 136 Relationships of Myrmecoboides 139 Phylogeny and taxonomy 140 Dispersal of marsupials 145 General summary 150 Literature cited 152 The Brain of Canolestes obscurus 157 INTRODUCTION. Owing to their many peoiliarities of structure and their probable relationship to ancient and long extinct types, marsupials are among the most interesting of mammals. Their present distribution, largely in Australasia but also in South America, adds to the importance they possess for the morphologist and phylogenist. They have long been classified in two large groups or suborders, the Polyprotodontia and the Diprotodontia. These were first recognized by De Blainville in 181 6 and later by Owen in 1866. Broadly speaking, the polyprotodonts include the carnivorous or insectivorous forms with small and relatively nu- merous incisors, while the diprotodonts arc the herbivorous forms with the incisors reduced in number and modified much as in rodents. Without exception, the diprotodonts are characterized also by a syndac- tylous foot, while the poljrprotodonts, with the exception of one family (Peramelidae), are eleuthcrodactylous. This makes slightly different divisions (Diadactyla and Syndactyla) possible, but other considera- tions have favored the conclusion that the two major groups indicated by the dentition' are the most natural ones. Until recently, it was supposed that all modem diprotodonts and the May, 1921. American Marsupial, Cenolestes — Osgood. 5 majority of polyprotodonts were confined to Australasia, only one family of polyprotodonts being known elsewhere, the Didelphiidae or opossimi family of South and Central America. Under these conditions, it was a matter of the greatest interest when a small marsupial, widely different from the opossums, was discovered in South America. This animal, now known by the generic name Ccmolesies, presented an apparent combination of diprotodont and polyprotodont characters, having a diprotodont dentition and an eleutherodactylous foot. Moreover, it was found to be closely allied to certain extinct forms known from fragmentary remains from the Tertiary of Patagonia, being clearly a surviving member of a highly differentiated group detailed knowledge of which promised to throw new Hght on problems connected with the origin and dispersal of marsupials. These facts were evident from examination of the few specimens, consisting merely of skulls and skins, which for many years were the only ones available. Such specimens had been obtained through aboriginal soiu-ces and the exact habitat of the animal was unknown. In 1 911, while making general collections in the mountains of western Venezuela (Osgood, 191 2), I had the good forttme to discover Ccenolestes living in dense forests at an altitude of about 8000 feet. As a result of assiduous trapping, a total of eleven animals was captured and, despite poor equipment for the care of anatomical material, two entire specimens representing both sexes and two others with some parts mutilated were preserved in formaldehyde and bichloride of mercury. In addition, several dry skeletons and a small number of conventional skins and skulls were saved. This material has formed the basis of the following study. Its importance seemed to demand the fullest possible treatment and, although this has not been accomplished, it is hoped that sufficiently detailed information has been obtained to warrant general conclusions. Study of particular organs and systems by speciahsts would have been exceedingly desirable, but the nature of the material and the conditions under which it has been studied have not made this feasible except to a limited extent.^ The cooperation of Dr. C. Judson Herrick has been greatly appreciated and his description of the brain of CcEtwlestes to- gether with the figures drawn under his direction which are incorporated in the present publication will doubtless add greatly to its value. Comparative material, especially of Australian forms, has been confined almost exclusively to skeletons and skulls. Fortunately a fairly representative collection of these is possessed by Field Musetmi and this has been supplemented by specimens borrowed from the U. S. * It is especially to be regretted that no study of the organ of Jacobson has been made. 6 Field Museum or Natural History — Zo6logy, Vol. XIV. National Museum, the American Museum of Natural History, and the Musevmi of Comparative Zoology. To the officials of these institutions, especially Dr. J. A. Alien and Dr. G. M. Allen, acknowledgment is grate- fully made. The accompanying illustrations are from drawings made by several different artists. The Hne drawings of muscles and soft parts (Pis. IV-X) are the work of Mr. Robert E. Snodgrass, now of the U. S. Bureau of Entomology; the wash drawings of skeletal parts (Pis. XI-XVIII) were done by Mr. Kenji Toda of the Department of Zoology, University of Chicago; the illustrations of the brain (Pis. XXI-XXII) are by Mr. A. B. Streedain formerly of the Department of Anatomy, University of Chicago; and the drawings of external parts (Pis. I-H) are by Mr. L. L. Pray of Field Museimi. HISTORY. In a brief list of mammals from Ecuador pubUshed by R. F. Tomes in i860, the following note appeared without reference either to genus or species : "A small animal about the size of the Water Shrew {Sorex Jodiens), with external characters and incisor teeth so much like those of the Soricidae as to have led in the first instance to the belief that it was a placental Inseciivore, perhaps in some degree resembling the Solenodon of Cuba. However, the existence of a small and rudimentary pouch sufficiently attests the implacental natiu-e of the creature, which but for this must certainly, as far as external appearances go, be regarded as one of the Soricidae. A more ample account of it will be given on a future occasion." This is the first published reference to the animal now known as Canolestes. Three years later (Tomes 1863), the single immatvue speci- men was described as to its dentition and external characters and given the name Hyracodon fuliginosus without any reference to its affin- ities within the order of marsupials. Subsequently it received little notice for many years. In 1880, Alston referred to it in the following brief statement, published as a footnote (Alston 1880, p. 195): "A small Marsupial from Ecuador, named Hyracodon fuliginosus by Mr. Tomes (P. Z. S. 1863, p. 51, pi. VIII), may represent a distinct family, but it is still only known from the very unsatisfactory original description. In any case it will require a new title, the name Hyracodon having been applied to a genus of fossil ungulates by Professor Lcidy in 1856, seven years before its use by Mr. Tomes." May, 1921. AifERicAN Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 7 Again in the concluding paragraph of the very important Catalogue of Marsupialia and Monotremata in the British Museum (Thomas 1888) it receives only this slight mention: "And, finally, one animal, referred to this Order, has been so in- sufficiently described that no idea of its proper position can be gained, nor have any further specimens of it been collected. This is — "Hyracodon fuligtnosus, Tomes, P. Z. S. 1863, p. 50, pi. viii (animal). "Hab. Ecuador." So meager were the data regarding it, that Lydekker (1894) com- pletely ignored it in his very comprehensive Hand-book of Marsupials and Monotremes. Thus for more than thirty years after its discovery the subject of this monograph remained almost as unknown as if no specimen existed. In 1895, however, a second specimen, consisting of a skin and skull, was received at the British Museimi and in two brief but important papers (Thomas 1895) was promptly described, tenta- tively classified, and figured. Its obvious affinity with extinct Patagonian forms was at once recognized and its importance in connection with theories of the dispersal of marsupials was noted. The preoccupied name Hyracodon was discarded and a new name, CcBuolestes, was pro- posed as well as another specific name, ohscurus, the second specimen having been obtained in the Bogota region and appearing to represent a different species of larger si25e. The following extracts from these papers of Thomas are of interest: "In vindication of Mr. Tomes's paper I should like to say, firstly, that his description, hitherto supposed (from our ignorance of any such animal) to be imperfect or incorrect, proves to agree, so far as it goes, very closely with the present specimen; and, secondly, that remarks on the affinities of the animal must have been at that time more easily wanted than given, since even now, with infinitely greater material and the best of advice, I am imable to be at all positive about the exact position and relationships of the little marsupial described by Mr. Tomes." "The rediscovery of this long-lost genus, whose wide distinction from all other living marsupials its original describer does not appear to have fully appreciated, is one of the most interesting events in mammalogy that has happened for many years, A full description of the animal will be given elsewhere; but it may be here briefly stated (i) that Ccenolestes represents among the marsupials a family, and, perhaps, a suborder, entirely different from any now living; and (2) that it is closely related to, and evidently a surviving representative of, some of the fossil marsupials from the Santa Cruz beds of Patagonia." "Apart from this, the survival to the present day of a member of so 8 Field Museum or Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. ancient a group, otherwise wholly extinct, is a fact of the utmost in- terest, and one whose discovery will be welcomed by every zoologist." "I have proposed for it thename CcBnoleste5,a,s it is a modem member of an ancient group." "'The afl5x 'lestes' is connected in mammalogy with small and an- cient fossil marsupials, e. g., Microlestes, Amphilestes, etc., so that the above name may be considered to represent an existing animal with ancient fossil relatives." ''CcBfiolestes, with its uninteresting exterior, appeals mainly to the technical mammalogist. To him, however, with its intense palasontolog- ical and geographical interest, and the added puzzle its structure gives rise to in the general classification of the order, no animal will appear more important or more worthy of close and detailed study. That by the arrival of spirit specimens account of its anatomy may be rendered possible is very much to be hoped." In these papers of Thomas, Ccenolestes was classified as a diprotodont and a member of the family Epanorthidae with the reservation that *^It is, however possible that, in spite of the resemblance of the teeth of Ccmolestes to those of certain Australian Diprotodonts, the study of further material, including soft parts, skeleton, and milk-teeth, will bring out differences of such importance as to necessitate its subordinal separation from them." He says further, "It is clearly a diprotodont, as not only does it possess the characteristic development of the lower incisors, but even the molars resemble most closely in structure those of certain members of the family Phalangeridae, while being wholly unlike those of the typical Polyprotodonts. From all the existing Diproto- donts, however, apart from its habitat and numerous detailed differences, Ccenolestes is at once distinguished by not being syndactylous, a character which is always considered of family rank. It forms, therefore, among existing marsupials a peculiar family, and one which in America rep- resents the Diprotodonts of Australia, just as Didelphyidae do the Polyprotodonts. ' ' Although some further material was obtained in later years, it was similar to that used by Thomas and consisted only of a few native-col- lected skins and skulls. Additional study of these, therefore, added but little to what was already known and opinions varied as to the inter- pretation of the peculiar characters of the animal. The next reference to Canolestes was a note by Ameghino (1897, p. 95) from which the following may be quoted: "M. Thomas est venu k La Plata, rapportant avec lui un cr4ne de CotnolesUs que nous avons soigneusement compard aux formes fossiles de Patagonie et nous avons pu reconnaitre qu'il prcsente plus de rap- May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 9 ports avec les Garzonidae qu'avec les Epanorthidae. Pourtant il est probable que le Coenolesies devra constituer le type d'une famille nou- veUe." Accepting the suggestion of Ameghino and others, Trouessart (1898) gave it the rank of a family, the Caenolestidae, including only the one genus, and assigned it to the suborder EHprotodontia. Ameghino (1900) later treated it as a family of diprotodonts, and still later (1903), in his well known rearrangement of marsupials and rodents, he included in the family the genus Ccenolestes and also the extinct genus Zygolestes. The family was classified with four others, containing only extinct forms, in his suborder Paucituberculata, which in turn was referred to the order Plagiaulacoidea and regarded as directly ancestral to the Australian diprotodonts. The name Diprotodonta was reserved to designate a superorder conceived to embrace not only American and Australian diprotodonts but also the multituberculates and the rodents. Although Ameghino 's ideas have not been generally accepted, especially those regarding the derivation of rodents, his strong conviction of the close alliance of American and Australian diprotodonts is noteworthy in the present connection. While differing from him in other respects, Weber (1904) agreed with Ameghino in placing Canolestes in neither the EHprotodontia nor the Polyprodontia but in a third suborder of marsu- pials for which Ameghino's name Paucituberculata was available. Mean- while, Bensley (1903), in his very important paper on the evolution of Australian marsupials, included Ccenolestes in his "First Neogeeic Radiation " and in casual references indicated his beHef that its dentition is due to parallel or convergent development rather than to any direct relationship to Australian diprotodonts closer than that of common derivation from a didelphid ancestry. On the other hand, Sinclair (1905, 1906) and Scott (1913) revert to the opinion of Thomas and Ameghino that Ccenolestes and allied extinct forms are so closely related to Australian diprotodonts as to furnish strong evidence of a former land connection between South America and Australia. Sinclair includes all South American forms with diproto- dont dentition in the family Caenolestidae which he divides into two sub- families, of which the Caenolestinae embraces the genera Ccenolestes, Garzonia, and Halmariphus. Of this family he says (1905): "The Caenolestidae resemble the primitive phalangers in so many respects that it is impossible to escape the conclusion that the two families are related and not merely convergent groups." This statement is some- what modified in a later paper (1906), as follows: 'While substantially the same conclusions are still held, it is proper to point out the evidence in favor of the view that the striking similarity in dental structure 10 Field Museum of Natural History — ZoOlogy, Vol. XIV. displayed by the two families may be explained by convergence. Un- til the upper dentition, skull and feet of the Caenolestidae, and espe- cially of the primitive members of the family, are fully known, this must remain an imsettled question. At present the argtunents in favor of the alternatives expressed are about equally balanced." The next author to give special attention to Ccsnolestes was Miss Pauline Dederer (1909), who made a study of the skull and pointed out certain resemblances to polyprotodonts, concluding that "While there is undeniably a series of forms connecting Ccsnolestes with the Diproto- donts in tooth structure, yet Ccsnolestes itself is so generalized in this respect that we may perhaps, in the absence of corroborating characters, question its inclusion within this group. Possibly it may be found to be an ofEshoot from the Polyprotodonts, as it appears structurally to be more generalized than any Diprotodont, and therefore it might well occupy a separate suborder, as Thomas suggested — the Paudtuberculata of Ameghino." Gregory (191 o, p. 211) refers to Miss Dederer 's work and concludes that "the detailed characters of the skull show no striking Diprotodont characters and the writer is incHned to regard CcBnolestes and its allies as an independent suborder, an offshoot of primitive Polyprotodonts, which has paralleled Diprotodonts in certain characters of the denti- tion." Accordingly he places Ccsnolestes in the suborder Paucituber- ciilata with the parenthetical suggestion that the group might be called the Caenolestoidea. Gregory also discusses the possible relationship of the caenolestids to Propolymastodon and allied forms regarded as multituberculates by Ameghino. He concludes his treatment of the marsupial group by stating that "The problem of the genetic relations of the Diprotodontia and the Polyprotodontia is complicated to a cer- tain extent by the existence of the Caenolestoids; but the opinion may be expressed that probably the resemblance of certain Caenolestoids to the Multituberculates is an instance of convergence between related sub- orders, and that the same is true, but to a less extent, of the resem- blances of other Caenolestoids to the Diprotodont phalangers." Sub- sequently (Osbom, 1910, pp. 515-518) the classification proposed by Gregory was somewhat modified and the caenolestids were included in the suborder Diprotodontia as a superfamily, the Caenolestoidea. Broom (191 2), in his special paper "On the Affinities of Cacnolcstes," reviewed the evidence adduced by Miss Dederer and pointed out cer- tain resemblances to polyprotodonts not previously noted. He concluded that " as Canolestes differs from the typical Polyprotodonts only in tooth specialization, it should not bo removed from the Polyprotodontia, but merely be made the type of a distinct family, or section at most." May, 1921. American Marsupial, C-enolestes — Osgood. ii Gidley (1915), in a short footnote, expresses an opinion similar to that of Broom, saying: "The Casnolestidae have been placed in this great group [Diprotodontia] apparently on the diprotodont-like de- velopment of the lower jaw. However, this may be an entirely in- dependently acquired character. This family more probably belongs with the Polyprotodonts." With the exception of casual references in general works, nothing else of importance has appeared in reference to the systematic or phylo- genetic position of CoBnolestes. The occurrence of the animal in several different locaUties has been recorded (Osgood, 191 2; Stone, 19 14) and the number of species has been increased at least nominally to three, one of which has been made the type of a second genus, Orolestes (Thomas, 191 7), which, as described, seems only slightly different from the original form.' Reviewing the foregoing it is seen that, within two decades and upon a knowledge of its cranial and external characters only, Ccsnolestes has been placed in three different suborders and that various competent authors have disagreed as to its proper position. Thomas, Ameghino and Scott frankly classify it with Australian diprotodonts; Sinclair inclines to do the same; Bensley, Miss Dederer and Gregory believe Its diprotodont characters are convergent and place it in a suborder of its own; while Broom and Gidley would rank it merely as an aberrant polyprotodont. Beginning with that of the period prior to the dis- covery of CcBnolestes, the following are the various classifications of marsupials concerned in its history, wholly extinct groups being in- dicated by a dagger: THOMAS 1888. Order Marsupialia Suborder Diprotodontia Family i. Macropodidae 2. Phalangeridae 3. Phascolomj4dae Suborder Polyprotodontia Family i. Peramelidae 2. Dasyuridae 3. Didelphyidae * At the time of writing, the privilege of examining specimens of Orolestes is denied me. 12 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. THOMAS 1895. Order Marsupialia I. Suborder Diprotodontia A. Non-syndactylous. American Family i. Epanorthidae Ccenolestes \Epanorihus \Decastis ^Paraepanorthus B. Syndactylous. Australian Family 2. Phalangeridae 3. Phascolomyidae 4. Macropodidae II. Suborder Polyprotodontia A. Syndactylous. Australian Family 5. Peramelidae B. Non-syndactylous. American and Australian Family 6. Didelphyidae 7. Dasyuridae 8. Notoryctidae TROUESSART 1898. Order Marsupialia I. Suborder Diprotodontia Section i. Syndactylia Family 1. Phalangeridae 2. Phascolomyidae 3. tDiprotodontidae 4. Macropodidae Section 2. Asyndactylia Family 5. fAbderitidae 6. fEpanorthidae 7. fGarzonidae 8. Caenolestidae {Ccsnolestes only) II. Suborder Polyprotodontia. Family 9. Peramelidae 10, tBorhyacnidae 11. Dasyuridae May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESXES — Osgood. 13 12. Notoryctidae 13. tMicrobiotheridae 14. Didelphyidae 15. fAmphitheridae 16. tTriconodontidae 17. tDromatheridae AMEGHINO 1903. Subclass Marsupialia Superorder Diprotodonta Order Plagiaulacoidea Suborder ^Allotheria Family fPlagiaulacidae jPolydolopidae fNeoplagiaulacidae fPromysopidae tPolymastodontidae Suborder Paucituberculata Family fAbderitidae fEpanorthidae Casnolestidae — Ccenolestes t — Zygolestes tGarzonidae tMicrolestidae Order Hypsiprymnoidea Australian diprotodonts Order Rodentia Rodents. Equivalent to Glires Superorder Polyprotodonta Australian and American polyprotodonts WEBER 1904. Subclass Marsupialia Order Marsupialia Suborder Polyprotodontia Family Didelph^ddae Dasyuridae Notoryctidae Peramelidae 14 Field Museum or Natural History — Zo6logy, Vol. XIV. Suborder Pauciiuberculata Family Epanorthidae (Ccsnolestes et aV) Suborder Diprotodontia Family Phascolarctidae Phalangeridae SINCLAIR 1906. Suborder Diprotodontia Family CcBtiolestidae Subfamily Caenolestinae Genus tHalmarhiphus fGarzonia Csenolestes Subfamily fPalaeothentinae Genus fPalaeothentes fCallomenus fDecastis Subfamily fAbderitinae Genus fAbderites GREGORY 1910. Infraclass Metatheria Order ITriconodonta Order fTRITUBERCULATA Order Marsupialia Suborder \AUotheria (Multituberculata) Suborder Diprotodontia Suborder Pauciiuberculata (Caenolestoidea) Suborder Polyprotodontia OSBORN 1910. Order Marsupialia Suborder Polyprotodontia Superfamily Didelphoidea Family i. Didelphiidae 2. Myrmecobiidae 3. Dasyuridae 4. Thylacinidae Superfamily Perameloidea Family i. Peramclidae May, 1921, Ameiucan Marsupial, CiENOLESTES — Osgood. 15 Superfamily Notoryctoidea Family i. Notoryctidae Suborder Diprotodontia Superfamily C^nolestoidea Family i. Palaeothentidae — \PaUBoihentes — ^Ahderites — Cctnolesles 2. Garzoniidae Superfamily Phalangeroidea Family i. Phalangeridae 2. fThylacoleonidae 3, Macropodidae 4, Phascolomyidae 5. fDiprotodontidae Suborder AUotheria Family i.fPlagiaulacidae SCOTT 1913 » Order Marsupiaua Suborder Polyprotodonta Didelphiidae Thylacynidae Suborder DiproiodontQ Caenolestidae fGarzoniidae Suborder AUotheria fPlagiaulacidae fPolydolopidae \ DISTRIBUTION. The present known distribution of Ccmolestes (and Orolestes) is shown by the accompanying map. Only a few localities are represented, all Andean, and extending from the Venezuelan border on the north nearly to the Bolivian boundary on the south. In the extensive regions between these localities, no specimens have been obtained but it is not improbable that the animal has nearly or quite continuous range throughout the central Andes so far as local conditions meet its needs. ^ American forms only. i6 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. X Records of CamolesUs and Orolestes The original type of Hyracodon fuliginosus was received from the well-known collector Louis Fraser in a shipment from Ecuador of which Tomes (i860, p. 211) says: "The greater portion of these are believed to have been collected at Pallatanga, on the western slope of the Cor- May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^enolestes — Osgood. 17 dillera; but the exact locality is not certain, from the specimens having been unfortunately mixed together." The elevation of Pallatanga is scarcely more than 1500 meters and, since all exact records of Ccen- olestes are from greater altitudes, it is probable that the first specimen did not come from there but from the paramos of Mt. Chimborazo or Mt. Pichincha where Eraser also worked. The type of Ccenolestes oh- scurus likewise came from an indefinite locality — the vicinity of Bogota, Colombia. In this case the probable actual locahty is at the edge of the paramos north or east of the city of Bogota in the eastern Cordillera of the Andes. Exact records are only three in number; Paramo de Tama, Venezuelan — Colombian Boundary at 7000-9000 ft. (Osgood, 191 2); Hacienda Garzon at 10500 ft., near the Paramo of Mount Pichincha, Ecuador (Stone, 1914); and Torontoy, Peru, at 14000 ft. between Lats. 10° 30' and 13° 30' S. and Longs. 72" and 73** W. (Thomas, 1917).' HABITS. Ccenolestes is of terrestrial and crepuscular or nocturnal habits. It feeds upon insects. These statements compass in a large measure what is known of its habits. It lives at high altitudes in cool forests not far from timberline and may be found also in grassy openings in mountain valleys. On the Paramo de Tama, near the head of the Tachira River, I obtained it at an altitude of about 7500 feet on both the Venezuelan and Colombian sides of the international boimdajy line which is here formed by the Tachira River. Most of the specimens were secured in the heart of a dense forest on the Colombian side of the river not far from a hacienda belonging to Don Mario Gonzales of San Jose de Cucuta, Colombia. Wishing to collect and observe in such a place under wholly natural and undisturbed conditions, I had employed men for some days to cut a new trail directly into the deepest part of this forest for a distance of several miles. Camp was established at the terminus of this main trail and short radiating trails were cut thence to various points of the compass, the forest and undergrowth being so dense that but little freedom of movement would have been possible otherwise. In the dense growth along these trails, Ctrwo/estes were caught in small numbers, rarely more than one specimen to fifty "trap nights." The exact nattu-e of the places in which individual specimens were taken varied widely, indicating that the animals move about freely. Some were caught in steel traps baited with small birds, others in rat traps baited with bacon rind, I In a paper published since this was written, Thomas (1920, p. 246) gives three additional locality records: Machu Picchu, Peru, alt. 12000-13000 ft.; Ocabamba Val- ley, Peru, alt. 9100 ft.; Gualea, Ecuador, alt. 6000 ft. 1 8 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. and still others in mouse traps with the conventional rolled oats as bait. In the case of the mouse traps, however, it was probable that the an- imals had not been attracted by the bait but had merely run across the lightly set traps. A preference for animal food was quite evident and it was only by continued effort with "meat baits " that a total of more than one or two specimens was obtained. Beneath the heavy canopy of treetops and still further shaded by masses of low vegetation, the animals of the dark damp forests exercise their vision only to a limited degree and depend mainly upon the sense of smell. That this is the case with Ccenolestes is indicated by its small eyes and its highly developed olfactory organs. In fact, although some- what ratlike in appearance and from its rather long hind legs doubtless active and roving, Ccsnolestes is best described as to appearance by saying that it is a large forest shrew. Like a shrew, it is fond of fresh meat when such food offers itself, but its steady diet consists only of insects. The contents of three stomachs were submitted to the U. S. Biological Survey and as a result of examinations kindly made in their laboratories the following report was received : "No. I. Contents: Parts of a weevil, three ants (Dorylidae), skin of caterpillar, lepidopterous pupa, adult lepidopteron, leg frag- ments of orthopteron, a Tipulid larva, centipede and spider. Dipterous and lepidopterous remains form the major portion. "No. 2. Contents: Fragments of two beetles and a weevil, a cater- pillar, an orthopteron, a hemipteron (?), spider and one seed of composite plant. Caterpillar — at least 60 per cent. "No. 3. Contents: Unidentified insect fragments and parts of spider." Other observations on the habits of CcBnolestes so far as published are meager. Mr. Geo. D. Child, through whom the type of C. ohscurus was obtained, contributed the following note: "The little animal you speak of is called 'Raton Runcho,' which means 'Opossum-Rat.'^ It lives in the high brush-wood, and is supposed to feed on birds' eggs and small birds. It is very rare indeed, and is obtained with much difficulty." (Thomas, 1895, p. 877.) Mr. Samuel N. Rhoads, who collected two females on Mt. Pichincha, Ecuador, writes that "The two specimens were secured in swampy ground, the edge of a large pasture on the Hacienda Garzon, within a few feet of a swiftly flowing stream of considerable size. They were caught in small cyclone mouse traps set in underground runways among the thick grass, these runways being about on the level with the watcrlinc of the swamp. They were caught on the same day, soon after ' The book name lelva wu proposed by Lydekker in 1896 (Geog. Hist. Mamm.), but hu leklom been used by others. May, 192 1. American Marsupial, C-^nolestes — Osgood. 19 placing the traps in that locaUty, but although I continued to trap there for a week longer, having as many as 40 or 50 traps in that place, I secured no more specimens there, nor in any other similar localities where trapping was done. The stream alluded to runs over a bed strewn with volcanic rocks and boulders and is in an open cultivated valley-head, draining the south slopes of Mount PIchincha, about 8 miles south of Quito and at an elevation of about 10,500 feet, the valley at this point being about half a mile wide and extending to even greater widths as far as one can see, in a southerly direction." (Stone, 1914, p. 18.) The type of CcBnolestes (or Orolestes) inca was collected by an ex- perienced naturalist, Mr. Edmund Heller, whose notes, when pubHshed, will doubtless furnish substantial additions to what is now known of the animal.^ EXTERNAL CHARACTERS. General form. — Although frequently referred to as "rathke," the general form in CcBnolestes might with equal propriety be called soricine. Insectivorous forms such as Nesogale approach it closely and, as else- where shown (PI. XIX), have practically identical major proportions. Among marsupials, the species most closely resembling it are perhaps to be found in the genus Phascologale. Many species of Marmosa ap- proximate it in size of body, but distinctions in the feet, ears, and tail are so obvious that the parallel is at once seen to be only of the most general nature. The legs are of moderate length, the hind pair 20 to 25 per cent longer than the front. Head. — The head is elongate conical and somewhat shrewlike in general appearance. The eyes are very small, the distance between the anterior and posterior canthi measuring only 2.2 mm. in a female speci- men in alcohol. The rounded ears project well above the pelage but are relatively small as compared to those of the didelphids. The thickness of the cartilaginous conch also is greater and it is set with fine short hairs within and without. The tragus is but little developed and the considerably larger antitragus is opposed mainly by the cms of the helix which forms a thin flap directed inward. Two parallel antihelical folds (metatragus) are prominent and separated from each other by a deep fossa (PI. II, fig. i). A similar condition is found in Perameles (cf. Thomas, 1888, PI. XXI, figs. 5, 7). The nostrils are lateral and bounded by a rhinarium which is extended dorsally to form a small v- shaped plate. A shallow furrow traverses it anteriorly and dorsally. ^ I am informed by Mr. Heller that these and other notes on Peruvian mammals have been prepared for publication by the National Geographic Society, Washington, 20 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. The upper lips have a thin coriaceous edge that continues to the median sulcus which partially divides the rhinarium and forms an incipient cleft of the lips. The lower lips have a similar narrow edge which is only very slightly thickened in front. The lower lip is free in front from the base of the long incisors and has a high internal median ridge or freniilimi which fits into the slight space between the incisors. Slightly in front of the angle of the mouth and just in advance of the molariform teeth is a pair of reciprocating labrets or outgrowths of the lips, one on the upper and the other on the lower lip (PI. II, fig. 2). These appear to be an adaptation for the ejection of undesirable food particles during mastication. They are directed slightly outward and downward in such a way that with the lips wholly or partly closed in front they might in conjunction with the buccinator muscle serve to guide hard parts of insects or other matter to the exterior. A quite different function also is possible, that is, in closing the lips at this point and assisting in isolating the internal cheek pouch formed by the buccinator muscle. This pouch is fairly definite and includes a consider- able space laterad of the molariform teeth. Tail. — The tail is gently tapering and has no inordinate thickening at the base. The body fur extends upon it only a very slight distance. Thence to the tip it is thickly set with short stiff hairs which nearly or 'quite conceal the underlying scaly annulations. At the tip there is usually a slight hairy pencil. Nothing suggests prehensilism in the slightest degree.^ The contour of the tail is rather distinctly quadri- lateral instead of cylindrical. Feet. — The fore feet are pentadactyl, but the outer toes are decidedly reduced and furnished with small blunt nails instead of claws. The third or middle toe is slightly the longest and the second and fourth are subequal, all three bearing sharp curved claws. The reduction of the lateral toes and especially the absence of claws is in marked contrast to the condition general among Dasyuridae and Didelphiidae but is almost exactly paralleled in the Peramelidac in many of which the reduction of the first and fifth toes has proceeded much farther. In Ccenolestes, however, although the elongated middle toes seem to indicate a digiti- grade adaptation, the plantar surface is carried well backward on the outer side and supported by an unusually large pisiform bone. There are five plantar pads well distinguished from each other and having smooth non-striated surfaces. The hind foot is relatively long and narrow. Its general proportions 'Thomas (1805), in describing C. obscurus, states that the tail has "its terminal inch below wnoliy naked" and that "it is therefore presumably prehensile." No •udi condition has been observed in other specimens and it is probable the tail in the abovA'mentioned one was abnormal. May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 21 might be said to lie somewhere between those of Phascologale and Antechinomys. The hallux is reduced and bears only a weak nail. It is set at a slight angle but it scarcely reaches the end of the second metatarsal and its functional importance is slight. The remaining four toes are subequal, the third and fourth possibly a trifle longer than the second and fifth. All are furnished with well-developed curved claws. The third and fourth digits are connected at the base by an integumen- tary web which is slightly more extensive than that between the other digits, but this is scarcely to be regarded as a tendency toward syndac- tylism. The soles are naked and provided with six plantar pads in much the same relative positions as in Phascologale. Three of them are digital, one hallucal, and two metatarsal. All are smooth without trans- verse striations. See Plate II, figures 3 and 4. Pelage. — The pelage is soft and thick over the entire body. Owing to the peculiar distribution of hairs of different quality the coat is not smooth or velvety but has an appearance of superficial looseness and unevenness not uncommon in mammals of humid regions. The color is practically uniform throughout, the underparts being only slightly lighter than the upper owing to the absence of the fine exserted blackish hairs which are generally distributed on the upperparts. The claws and a few hairs at their bases are whitish but the hairiness of the upper sides of the feet shows no contrast with the body. The tail also is colored the same above and below and from base to tip except that in four out of eleven specimens the tip is white. There are no facial markings and in general it would be difficult to find a more uniformly colored animal. The color is dull Mars brown, clearer on the underparts and more mixed with darker and subject to light reflections on the upper parts. Marsupiunt. — No trace of an external pouch can be detected in adult specimens of either sex and no immatvu-e examples have been examined. Tomes (1863), in describing the original type of Hyracodon fuliginosuSj which was probably immature, states that it had a "small and rudimentary pouch." Hence it is probable that the pouch in Ccenolestes, as in Phascologale and some others, is present in the young but disappears in the adult. MEASUREMENTS. External measurements. — Fresh specimens measured in the field: Average of 5 males: Total length 240.6 (235-251); head and body 119.2 (113-135); tail vertebrae 121.4 (118-126); hind foot with claw 23.5 (23-24.5). Of 5 females: 223 (209-230); 107.6 (106-113); 115.4 (103-121) 22 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. 22.5 (22-23). The ear in a female in alcohol measures 12.5 mm. from the intertragal notch to the apex. The tail at the base is 3.3 mm. wide and 3 mm. deep; at 10 mm. from the tip it is i mm. x i mm. Measurements of skull. — ^Adult male and female, respectively: Great- est length 32.7, 29.2; basilar length 28.4, 25; zygomatic breadth 15, 13.8; mastoid breadth 11.4, 10.9; depth of braincase 8.2, 8.1; length of nasals 15. 1, 14; greatest breadth of nasals 4.3, 4.3; least interorbital breadth 7.3, 7.3; length of palate from gnathion 18.3, 16.2; anterior palatal fora- mina 6.3 X 2.5, 5.4 X 2.2; palatal vacuities 6.7 x 3.2, 6 x 3.2; front of upper canine to back of M"^ 12.9, 11.5; combined length of four upper molars 5.7, 5.5; combined length of three lateral incisors 3.1, 2.8; length of bone of lower jaw from condyle 20.5, 17.5; angle to coronoid 8, 7.2; depth of jaw at second molar 2.2, 1.7; combined length of four lower molars 6.6, 6.3; exposed length of median lower incisor 6, 5. MYOLOGY. Plates III-VI. Muscles of the Skin. Panniculus. — Immediately beneath the skin and separable from it only by careful dissecting is a thin, partly membranous and partly muscular layer which may be divided into several rather definite parts but which taken as a whole forms a sac enveloping the entire body and having relatively few and weak ental attachments. On the fore and hind legs it becomes exceedingly thin and cannot be traced beyond the middle of the epipodials. Over the posterior part of the body it is entirely membranous, thicker over the back and sides and very thin over the pectoral muscles. It is attached posteriorly on the biceps femoris length- wise of its caudal fibers; dorsally it becomes slightly muscular and dips beneath the " cruro-coccygeus " to a definite insertion on the dorso- ental surface of the tuberosity of the ischium.^ It is almost discontin- uous over the pectoral and interscapular regions where it is lost in a thin scarcely perceptible aponeurosis. Over the head it reappears as a thin sheet chiefly membranous except along the under side of the car and forward on the side of the face to the anterior base of the zygoma where a few muscle fibers run. The principal muscular division proceeding directly from this outer plane, superficial fascia, or panniculus is that which enters the axilla forming the so-called cuianeus maximus. Be- 'PoMtbly thU donal part corresponds to the " ischiotcrgal " slip described by Macalister in Datypm and by Wilson (1894, p. 6) in Notorycles. May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESXES — Osgood. 23 ginning in the middorsal line near the origin of the lattssimus dorsi (and immediately overlying and parallel to it), a thin sheet of converging fibers runs forward and downward to the axilla. Similar converging fibers from the mid-thoracic region and from the abdomen join those from above and unite to form a single muscle which enters the axillary region dorso-laterally just below the latissimus dorsi and ventrally parallels the outer edge of the pectoralis major. It makes a turn on itself and inserts as usual on the proximal two thirds of the inner edge of the deltoid ridge of the humerus. The abdominal part of this muscle is somewhat differentiated into a humero-abdominalis or xiphi-humeralis {pectoralis quartus). This begins to be fleshy on the middle of the abdo- men and anteriorly divides to pass on either side of the pectoralis and parallel to it. On entering the axilla it becomes fused with the cutaneus maximus and has a common insertion with it. It has similar relations in most marsupials. Cervico-auricularis. — This is a thin paired sheet arising from the oc- ciput and the nuchal crest for a distance of about 10 mm. or to the fatty deposit in the interscapular space. It is inserted on the cartilage of the back of the ear and into the ental surface of the superficial fascia be- low the ear for some 8 mm. lengthwise of the side of the neck. Dorsally it leaves the base of the ear for a short distance and attaches to the ectal surface of the muscle which elsewhere underlies it and which is here called the auriculo-occipitalis. Auriculo-occipitalis. — Arises from the nuchal crest entad of the cervico-auricularis, the anterior limit of its origin being even with that of the cervico-auricularis and the posterior slightly cephalad of it. Its two halves separate on the occiput and diverge over the parieto-squa- mosal region to overly the caudal part of the temporal muscle. Directly above the ear, it passes into the ental surface of the superficial fascia or panniculus and thence around the anterior base of the ear the two are inseparable. Dorso-cuticularis. — ^A long slender muscle arising on the side of the twelfth thoracic vertebra and running forward along the boundary be- tween the latissimus dorsi and the trapezius to the side of the scapula where it widens slightly and inserts on the ental surface of the thin outer sheet of the panniculus. Its width at its insertion is 1.5 mm. I have been unable to find any trace of this muscle in Didelphis nor any record of its occurrence in any other marsupial. Its form and relations are almost exactly as in the Insectivora where it is of frequent occurrence. Somewhat similar muscles are foimd also in certain edentates. (See Plate III.) 24 Field Museum of Natural History — ZoologYj Vol. XIV. Muscles of the Back. Spino-trapezius. — Origin from the spines of the thoracic vertebrae from the fifth to the twelfth. Insertion on the middle of the vertebral third of the scapular spine. A thin rather elongate muscle passing for- ward superficial to the dorso-cephalic part of the latissimus dorsi. Dorsally it is separated from the acromio-trapezius by a small fascia overl3dng the rhomboideus. A separation has been noted also in Noto- ryctes (Wilson, 1894, p. 6). It is the usual condition in the monotremes, insectivores and certain edentates. In Didelphis, the single muscle is weaker over the shoulder than elsewhere and in Sarcophilus (Macalister) also there is a tendency toward division. In Petrogale, Parsons (1896) found that it had a "continuous fleshy origin except opposite the first thoracic spine, where it is aponeurotic." Acromio-trapezius. — Origin from the occipital crest slightly laterad of the median line and thence along the nuchal crest to the vicinity of the fifth thoracic spine. Insertion on the front of the scapular spine and metacromion and thence along a fascia crossing the acromio- deltoid to the clavicle. A broad thin sheet covering the dorso-caudal half of the side of the neck and part of the shoulder. Latissimus dorsi. — Origin from the vicinity of the fifth thoracic spine along the vertebral coltmin to the middle of the third lumbar vertebra and to the lumbar fascia. Insertion in common with that of the teres major entad of the biceps on the side of the bicipital groove. On its lower side near its insertion is the usual connection of the epitro- chlearis. It is more definitely connected to the teres at its insertion than in Didelphis. It has no costal slips and in this 'agrees with Dtdelphis, Dasyurus, Notoryctes, Phascolarctos, etc. Rhomboideus. — This is divisible into Rhomboideus major (vertebralis) and R. minor (capitis). R. major has its origin on the nuchal crest from the occiput slightly caudad of the anterior border of the trapezius to the fifth thoracic spine. Its insertion is on the inner side of the vertebral border of the scapula cephalad of the insertion of the serratus magnus. R. minor has its origin fleshy from the junction of the mastoid, squa- mosal and supraoccipital bones and thence along the occipital crest a distance of about four millimeters. It is a thin flat ribbon free from the vertebral division until a point halfway between the occiput and the scapula where it unites with its fellow. Its insertion is on the anterior distal base of the scapular spine dorsad of the insertion of the "atlanto- scapularis." The rhomboideus in marsupials is usually undivided. Levator scapulae. — Origin from the transverse processes of the last five cervical vertebrae just entad of the scalenus. Anteriorly a single sUp May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESXES — Osgood. 25 passes ectad over the scalenus from an origin on the superior transverse process of the third cervical. This arrangement differs from that of Didelphis in which the scalenus is entirely laterad of the serratus. In- sertion on the posterior vertebral border of the scapula craniad of the insertion of the serraius and continuous with it. Serratus posterior superior. — Insertion by digitations from the fourth to the ninth ribs inclusive. Dorsally it is mostly aponeurotic but a broad fleshy prolongation extends anteriorly to the lower border of the splenius, thence becoming aponeurotic as it crosses that muscle and continues between the splenius and the rhomboideus to the most anterior point of its origin on the nuchal crest above the sixth cervical spine. Thence caudad its origin follows the mid-dorsal line and its wide apo- neurosis covers the longissimus dorsi and continues into the lumbar fascia. Serratus posterior inferior. — Origin on the middorsal line with the lumbar fascia. Insertion from the tenth to the thirteenth ribs. Practical- ly as in Didelphis. Splenius. — Origin from the nuchal crest from the vicinity of the front of the axial spine to the second thoracic vertebra. Insertion on the occipital crest from the mastoid process of the squamosal to a point about 2 mm. from the median line. Its lower border is free as usual and near its caudal extremity it is somewhat attached to the aponeurosis of the serratus posterior superior. Biventer cervicis. — Origin from the transverse processes of the fifth, sixth, and seventh thoracic vertebrae. Insertion fleshy or very shghtly aponeurotic on the occiput between the median line and the complexus to which its lateral border is attached for some 4 mm. Anteriorly it reaches nearly to the parietal bones. It is a larger and thicker muscle than in Didelphis and lies with its counterpart for a great part of its length in the space between the elevated axial spine and the second thoracic spine. Complexus. — Origin from the articular processes of and the aponeu- rotic arches between the last six cervical and the first five thoracic vertebrae. A large slip somewhat connected also with the longissimus capitis runs forward to the transverse process of the atlas. Insertion by a broad tendon on the occipital crest laterad of the biventer to within about 3 mm. of the mastoid bulla. Longissimus capitis. — Origin from the articular processes of the last six cervical and the first four thoracic vertebrae in intimate relation with the slips of origin of the complexus. Insertion by broad tendon on the upper cranio-lateral border of the mastoid bulla and to a slight extent on the adjoining part of the squamosal. 26 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. The biventer, complexus, and longissimus capitis are well distinguished from each other and in their general relations are as in Didelphis. At least one distinct tendinous inscription crosses the anterior part of each some 4 mm. from the insertion. Rectus capitis posterior superficialis. — Origin from the crest of the axial spine. Insertion entad of the complexus on the occipital crest. It runs downward and forward with free upper and lower borders, leaving a triangle on either side of the median line in which the much smaller halves of the rectus minor and part of the rectus major are exposed. This muscle, often found in carnivores, is not generally reported for marsupials, although Parsons (1896, p. 694) reports the rectus major as bilaminar in Petrogale. It is thin and fiat and covers a great part of the rectus capitis posterior major. In Didelphis, it is only partially separable from the rectus major, in Marmosa it is somewhat freer, and in CcBfiolestes it is quite independent. Rectus capitis posterior major. — Origin from the craniad surface of the axial spine and intermuscular septa with the obliquus inferior. Insertion on the occiput from the base of the paroccipital process dorsad along the caudal border of the mastoid bulla to a point on the occipital crest midway to the median line. It meets its fellow of the opposite side in front of the axial spine and the two have tendinous connection there and to a slight extent also with the caudal border of the neural arch of the atlas. Its under surface has relation with the rectus capitis posterior minor and with the surface of the neural arch of the atlas. It is a rather thick muscle only slightly smaller than the obliquus inferior with which its lower border is in apposition. Rectus capitis posterior minor. — Origin from the straight anterior border of the neural arch of the atlas. In a female specimen this meas- ures 3 mm. in length from side to side. Insertion on the occipital from a point near the median line nearly to the mastoid bulla. Its outer surface has relation with the biventer, complexus, and rectus posterior major. At the median line of the occiput it is separated from its counter- part by I — 2 mm. The two muscles approach each other and have tendinous imion in their caudal halves. Obliquus capitis superior. — Origin from the lateral surface of the transverse process of the atlas. Insertion tendinous on the occipital ridge immediately dorsad of the mastoid bulla. A short flat muscle crossing nearly at right angles to the large obliquus inferior and rectus capitis posterior major which has relation with its inner surface. Obliquus capitis inferior. — Origin from practically the whole lateral surface of the axial spine. Insertion on the whole caudal surface of the transverse process of the atlas. It is a thick heavy muscle running May, 192 1. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 27 downward and forward. In Didelphis, this muscle extends to the third, fourth and fifth cervical spines, but in Marmosa it is much as in Ccenolestes. Rectus capitis anticus major. — Origin on the transverse processes of the last five cervical vertebrae. Insertion on the posterior third of the basisphenoid and the anterior two fifths of the basioccipital slightly laterad of the median line. Some of its superficial fibers extend caudad with the longus colli to the ventral side of the posterior thoracic verte- brae. Anteriorly it forms a good sized bundle and is not peculiar except for the extent of its attachment to the basisphenoid which is more than usual. Rectus capitis anticus minor. — Origin on the middle third of the ven- tral surface of the neural arch of the atlas midway between the median tubercle and the transverse process. Insertion on the ventral surface of the basioccipital in its anterior lateral fourth. A thin flat muscle lying entad of the rectus anticus major and mediad of the rectus capitis lateralis but entirely free from both. Rectus capitis lateralis. — Origin on the transverse process of the atlas. Insertion slightly tendinous on the outer edge of the basioccipital along the carotid canal and thence forward to the basisphenoid and by tendi- nous fascia to the presphenoid. Certain lateral fibers attach on the periotic. It is a well developed muscle and entirely distinct, extending farther cephalad than in Didelphis. Longus colli. — The dorsal part of the longus colli is rather distinct, extending from the transverse process of the sixth cervical along the bases of the ribs and the sides of the vertebrae to the fourth dorsal vertebra. Between its two halves are fibers which extend into the cervical part but they are lateral in position and the median ventral surfaces of the dorsal vertebrae are mostly covered only with tendinous fascia. The cervical part consists of various converging slips from the transverse processes of the cer\4cal vertebrae and caudally from the sides of the ventral surfaces of the vertebrae. Over the atlas it shows six rather distinct divisions, two medial ones inserting on the tubercle of the atlas and two on either side inserting on the body. Spinalis dorsi. — The spinalis dorsi disengages from the medial side of the longissimus about opposite the eighth thoracic vertebra, the cau- dal part of the biventer cervicis forming a wedge between the two. Its inner fibers run to the spines of the anterior thoracic vertebrae but its lateral fibers form a practically distinct subvertical ribbon which runs forward and inserts on the side of the low spines and bodies of the fourth to the seventh cervicals and the first thoracic. It passes the high spine of the second thoracic without definite attachment, but between the 28 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. first thoracic and the tip of the spine of the second it is traversed by a strong tendinous inscription which may be partially attached to either or both of the vertebrae. Anteriorly it passes between the lateral division of the semispinalis cervicis and the long interspinal which connects the spines of the fifth cervical and the second thoracic. In the opossum the spinalis inserts as high up as the third cervical and the outer surface of its anterior part is wholly in relation with the complexus. Semispinalis cervicis. — In the region between the axial spine and the second thoracic spine are two paired muscles which run ventrad toward each other and meet at an angle over the sixth and seventh cervicals, the posterior one passing inside the spinalis between the two halves of the anterior one. The anterior of these muscles has been regarded as the semispinalis cervicis. It arises on the bodies of the first thoracic and the fifth, sixth and seventh cervical vertebrae and converges to insert on the tip and side of the axial spine in opposition to the obliquus capitis inferior. Its outer surface has relation with the complexus and its inner with the spinalis. It is not apparent in Didelphis, but is present in Marmosa. The posterior paired muscle, above-mentioned, which is in the nature of an interspinal, may be described here also. Its origin is on the side of the spine of the fifth cervical and its insertion on the front of the tip of the spine of the second thoracic vertebra. It stretches directly between these spines without connection with the intervening vertebrae. Between its two halves the ligamentum nuchae passes to the vertebral spines. Beneath its caudal part, but distinct from it, a paired intervertebral connects the spines of the first and second thoracic vertebrae.. Its outer surface has relation with the biventer and the spinalis, its inner with the ligamentum nuchae. A corresponding muscle is found in the opossum running to the sides of the thickened third cervical spine, its two sides therefore being widely apart and, although its actual relations are much as in Ccenolestes, its appearance is quite different. In Marmosa the third, fourth and fifth cervical spines are not enlarged as in Didelphi^. Consequently the arrangement of the neck muscles is more nearly as in Ccenolesies and many other marsupials. Longissimus. — ^Anteriorly this is divisible into longissimus dorsi and Umgissimus cervicis. Superficially the two divisions appear as one muscle but the outer part which continues caudad may be partially separated from an inner mostly concealed part which only extends cau- dad to the fifth thoracic vertebra and which may be regarded as the longissimus cervicis. It arises by slips from the laminae of the cervicals and from the transverse processes of the thoracic vertebrae from the first to the fifth. It inserts on the transverse processes of the cervical vertebrae from the second to the fourth or fifth, being inseparable at this May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESXES — Osgood. 29 point from the longissimus dorsi. The longissimus dorsi separates from the spinalis dorsi about opposite the eighth thoracic vertebra and passes cranio-ventrad between the iliocostalis and the biventer and longissimus capitis from which it is entirely distinct. Its insertion is just caudad of that of the longissimus cervicis on the transverse process of the fifth and possibly also the fourth cervical vertebra. Its origin is from the lumbar tendinous sheet from which it becomes fleshy in the vicinity of the second Itmibar vertebra. Passing forward it is conjoined with the spinalis and consists of slips from the transverse processes of the vertebrae. Iliocostalis. — An anterior division or iliocostalis dorsi and a posterior or iliocostalis lumborum are fairly distinct. The iliocostalis dorsi arises by sHps from the sides of the ribs from the first to the eighth. It passes cranio-ventrad on the side of the neck laterad of the longissimus and inserts on the superior transverse processes of the sixth and seventh cervical vertebrae. For a short distance just before its insertion it is merged with the longissimus. The iliocostalis lumborum arises from the complicated lumbar ten- dons of the sacrospinalis and becomes fleshy opposite the fourth lumbar vertebra. It inserts by thin flat slips on the sides of the ribs from the sixth to the thirteenth. Between the ilium and the ribs it forms the anterior lateral boundary of the mass of muscle filling the space between the articular and transverse processes of the limibar vertebrae. Over the ribs it is thin and the slips are fairly distinct from each other. Between the sixth and the ninth ribs it overlaps the iliocostalis dorsi which only reaches the eighth rib. Sacrospinalis. — Origin from the crest and the ventro-medial surface of the cranial fourth of the ilium, meeting the origin of the iliacus, and from the tendinous lumbo-dorsal fascia. Insertion on the dorsal siu^aces and caudal edges of the transverse processes of the lumbar vertebrae and the twelfth and thirteenth dorsals. A thick rounded bundle ex- tending from the ilium to the ribs. Easily separable from the multifidae which lie mediad of it but covered by the tendinous fascia. It fills the space on the side of the vertebral column between the articular and the transverse processes of the lumbar vertebrae. Quadratus lumborum. — Origin from the bodies of the 12th and 13th dorsal vertebrae and the limibar vertebrae from the first to the fourth. Insertion on the tips and ventral surfaces of the transverse processes of all the lumbar vertebrae except the last. It lies somewhat flattened between the psoas parvus and the large rounded sacrospinalis and con- nects the series of transverse processes with each other by series of overlying tendons, the fibers from the under side of one running to the 3© Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. upper side of the one succeeding. Anteriorly it is closely associated with the psoas parvus. Psoas parvus. — ^Arises fleshy and also by tendinous heads from the first, second, third, fourth and fifth lumbar vertebrae. Thence it continues caudad as a broad flat tendon crossing the surface of the medial part of the psoas magnus and inserting dorso-craniad of the marsupial bone on the iHopectineal tubercle. In its cranial part it is closely con- nected with the quadratus lumborum which lies laterad of it. The caudal part of its fleshy origin on the fifth limibar vertebra is overlapped by the psoas magnus which intervenes between it and the quadratus lumborum at this point. Psoas magnus. — Origin from the sides of the bodies and the ventral bases of the transverse processes of the foiurth, fifth, and sixth lumbar vertebrae and the cranial half of the first sacral. Anteriorly it reaches to the posterior epiphysis of the third lumbar. Insertion with the iliacus on the lesser trochanter and the adjacent inner surface of the femur nearly as far distad as the insertion of the pectineus. Muscles of the Head. Plates III-IV. Masseter. — The superficial masseter has its origin on the lower side of the zygoma by a short stout tendon nearly opposite and slightly caudad to that of the inferior zygomaticus and in the vertical plane of the middle of the eye. It spreads over the lower part of the mandibular insertion of the deep masseter and covers the ventro-caudal part of the mandible with its insertion from the base of the coronoid process just caudad of the buccinator and along the lower side of the mandible to the angle and the pterygoideus. It does not reach the inner surface of the mandible and especially in its ventro-caudal portion is relatively weaker than in Didelphis. The deep masseter lies below it and is closely connected, but a division is evident. It has its origin on the inner and lower sides of the zygoma and the fascia over it and is intimately asso- ciated with the temporalis. It is broadly attached to the whole outer face of the coronoid fossa. Temporalis. — This is in two layers. The superficial or outer temporal arises from the fascia along the middle of the parietal bone and across the caudal part of the underlying layer. Thence it spreads as a rather thin sheet over the deep temporal and narrows to pass into the orbital foesa and insert on the mandible at the anterior base of the ascending ramus. It is also attached superficially to the membrane between it and the eye. The deep temporal is more extensive; its origin runs from the May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESXES — Osgood. 31 glenoid fossa across the mastoid bulla along the supraoccipital crest halfway to the median line and thence directly forward along the rather indistinct parietal and supraorbital crests to the plane of the posterior canthus of the eye. Its insertions are extensive on the coronoid process, mostly on its ental surface and its anterior edge with a few of the fibers from the mastoid origin going to its ectal surface. Buccinator. — Relatively extensive and forming a pouch behind the angle of the mouth. Its origin is along the alveolar border of the maxil- lary from the vicinity of the infraorbital foramen to the anterior base of the zygoma and likewise along the ramus of the mandible from the front and base of the coronoid process forward to the vicinity of the mental foramen. It is attached to or merged with the orbicularis oris around the lips. Pierygoideus ititernus. — Origin from the whole of the external pterygoid fossa from the carotid foramen cephalad, passing the tips of the pterygoids but attached to their bases and thence along the ridge to the dorsal side of the lateral tuberosity of the palatal ridge. Insertion broad on the inner surface of the angle of the mandible and by certain medial fibers running to the fascia over the tympanic. Mediad of the internal pterygoid the small but distinct tensor veli palatini runs from the periotic and the edge of the basisphenoid to the hamular process of the pterygoid bone. Pierygoideus externus. — Origin by two heads. The larger ventral one arises fleshy from the whole of the lateral base of the pterygoid bone laterad of the pierygoideus iniemus. The smaller dorsal head arises from the alisphenoid caudad and laterad of the sphenoidal fisstire. The two heads spread over the convex surface of the alisphenoid between the sphenoidal fissure and the glenoid fossa and, after uniting as they pass the front of the tympanic, insert at the base of the mandibular condyle principally on the stylomandibular ligament. The muscle is relatively large and broad, bulking fully two-fifths as much as the internal pterygoid. It is thus quite different from that of Didelphis in which it is single-headed and very weak. It is described (Macalister) in Phascolarcios as a "small rudiment crossing and insepa- rable from the internal" and in Sarcophilus as "exceedingly feeble"; in Myrmecohius also, it is weak and single (Leche) ; in Chczropus (Parsons, 1903, p. 67), it is imusual and inserts on the inside of the mandibvilar ramus; in Petrogale (Parsons, 1896) and other kangaroos, it is small; for most other marsupials, data are lacking. Mandihulo-auricularis. — The only prominent ear muscle seems to correspond to the one for which this name has been used by various authors. It is a small subcyHndrical muscle arising in the fascia between 32 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. the superficial and deep masseters near the mandibular condyle and issu- ing between the masseters to an insertion on the anterior base of the ear. Zygomaticus. — This is in three divisions all arising on the zygoma. Two of them originate from the lateral surface of the posterior half of the zygoma behind the eye. They are small well-formed fasciculi closely similar to each other and somewhat distinguished from the third division which lies below (entad) them. They run forward to the level of the angle of the mouth where they become tendinous and proceed thus for some distance to insertions in the tissue on the side of the upper jaw at the base of the whiskers. The third division, to which some other name may be applicable, is similar in appearance but arises from the side of the lower anterior angle of the zygoma and its slender tendon is inserted into the skin of the inside of the upper lip in the vicinity of the base of the labret. Retractor naris. — ^A slender muscle arising from the fascia between the eye and the zygoma. It crosses the outer surface of the anterior root of the zygoma and becomes a very slender threadlike tendon which runs forward to an insertion on the nasal cartilages. Digastricus. — Arises on the paroccipital process between the condyle and the mastoid bulla and runs down around the ear and thence for- ward to spread over the interramal space and attach along the sides of the mandible from the base of the angular process to the symphysis. Anteriorly it is largely aponeurotic. A tendinous slip diverges at a point ventrad of the masseter and passes dorsad to the caudal median border of the mylohyoid. It is essentially as in Didelphis. Muscles of the Neck. Plates IV, VI. Sterno-hyoideus. — This is the principal muscle exposed on removing the skin from the lower side of the neck. It arises on the ental surface of the second stemebra and runs directly forward opposite its mate and inserts on the posterior side of the hyoid bone caudad to the insertion of the gcnio-hyoid. Some of its superficial fibers inosculate with those of the genio-hyoid. Like the other muscles connected with the hyoid and the tongue, it is not peculiar. Genio-hyoideus. — A flat paired muscle immediately cephalad of the sterno-hyoideus and entad of the my lo-hyoideus. It arises on the body of the hyoid bone and inserts on the mandibular symphysis. Sterno-thyroideus. — ^A thin, paired muscle lying between the trachea and the sterno-hyoideus. Laterally it is thin and transparent and toward the median line it is somewhat thicker, especially in its caudal May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 33 portion where its two sides become fused. It arises on the sides and ental surface of the second stemebra and inserts on the thyroid cartilage. Mylo-hyoideus. — A very thin, paired, transverse muscle between the mandibles and immediately entad of the digasiricus. It arises from the inside of the mandible near the alveolar border and has no bony insertion, merely meeting its fellow in a raphe in the median line and becoming aponeurotic anteriorly and posteriorly. Along the dorsal side of this raphe it is attached to the genio-hyoideus. Its posterior fleshy border runs from the angle of the mandible forward to the median Une opposite the base of the angular process. Hyoglossus. — ^Arises laterad and dorsad of the genio-hyoideus on the ventrocaudal border of the thjrrohyals and basihyal cephalad of the insertion of the thyrohyoideus. It passes ventrad of the ceratohyals and free from them, diverges to enclose the genioglossus, and passes dorsad and cephalad into the body of the tongue. Genioglossus. — Well-developed and having the usual relations, aris- ing on the sides of the mandibles near the symphysis and forming a wedge between the two halves of the hyoglossus. Styloglossus. — Runs laterad of the hyoglossus and merges with it about midway of the mandible. Its origin was not determined, having been destroyed inadvertently. Thyrohyoideus. — Origin on the thyrohyal bone entad of the sternohy- oid and the omohyoid and opposite the hyoglossus. Insertion on the posterior comer of the bony wing of the thyroid cartilage. A short stout triangular muscle, relatively well-developed. Omo-hyoideus. — Origin on the lateral fourth of the posterior side of the hyoid bone. Insertion on the upper posterior angle of the scapula just craniad of the insertion of the levator scapulae. On the ental side near its origin it is joined to the sternohyoid by thin membrane. Sterno-mastoideus. — Origin on the manubritmi of the sterntun sHghtly overlapped by the edge of the pectoralis. Insertion divided, one rather thin sheet inserting by broad aponeurosis on the occipital crest from a point midway between the median Hne and the auditory meatus to the middle of the anterior border of the mastoid bulla. The other division is a thickened bundle and inserts by a short tendon on the mastoid pro- cess slightly ectad and cephalad of that of the cleido- mastoid. The two divisions become fused about midway between origin and insertion. Cleido-mastoideus. — Origin on the front of the distal end of the cla- vicle. Insertion fleshy or only slightly tendinous on the mastoid pro- cess. Its outer surface has relation with the splenius, the sterno-mastoid- eus and the cleido-occipitalis; its inner with the digasiricus, atlanto- acromialis and omo-hyoideus. 34 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. Cleido-occipiialis. — Origin on the clavicle just laterad of the stemo- mastoid. Insertion by aponeurosis on the side of the occiput just laterad of and in the same plane with the acromio-trapezius. On its outer sur- face its relations are with the cervico-auncularis; on its inner with the rhomboideus, the atlanto-acromialis, and the cleido-mastoideus. Omo-cleido-iransversarius. — This includes two distinct muscles as in Didelphis, a dorsal part or " atlanto-scapularis" and a ventral part or '' ailanto-acromtalis." The dorsal part has its origin on the side of the body of the atlas immediately laterad of the origin of the ventral part. The insertion is on the front of the scapular spine in its vertebral fourth just ventrad of the insertion of the rhomboideus minor. It is a weaker more slender muscle than the ventral part and does not widen so at its insertion. The ventral part has origin on the side of the hypapophysial tubercle of the atlas. Its insertion is broad from the caudal side of the metacromion process of the scapula and for a short distance ventrad along the deltoid fascia over the acromio-deltoid muscle where it sends a few fibers ventrad. Muscles of the Thorax. Pectoralis minor. — Origin from the sides of the fourth and fifth stemebrae. Insertion on the lesser tuberosity of the humerus and the deltoid ridge by a broad slightly tendinous aponeurosis much wider than in Didelphis. Its outer surface has relation with the pectoralis major ^ its inner with the rectus abdominis, scalenus, etc. Pectoralis major. — Origin from the median line of the entire sternum. Insertion on the distal part of the inner edge of the deltoid ridge. Its outer edge is curled under and near the insertion it has a slight aponeu- rotic connection with the xiphihumeralis as in Didelphis. Supracosialis. — Origin by broad aponeurosis from the second, third, fourth and fifth stemebrae. Insertion fleshy on the side of the first rib. This muscle, which Coues called "sterno-costalis" and others designate transversus costarum, has practically the same relations as in Didelphis. Its broad aponeurosis for its entire length covers the rectus abdominis. Subclavius. — Arises from the first rib and inserts on the outer side of the distal end of the clavicle, not extending to the scapular spine as in Didelphis. In this it agrees with Phascologale, and some other Australian forms (Macropus sp., Phalanger sp.). Serratus magnus. — Origin posteriorly by six very distinct digitations on the sidesof the ribs from the third to the eighth inclusive. Anteriorly there are no distinct digitations and the origin is from the joints of cos- tal cartilages with the first, second and third ribs. Insertion on the pos- May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESXES — Osgood. 35 tenor border of the scapula where it is continuous with the levator scapulae. Scalenus. — This has two fairly distinct divisions, at least posteriorly. The scalenus ntedtus, or larger division, takes origin from the superior transverse processes of the third, fourth, and fifth cervical vertebrae over which it is somewhat narrow and thickened. Thence passing caudad it becomes thin and flattened and inserts by broad distinct slips on the middle of the third and fourth ribs, one slip on the third and two on the fourth, passing beneath and separating digitations of the serratus magnus in so doing. The scalenus anticus has its origin in coalescence with the medius, but about midway between the third cervical vertebra and the first rib it separates and inserts on the front of the first rib directly opposite the insertion of the supracostalis. Muscles or the Abdomen. Rectus abdominis. — Origin from the pubis and marsupial bone. In- sertion on the sternal part of the first rib and on the adjoining side of the manubrium of the sternum. It is strong and well developed anteriorly, broader but thinner abdominally. Obliquus externus abdominis. — Origin from the middle of the sides of the ribs from the fourth to the twelfth, interdigitating anteriorly with the serratus. Thence it follows the limibar fascia to Poupart's U|^ament which is inserted at the inner anterior base of the marsupial bone. Ventrally it spreads over the abdomen covering the rectus and inserting by aponeurosis on the linea alba. Obliquus internus abdominis. — Origin from Poupart's ligament and the ilium and thence dorsad to the lumbar fascia and craniad to the posterior borders of the loth to 13th ribs. It is fleshy in its dorsal portion down to a line from the ventral third of the costal cartilage of the tenth rib diagonally across the side of the abdomen to the pubic region. Ven- trad of this line the transversalis appears and no aponeurosis of the obliquus is demonstrable in the material available. Transversus abdominis. — Origin from the inner sides of the nth, 12th, and 13th ribs and from a coalescence with the diaphragm and thence along the lumbar fascia to the ihirni. Ventrally it is inserted into the linea alba. Posteriorly it is broadly aponeurotic and anteriorly mostly fleshy. Cremaster. — ^Arises in the male beneath the internal oblique near the crest of the ilium, and passes ventro-caudad across the iliacus and psoas major in the plane of the transversalis but separated from it by a shght space. It passes out of the body cavity through the ring in front of the 36 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol, XIV. marsupial bone and proceeds to the mid-ventral line and the testes. It is a well developed strand of muscle about one mm. in width but simply parallels or covers but does not enclose the spermatic cord until near the base of the testes where it nearly or quite surrounds the cord before spreading over the base of the testes and becoming aponeurotic. Muscles of the Sacrum. Plates III, V. Gluteus maximus. — Origin from the crest and the anterior part of the acetabular border of the iliimi and from the articular processes of the sacral and anterior caudal vertebrae as well as from the tendinous fascia covering the erector spinae as far caudad as the origin of the Jemoro- coccygeus. Insertion somewhat divided, an anterior part on the cranio- lateral and a posterior one on the caudo-lateral siu-face of the distal end of the great trochanter of the femur. It is a broad fan-shaped muscle, relatively thicker than in Didelphis, being fleshy from the erector spinae. Its cranial border is thickened and somewhat curled around the anterior fifth of the iliimi and distad lies in the groove between the gluteus medius and the iliacus, continuing ectad of the proximal end of the vastus externus to the cranial border of the biceps femoris to which it has a short semitendinous attachment distad and ectad of its insertion on the great trochanter. Its caudal border parallels the femorococcygeus but except in the dorsal fascia is distinct from it. No separate tensor fascia femoris is evident and it is doubtless |used with the gluteus as in various other marsupials. Gluteus medius. — Origin extensive from the dorsal fascia, the laminar tendons of the caudal muscles, the transverse processes of the sacral vertebrae, and the crest and ischial border of the ilium. Insertion on the caudo-lateral proximal part of the great trochanter of the femur ectad of that of the gluteus minimus which is distinct. It lies entad of the gluteus maximus and is almost equal to it in superficial extent. It is imperfectly divisible into two layers, the posterior one overlapping the anterior. A similar bilaminar arrangement is reported in Phascolarctos, Thylacinus, and Dasyurus, but not in Didelphis * and Cuscus (see Leche, Bronn's Thierr., p. 853). It is likewise in Notoryctes (Thompson and Hillier, 1905, p. 310). On its cntal side it is somewhat connected with the pyriformis not only near the insertion but also elsewhere except along the anterior tendinous border of the pyriformis. Anteriorly it is curled under from the crest of the ilium to the femur but in the distal half of this extent its edge is free and merely overlies the gluteus minimus. * Sidcbotbam (1885, p. 13) reports three layers in Chironecles. May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 37 Gluteus minimus. — Origin from the dorsal siirface of the ilium from a point on the acetabular border about midway between the crest and the acetabulum to a point opposite the middle of the acetabulum. Insertion broadly covering the antero-intemal surface of the great trochanter of the femur. It is relatively large and completely distinct not only anteriorly from the gluteus maximus and gluteus minimus but posteriorly from the gemelli. In the didelphids and various other marsupials it is partially joined to the maximus. Pyriformis. — Origin fleshy from the dorso-lateral surface and the caudal edge of the crest of the ilium and from the tips of the transverse processes of the two sacral and the first caudal vertebrae. Insertion on the apex of the great trochanter of the femur just caudad of the insertion of the gluteus minimus and entad of the gluteus medius. A very large muscle lying entad of the gluteus medius and ecto-caudad of the gluteus minimus. Its anterior border which is full and rounded runs direct from the trochanter to the iliac crest and at least in its distal half is tendinous. Fleshy fibers pass dorsad from this broad tendinous edge to the sacral border. Its outer surface, at least caudally, is somewhat connected with the gluteus medius. Quadratus femoris. — Origin on the inner side and slightly ventrad of the tuberosity of the ischium and on the inner edge of the ischium just craniad of the tuberosity. The fibers curve over the lesser sciatic notch to pass outward to their insertion on the middle of the ventral edge of the great trochanter of the femur and on the intertrochanteric ridge. It is relatively large and well developed and fairly distinguishable from the gemelli anteriorly. Gemelli. — No distinction is evident between a gemellus superior and inferior. The origin is on the body of the ischivun dorsad of the origin of the ischiococcygeus. The insertion is with the tendon of the obturator internus on the caudal edge of the great trochanter of the femur and in the digital fossa proximad of the insertion of the quadratus femoris. Its cranial border is distinct from the caudal border of the gluteus minimus. Iliacus. — Origin from the ventro-lateral or iliac surface and the acetabular border of the cranial two-thirds of the ilium from the crest caudad. In its caudal portions its insertion is opposite that of the iliococcygeus on one side and the gluteus minimus on the other with a part of the psoas magnus lying loosely between. Its general relations are closely similar to those in Didelphis. Obturator internus. — Origin from all of the caudal border of the ramus of the ischiimi which is ventrad of the quadratus fem^is, from the inner side of the pubic symphysis, and from the caudal border of the obturator foramen. Insertion by a flat tendon in the digital fossa of the femur. 38 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. Obturator externus. — Origin from the side of the ascending ramus of the ischium from the lower edge of the tuberosity to the symphysis and thence on the side of the pubic ramus to a point nearly opposite the anterior base of the marsupial bone. Insertion by a thick tendon in the digital fossa and on the intertrochanteric ridge of the femur. It is a broad thickened muscle lying at its origin entad of the adductors. Dor- sally it meets the edge of the quadratus femoris. The obturator externus is said by Leche (p. 858) to be "nichts be- merkenswerthes " in the Marsupialia, but Macalister (1870, p. 167) states that it is "large and normal in Phascolomys and Sarcophilus, as well as in Macropus giganteus, the Wallaby, Phalanger, and Opossum." Thompson and Hillier (1905, p. 312) found it well developed in Notoryc- tes. The so-caUed differentiation of the obturator, which Leche names intermedius and reports only for Didelphis and Philander is doubtless not peculiar to these forms. It was not specially sought in Ccenolestes and may have been overlooked and included as an integral part of the externus. Whether it be called externus or intermedius, it is apparent that it is not peculiar in Ccenolestes. I Muscles of the Tail. All the usual tail muscles of the pubic cavity are present and distinct but their muscular parts do not extend far beyond the base of the tail. On removal of the skin and the underlying fascia, the tail appears almost entirely encased in shining tendons from its base to its tip. On the dorsal aspect the continuations of the back muscles proceed somewhat farther caudad but these also soon become entirely tendinous. After all the tendons have been removed, however, a series of thin muscles connecting the vertebrae are exposed. These are short muscles, those next the median line extending from the chevron bone of one vertebra to that of the one succeeding; those laterad extend from the caudal transverse process of one vertebra to the cephalic articular process of the second succeeding vertebra, each muscle thus spanning a vertebra. Dorsally the tendons from the dorsal extensors cover the angles of the tail, passing over the articular processes of the vertebrae, but in the median line the short intervertebral tail muscles are exposed. Abductor caifdae externus. — Origin on the medial side of the iliac crest and by tendinous connection with the lumbo dorsal fascia. In- sertion on the dorsal surfaces and tips of transverse processes of the caudal vertebrae. This is a spindle-shaped muscle filling the great part of the space between the transverse and the articular ])roccsscs of the anterior caudal vertebrae and passing out on the side of the tail where it narrows and soon becomes wholly tendinous. May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 39 Extensor catidae lateralis. — Origin by slips from the articular processes of the sacral and caudal vertebrae. Insertion on the sides and transverse processes of the caudal vertebrae. Lies between the abductor catidae externus and the multifidae which are continued to the base of the tail as an extensor catidae medialis. Pabococcygeus. — Origin from the whole inner caudal border of the pubic ramus. It forms a thin sheet over the obturator foramen and continues fleshy to the front of the fifth caudal vertebra whence it finds attachment in the aponeurosis on the surface of the tail. In some cases it is slightly tendinous on its inner side and attached to the chevron bone of the fifth caudal. Laterally it has slight attachment to the colon. Sacrococcygeus. — Origin from the ventral surfaces of the transverse processes of the sacral and the first four caudal vertebrae. Thence by numerous slender tendons it proceeds along the side of the tail to the distal caudal vertebrae. These tendons lie slightly laterad of those of the infracoccygeus and fill the space between the cephalic articular and transverse processes of the caudal vertebrae. Its muscular heads are thick and fleshy and lie between the caudal part of the infracoccygeus and the puhococcygeus and ventrad of the ischiococcygeus. Ischiococcygeus. — Origin from the inner side of the ilium from a point opposite and slightly craniad of the caudal border of the gluteus minimus caudad about halfway to the tuberosity of the ischium. In- sertion on the tips of the transverse processes of the first four caudal vertebrae. Iliococcygeus. — Origin from the ischial border of the ilium from a point just caudad of the sacrum (posterior inferior spine of ilitun) and thence caudad along the whole inner surface of the ilium (great sacro- sciatic notch) nearly to the anterior border of the obturator foramen. A few fibers rise from the tendons of the psoas minor and at this point are closely connected with those of the pubococcygeus. Insertion by four distinct tendons which converge to the middle of the ventral surface of the tail. The outer tendon runs just laterad of the mid-ventral line of the tail to the chevron bone of the eighth caudal vertebra. The next one runs similarly to the seventh caudal. The inner pair of tendons run first mediad, then entad, and finally laterad of the outer pair. Of this inner pair the outer one inserts on the chevron bone of the ninth and the other on the tenth caudal. Near their attachments each of the tendons gives off a slight muscular fasdculus. Infracoccygeus. — Origin from the medio-ventral surfaces of the bodies of the fifth and sixth lumbars and the two sacral vertebrae. In- sertion by long slender tendons running on the ventral side of the tail next to the median line. The innermost tendon runs to the middle of 40 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. the front of the first caudal. The next tendon laterad runs to the eleventh caudal, the next to the twelfth and so they continue to the twentieth caudal. The muscle is broadly spindle shaped and occupies the sacral basin, its two halves forming an elongate ellipse between the two halves of the psoas magnus anteriorly and of the iliococcygeus posteriorly. It consists of superposed laminae each becoming tendi- nous before issuing from the pubis. Muscles of the Anterior Limb. Plate V. Spino-deltoideus. — Origin from the middle third of the scapular spine. Insertion on the distal end and outer edge of the deltoid ridge of the humerus. At its insertion it passes beneath and nearly at right angles to the acromio-deltoideus. Acromio-deltoideus. — Origin on the acromion and the proximal half of the clavicle. Insertion on the inner end of the flattened surface of the deltoid ridge opposite the insertion of the pectoralis major. It covers the rather broad surface of the deltoid ridge and is a thicker muscle than in Didelphis and more distinct from the spino-deltoideus and the pectoralis. It is fan-shaped, the fibers from the clavicle and those from the acromion converging toward a median raphe and coming to a point ventrally. Subscapularis. — Origin from practically the whole of the expanded ental surface of the scapula. Insertion by a short broad tendon on the lesser tuberosity of the humerus. It is slightly thicker dorsally than ventrally but in general is thin and flat. Supraspinatus. — Origin from the surface of the supraspinous fossa. It passes entad of the clavicle between the coracoid and the acromion and inserts on the greater tuberosity of the humerus. It is about twice as large as the infraspinatus and relatively larger than in Didelphis, agreeing more nearly with Phalanger, Perameles, Phascologale, etc. Infraspinatus. — Origin from the infraspinous fossa, including the ental surface of the metacromion and acromion, the axillary border of the scapula, and from a tendinous raphe between it and the proximal part of the teres. Insertion partly fleshy and partly tendinous on the greater tuberosity of the humerus. A weak aponeurosis from the infraspinous fossa near the base of the acromion may represent the teres minor, but it is very indefinite. A teres minor is reported for Chiro- necies (Sidebotham) but not for Didelphis. Epitrochlearis. — Origin from the lower border of the latissimus slight- ly (2 mm.) before it passes beneath the biceps. Insertion on the olecranon process of the ulna. May, 1921. American Marsupial, Cenolestes — Osgood. 41 Teres major. — Origin from the posterior ventral angle of the scapula in close relation with the subscapularis. Insertion on the bicipital groove slightly proximad of and in conjunction with that of the latissimus. Coracohrachialis hrevis. — Origin on the coracoid process entad of the biceps. Insertion on the humerus just proximad of the insertion of the teres. It is very slightly developed, almost rudimentary, and in its fleshy part consists of a very thin layer of fibers instead of a thick belly as in Didelphis. In one specimen it appeared to insert in the tissue of the medial head of the triceps rather than on the humerus. Biceps brachii. — Origin by a single tendon from the coracoid process of the scapula and adjacent fascia. Soon after becoming fleshy it is readily divisible into two distinct muscles which run in close apposition to pass into the forearm between the pronator teres and the extensor carpi radialis brevis. The outer muscle inserts by a narrow flat tendon on the tubercle of the radius. The inner muscle is partially attached to the brachialis near its insertion and then its tendons divide and pass on either side of the tendon of the brachialis to insertions on the side of the ulna distad of the lesser sigmoid cavity. In some of the Macropodidae the biceps is completely divided but in some other diprotodonts and in polyprotodonts generally its relations are reported essentially as above. Brachialis anticus. — Origin from the lesser tuberosity and the border of the head of the hiunerus passing around the middle of the front of the humerus and thence distad. At about the middle of the front of the humerus it becomes attached to the bone; between this and its origin it is free or nearly so. Thence it continues along the humerus to the elbow joint where it twists further and has final insertion just distad of the lesser sigmoid cavity on the inner siu-face of the ulna by a flattened ten- don which passes between the divided tendons of the biceps. Triceps brachii. — The long head has its origin as usual on the axillary border of the scapula just dorsad of the glenoid cavity. Its insertion by common tendon with the lateral head is on the outer angle of the olecranon process of the ulna. The lateral head arises beneath the posterior border of the head of the humerus and thence is free from the humerus to its union with the long head. Its posterior aspect is hollowed to receive the long head for most of its length and the two are fairly distinct. The median head arises from the posterior aspect of the htunerus for practically its entire length, reaching dorsally within 2 mm. of the lesser tuberosity and thence to the olecranon fossa. Its insertion is on the inner angle of the olecranon process of the ulna quite distinct from that of the other two head?. The triceps of Ccenolestes is characterized by the distinctness of the 42 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. median head which in Didelphis and many other marsupials is united with the lateral head near its origin. Anconeus. — Origin from the inner condyle of the himierus. In- sertion on the inner angle of the olecranon process entad of the epitroch- learis. A small muscle connected on its lower side by a tendinous raphe with the extensor carpi ulnaris and on its upper side slightly connected with the median head of the triceps. Pronator teres. — Has origin as a thick fleshy bundle from the posterior side of the inner condyle of the humerus and the epicondylar ridge. Insertion by broad aponeurosis on the middle third of the front of the radius. Flexor carpi radialis. — Origin from the inner humeral condyle and the septa connecting with the pronator teres between which and the palmaris longus it lies. Its long slender tendon passes over the extremity of the radius and thence over the scaphoid to insertion at the bases of the second and third metacarpals.^ Palmaris longus. — Origin from the septa between it and the fiexor carpi ulnaris, the flexor carpi radialis, and the digital flexors and by a few fibers from the inner condyle of the humerus. It covers the digital flexors almost completely and Hes between the flexor carpi ulnaris and the flexor carpi radialis. In the single specimen dissected it was divided into two parts. The superficial one (palmaris accessorius?) sends its tendon beside that of the fl£xor carpi ulnaris to a slight attachment on the inner side of the fascia on the pisiform bone and thence superficial to or partly attached to the flat transverse ligament of the wrist which extends across the wrist from the pisiform to the base of the first metacarpal. Above this transverse ligament it extends into the palmar fascia. The deeper division sends its tendon boimd with its fellow to the transverse ligament where the two separate and the second dips beneath the ligament to reappear in the facia and send aponeurotic branches to the extremities of the second, third, and fourth digits. The fleshy parts of the two divisions are distinct for about one-half their length. Flexor carpi ulnaris. — Origin from the inner condyle of the humerus, from the septa between it and the palmaris longus, the extensor digitorum communis, and the anconeus, and from the outer angle of the olecranon opposite the insertion of the epitrochlearis. Insertion on the end of the pisiform bone. A broad fan-shaped muscle with two sets of fibers con- verging toward its tendon which extends a short distance into its fleshy * Thia is also the case in Didelphis, although Coucs states that the insertion is on the first metacarpal; Cunningham (1883, p. 17) found a similar disposition in Pha- langer maculata. May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESXES — Osgood. 43 part. The fleshy divisions end abruptly and equally about one-third of the distance from the olecranon to the carpus. The posterior division, therefore is not longer than the anterior as it is in the opossum and the tendon is shorter. Flexor digitorum suhlimis. — Origin by three heads in the septa of the ulnar head of the profundus. These give rise to three distinct slips which send their tendons loosely bound together until they reach the palm where they pass beneath the annular ligament and insert ectad of the large profundus tendons at the bases of the first phalanx of the second, third, and fourth digits, respectively. Their tendons are slender and practically of the same size throughout. From their point of origin a short thick muscle with fibers running diagonally opposite those of the ulnar head of the profundus extends to an origin from the caudad surface of the inner humeral condyle and from the proximal edge of the glenoid cavity of the ulna. Whether it may be one head of the sublimis is doubt- ful. It is very distinct. Flexor digitorum profundus. — Origin by four heads each of which sends a distinct tendon to the palm where all unite in a thick flat tendi- nous mass which occupies most of the palmar space. From this three strong tendons radiate to the middle digits. Two others going to the pollex and the fifth finger are much smaller and arise from the ectal surface of the common tendon. The heads are as follows: 1. Ulnar head. Origin on the flattened posterior surface of the proximal two-thirds of the ulna from the olecranon at least to a point opposite the neck of the radius. Its tendon is very large and strong, rounded in its proximal part, slightly tapering toward its middle, and flattening as it joins the outer side of the palmar tendinous mass. This is the largest fasciculus of the forearm, lying beneath the flexor ulnaris and giving shape to the limb. 2. The second head lies superficially next to the flexor carpi radialis and connected with it in its proximal part by intermuscular septa. It is similarly connected with the fourth head for a distance of nearly half its fleshy extent. Its origin is from the inner condyle of the humerus entad of that of the palmaris longus. Its tendon joins the common tendon ectad of that of the third head, the two being approximately of equal size and l>'ing midway between the tendons of the first and foiuth heads which are much larger. 3 . The third head is very distinct and wholly free but lies deeper than the second and is not exposed until that is reflected. It lies between the flexor ulnaris and the second head of the profundus together with the conjoined part of the flexor radialis. Its origin is from the inner side of the lip of the lesser sigmoid cavity of the ulna. Its small roimd tendon 44 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. runs direct to the common palmar tendon which it joins next to that of the ulnar head and entad of that of the second head. 4. The fourth head, which is almost as large as the first or ulnar head, has origin from a distinct slip from the front of the inner condyle of the htmierus and from a broad fleshy expansion arising from the inner side of the proximal foiuth of the radius. The two fleshy parts join to form a single tendon which runs along the radius to join the common tendon in the palm. While obviously very different from that of Didelphis, in which there is no division above the palm, this muscle is so variable that detailed comparisons have not been attempted. In most marsupials it sends tendons only to the four ulnar digits. Abductor pollicis longus {Extensor ossis metacarpi pollicis). — Lies in the deep groove in the proximal part of the ulna and takes origin from the adjacent sides of the ulna and the radius, the fibers converging from the two sides to the central tendon which extends some distance into the fleshy part. Its origin (male specimen) is thus some 5 mm. in length. Its rather broad fiat tendon passes beneath the ulnar and lateral digital extensors crossing the forearm and becoming superficial between the extensor digitorum communis and the extensor carpi brevis. It then cm^es around the radius and inserts on the lateral surface of the first metacarpal. Pronator quadratus. — This muscle, which is present in didelphids and so far as known in all other marsupials except Notoryctes, is not found in Ccenolestes, or at most is represented by no more than an indefinite non-muscular fascia. It is reported as poorly developed in Thylacinus, Sarcophilus, Phalanger and Phascologale. It is lacking in monotremes, insectivores, bats, and certain edentates (Dasypodidae, Manidae). Brachioradialis {Supinator longus). — Origin from the outer epicondy- lar ridge of the himierus proximad of the extensor carpi radialis longus. Its tendon passes under that of the abductor pollicis longus and over a groove in the extremity of the radius to insertion in the external lateral ligament which overlies the extremity of the radius. Extensor carpi radialis longus. — Origin from the outer epicondylar ridge of the humerus distad of the brachioradialis. Insertion on the base of the second phalanx of the second digit. Extensor carpi radialis brevis. — Origin from the outer epicondylar ridge and septa of the extensor digitorum communis, between which and ^e extensor carpi radialis longus it lies. Insertion on the outer lateral surface of the proximal third of the first phalanx of the third digit. It is somewhat larger than the longus and separate from it as in Thylacinus and Phalanger. In most other marsupials, the long and short radial May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESXES — Osgood. 45 extensors are reported to be fused at least proximally, but Parsons (1896, p. 697) expresses the belief that they are normally separate in the kangaroos. Extensor digitorum communis. — Origin from the distal part of the outer epicondylar ridge, the outer condyle and from the septa of the muscles lying on either side, namely the extensor carpi radialis brevis and the extensor digitorum lateralis. The fleshy part divides into two slips, the more superficial of which sends tendons to the second and third digits and the deeper one to the fourth and fifth. The tendons are separate but closely parallel until they pass under the transverse liga- ment and separate to insertions on the terminal phalanges of the second to the fifth digits. The tendons become somewhat flattened or aponeu- rotic distally. Extensor digitorum lateralis. — Origin on the front of the outer con- dyle of the humerus next to the extensor communis but quite distinct from it. Connected by septa with the extensor carpi ulnaris. The head of the radius lies immediately entad of the line of separation between the two muscles. In the distal two thirds of its fleshy extent it is divided into three distinct slips from which separate parallel tendons run one to the fourth and two to the fifth digit. On the fourth digit the insertion is at the base of the ungual phalanx. On the fifth the insertion in one case is at the base of the ungual phalanx and in the other in the fascia covering the second and third phalanges. A double tendon from this muscle to the fifth digit has been noted in Sarcophilus (Macalister, 1870, p. 164), but not in other marsupials. Extensor carpi ulnaris. — Origin from the front of the outer condyle of the himierus and the adjacent side of the ulna; also connected by septa with the extensor digitorum lateralis. Its tendon passes over a groove on the antero-intemal siuiace of the extremity of the radius and inserts at the base of the fifth metacarpal. According to Macalister (1. c.) and Wilson (1894, p. 451), this muscle has no ulnar origin in Sarcophilus, Didelphis, Trichosurus, and Dasyurus, but like Ccenolestes, has one in Macropus, Phascolomys, Phascolarcios, and Perameles. Supinator (brevis). — Origin tendinous on the sesamoid laterad of the head of the radius. Insertion on the arched anterior surface of the prox- imal third of the radius. A broad flat muscle. It occupies the upper two- thirds of the radius in Phascolomys, two-fifths in Phascolarcios, one- third in Macropus and Sarcophilus and only one-fourth in Didelphis and Dasyurus (Macalister 1. c). The presence of a sesamoid in its tendon of origin appears to be unique among marsupials. It is reported in certain edentates and bats and an origin from the orbicular ligament of the radius was found in Dasyurus by MacCormick (fide Wilson, 1. c, p. 48). 46 Field Museum of Natural History — ZoOlogy, Vol. XIV. Extensor indicts. — Origin from the antero-extemal edge of the tdna opposite the greater sigmoid cavity. Its tendon divides into two about midway of its length. These pass under the digital extensors and across the carpus to insertions one at the base of the ungual phalanx of the first digit and one at the same point on the second digit. Muscles of the Forefoot. The delicate intrinsic muscles of the forefoot have been worked out as carefully as possible, but in all the specimens examined some of the metacarpal bones were found to be broken, making it very difficult to ascertain exact relations. In general the muscles of the hand differ from those of Didelphis more than they do from some of the Australian forms. The adductors are much less highly developed than in Didelphis and this in connection with the absence of a pronator quadratus indicates a relatively limited power of action of hand and fingers. Lumbricals are present but not greatly developed. Adductors. — Three adductors are readily distinguishable, the indicis, annularis, and minimus. They arise in the palmar fascia at the base of the metacarpals and radiate to their insertions as practically separate muscles without any development of a central raphe. The indicis arises over the bases of the second and third metacarpals and inserts on the ulnar side of the distal extremity of the second metacarpal. It is separable with some difficulty from the ulnar head of the flexor hrevis indicis. The annularis and minimus arise over the bases of the third and fourth metacarpals and insert on the radial sides of the distal ends of the fourth and fifth metacarpals respectively. They are sep- arated from the flexors by a large palmar nerve. An adductor pollicis could not be distinguished. In general the adductors seem to be very similar to those of Thylacinus as figiu-ed by Cunningham. Flexors. — Short flexors are well developed on all the fingers. The flexor brevis pollicis could not be divided into two parts. It arises on the ulnar side of the base of the first metacarpal and inserts medially with a sesamoid at the first joint of the pollex. It is a relatively thick muscle and possibly may include a fused adductor. A rather definite aponeurotic strand running from the carpus to the ulnar side of the first joint of the poUcx may represent a second head of this flexor. The re- maining flexors are divided except proximally and lie in the usual posi- tion on the metacarpals with their tendons of insertion embracing the mctacarpo-phalangeal joints of each of the digits. Abductors and interossei. — Two marginal muscles regarded re- spectively as abductor pollicis and abductor digiti minimi are present. May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESTES — Osgood. 47 There is also an abductor of the index digit which is separately de- scribed owing to its more palmar position than the other interossei. The abductor pollicis is a short thick muscle with origin from the trapezium, the transverse ligament and the base of the first metacarpal. Its insertion is on the radial side of the distal extremity of the first metacarpal. The abductor digiti minimi also is a relatively large muscle. It orig- inates on the pisiform bone opposite the insertion of the flexor carpi ulnaris and inserts by a flattened tendon running under the annular ligament to the outer side of the metacarpo-phalangeal joint of the fifth finger. The abductor digiti indicis arises on the trapeziimi and the base of the first metacarpal and inserts near the distal end and on the radial side of the second phalanx in close apposition with the short flexor. It is in nearly the same plane as the flexors and is visible alongside the abductor pollicis before removal of the large tendons. It is also visible from the dorsal aspect of the hand. Excluding the above described abductor indicis, there are three dorsal interosseus muscles. These lie over the spaces between the four outer metacarpals, are almost wholly dorsal in position, and resemble those described and figured for Phalanger (Cuscus) by Cimningham (loc. cit., p. 23, pi. II, fig. 2). The one between the index and the medius has origin principally on the ulnar base and side of the second metacarpal and insertion with the tendon of the short flexor on the radial side of the third metacarpal. That between the medius and the annularis arises from the bases and the sides of the third and fourth metacarpals and inserts on the tendon of the short flexor on the ulnar side of the third metacarpal. That between the annularis and minimus arises from the bases and sides of the fourth and fifth metacarpals and inserts on the tendon of the short flexor of the ulnar side of the fourth metacarpal, also sending a short tendinous slip to the radial side of the fifth metacarpal. Muscles of the Hind Limb. Plates V-VI. Adductor longus. — Origin from the side of the ramus of the ischitmi from the symphysis pubis to the insertion of the semimembranosus. Its origin is ectad of the addtictor magnus and entad of the gracilis. Its caudal border parallels the semimembranosus. Insertion on the inner condyle of the femur and the inner side of the head of the tibia. Adductor magnus. — Origin from the side of the pubic symphj^sis and thence dorso-craniad along the edge of the pubis to the middle of the 48 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol, XIV. base of the marsupial bone and dorsad along the ramus of the ischium to the semimembranosus. Insertion on most of the length of the caudal surface of the femur from the insertion of the adductor hrevis near the lesser trochanter to the insertion of the longus at the base of the inner condyle. This muscle lies between the hrevis and the longus and its exposed surface lies next to the pectineus. At its origin it lies entad of the longus which parallels it distad. Adductor hrevis. — Origin from the side of the dorsal half of the ascend- ing ramus of the ischium to the side and front of the tuberosity of the ischium and for a slight distance craniad. Insertion on the distal caudal edge of the great trochanter of the femur caudo-entad of the insertion of the gluteus maximus and thence transversely of the femur to a point slightly distad of the lesser trochanter. The outer surface of this short broad muscle is wholly covered by the gracilis, the semimemhranosus, and the other adductors. Caudofemoralis. — Origin by a broad tendinous aponeurosis from the fascia covering the multifidae and somewhat attached to the articular processes of the third caudal vertebra. The insertion is double, one slender slip inserting by a short tendon on the inner edge of the inner condyle of the femur between the adductor longus and the gastrocnemius. The other division of the muscle passes on the opposite side of the addvutor longus and inserts by several fasciculi on the caudal surface of the distal fourth of the shaft of the femiu*. Near its insertion it is slightly connected with the adductor. This muscle, which is not present in the didelphids, is well developed, but shows some variation even in the small number of specimens dissected. At its origin it lies immediately entad of the femorococcygeus and slightly distad is separated from it by the great sciatic nerve. It passes transversely to the bases of the ad- ductors, but is free from the femur to its insertion. Its ental surface near its origin has relation with the caudal muscles, the quadratus femoriSf and the ohturator internus as it passes distad just craniad of the biceps femoris. Its presence is reported in Notoryctes, Phalanger, Thy- lacinus, Myrmecobius, and Dasyurus. Pectineus. — Origin from the side of the pubis at the anterior base of the marsupial bone. Insertion on the inner surface of the femur slightly proximad of the middle. A short thick muscle lying ectad of the insertion of the psoas major. Femoro-coccygeus. — Origin aponeurotic from tendinous fascia be- tween the cephalic and caudal articular processes of the third caudal vertebra. Insertion by several fasciculi on the distal third of the caudo- lateral surface of the femur. It is separate from the gluteus maximus except near the insertion where the fascia join. It has a slight twist May, 1921, American Marsupial, CiENOLESTES — Osgood. 49 in passing between the biceps and the gluteus and lies "edgewise" for a short distance, its distal part being covered by the biceps. It is separate from the gluteus in Sarcophilus (Macalister, 1870, p. 166) and Notary ctes (Thompson and Hillier, 1905, p. 310), but in other marsupials is in the same plane and more or less fused with it. Vastus internus. — Origin from the proximal three-fourths of the anterior and dorsal surface of the femur, extending from the anterior edge of the great trochanter to the lesser trochanter and thence distad. Insertion with the vastus externus on the inner side of the patella and thence by aponeurosis to the head of the tibia. A very large muscle greatly exceeding the vastus externus. Subcrureus. — Origin on the dorsal surface of the femur just distad of the vastus internus. Insertion in the tendinous fascia surrounding the patella. A short fiat muscle. Vastus externus. — Origin from the anterior border of the great tro- chanter of the femur. Insertion conjoined with the rectus femoris on the patella. About equal in size and form to the rectus, with which it forms the anterior border of the thigh. Decidedly smaller than the vastus internus to which it is closely appressed but from which it is distinct except for a short distance near its origin. Biceps femoris. — Origin by a short tendon from the lateral surface of the tuberosity of the ischium craniad of the inner division of the semi- tendinosus and entad of the outer division or crurococcygeus. Insertion by broad aponeurosis from the patella across the proximal third of the leg to the outer edge of the tibia. This aponeurosis covers a large part of the outer side of the leg. A large triangular muscle of great width but moderate thickness. Its anterior border meets the vastus externus and covers the insertion of the femorococcygeus. Rectus femoris. — Origin from the dorso-lateral ridge of the ilium im- mediately craniad of the acetabulimi. Insertion with the vasti on the patella. It passes between the gluteus minimus and the ileopsoas and forms the inner anterior boundary of the thigh. Semitendinous. — Origin by two heads, an outer one {^'crurococcyg- eus") from the fascia over the fourth caudal vertebra and an inner one from the tuberosity of the ischiimi just caudad of the biceps. Midway between the tuberosity and the flexed femur these two sHps imite and then divide into three parts, two passing inside the gastrocnemius and one outside. The inner slips insert by aponeurosis, one with a twist on the front of the tibia one-third of the distance from the tibial head and the other (entad) on the same surface of the tibia halfway between its fellow and the head of the tibia. The outer slip inserts on the outer siirface of the tibia and in the fascia of the biceps femoris. The relations so Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. of this muscle are essentially as in Didelphis and different from those of most other marsupials, in which the so-called crurococcygeus is not so well developed, although tendinous intersections have been found in Thylacinus, Dasyurus, and Trichosurus (fide Thompson and Hillier, 1905, p. 316) and in ChtBropus (Parsons, 1903, p. 73). Gracilis. — Origin from the pubic symphysis and the ascending ramus of the ischivmi nearly half way to the tuberosity. Anteriorly a few fibers reach to the base of the marsupial bone. Insertion aponeurotic on the inner surface of the distal half of the proximal third of the tibia. Semimembranosus. — Origin fleshy from the outer side of the ascend- ing ramus of the ischium, occupying the middle two-thirds of the space between the symphysis and the tuberosity. Insertion by a broad ten- don on the inner side of the head of the tibia entad of the internal lateral ligament of the knee joint which is strongly developed. A large thick muscle elliptical in cross section. No presemimembranosus was dis- tinguished, but it may be represented in the somewhat anomalous muscle here called caudojemoralis although that has no ischial origin. Sartorius. — Origin on the dorsal border of Poupart's ligament. Insertion in the fascia extending from the knee joint and the patella to the proximal third of the front edge of the tibia. It is a thin band con- sisting of one layer of muscle fibers only and can scarcely be functional. This muscular part is clearly differentiated from the fascia on either side of it which cover a great part of the inside of the leg immediately be- neath (entad) the mass of fat. Between the sartorius and the next layer of muscle is the crural nerve and its branches, of which the saphenus innervates the sartorius and runs down the side of the leg (PI. VI, fig. 2). It is practically imbedded in the sartorius at this point and is visible through the thin muscle layer. The insertion of the muscle is ectad of the gracilis. This much-reduced, almost rudimentary muscle, is easily over- looked and it was at first thought that a sartorius was entirely absent or fused with the gluteus maximus. It was possible also that it might be a second gracilis. It has been demonstrated in two specimens, however, and its relations with the saphenus nerve seem to justify the conclusion that it is in reality the sartorius. Its origin from Poupart's Hgamcnt is paralleled in certain edentates, as sloths and armadillos. A partial origin from Poupart's ligament has been noted in Sarcophilus by Macalistcr (1870, p. 170). In the Inscctivora, although usually absent, the sartorius is found in Gymnura partly attached to the gracilis. Gastrocnemius. — The medial head arises by a short thick tendon from the inner transverse surface of the inner condyle of the femur and the intercondyloid notch just distad of the caudojemoralis and the adductor May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 51 longus. It lies against the lateral head with various nerves intervening and is joined with it in the distal fourth of its fleshy extent. It thus agrees with most marsupials and differs from Didelphis in which it is wholly free from the lateral head. The lateral head has two divisions, one of which probably represents the soleus. These are : 1. The principal part arises from the extremity of the fibular sesa- moid opposite the end of the collateral tibial ligament and joins the second part about midway of its fleshy extent. Except for a small tri- angular area along its outer proximal edge where the second part is visible beneath the fascia, it overlies the second part. 2. The second part arises from the caudal surface of the fabella and from the tendinous edge of the plantaris for about two-fifths of the fleshy extent of the plantaris. It joins the outer part about midway of its fleshy extent. This second and more deep-seated part of the muscle may be the soleus which is not otherwise evident. The conjoined parts form a rounded tendon which runs to an insertion on the calcaneum. As a whole the gastrocnemius forms a deep belly on the leg curving rather abruptly inward to its tendon and (^ccupying in its fleshy part only forty per cent of the length of the leg, the remainder being tendinous. Its outer or anterior edge is continuous with the fascia lata which ex- tends to the patellar region and down the leg entad of and intimately associated with the fascia of the biceps Jemoris. In one specimen a slight cleft in this outer edge was observed separating a thin slip which may represent a third or patellar division of the gastrocnemius. Plantaris. — Origin from the side of the fabella, mediad of the second division of the lateral head of the gastrocnemius and more or less imited with it. It continues joined with the gastrocnemius for about two-fifths of its fleshy extent and then becomes free as a slender bundle which proceeds distad covered by the gastrocnemius. Its slender tendon, which at first is entad of that of the gastrocnemius ^ curves around it and passes over the calcaneum ectad of the gastrocnemius tendon and widens to merge into the plantar fascia where its prolongations could not be traced. Flexor digitorum fibularis. — This has two divisions scarcely separable in their fleshy part. The smaller one, which is on the tibial side, sends a small tendon beneath the larger one but separate from it imtil just before it passes the os calcis when the two merge. The fleshy part of the muscle is relatively large, lying next below the gastrocnemius and taking origin from the greater part of the inner and posterior aspects of the fibula from the inner side of the outer tuberosity distad not only in the grooved inner expanded part but also on the proximal part of the roimded posterior aspect. Proximally it is connected by septa with the tibialis anticus and distally some of its fibers arise from the interosseous mem- 52 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. brane. Its large tendon passes inside the calcaneum where it becomes broad and heavy and soon divides into four strong tendons bearing the lumbricals and ninning to the ends of the outer toes. Just before the common tendon divides it receives on its ental surface the two flattened tendons of the flexor digitorum tibialis between which passes the flexor accessorius. Flexor accessorius. — ^Arises on the tuberosity of the distal outer extremity of the os calcis, spreads over the ventral surface of the distal part of the calcaneimi, passes beneath the plantar ligament and then becoming tendinous, continues diagonally entad of the common tendon of the large flexor fibularis. Thence it perforates the tendon of the flexor tibialis, or at least is somewhat attached to it, and proceeds to insertion on the distal phalanx of the hallux. Just before passing through the annular ligament at the first joint of the hallux its tendon imites with that of the flexor tibialis. This muscle is present in Didelphis and has been described by Coues (1872, p. 134) tmder the name flexor brevis pollicis obliquus. In Didelphis, however, it passes ectad of the common tendon of the flexor flbularis and its tendon joins the tendon of the flexor tibialis before it reaches the hallux. An accessorius is recorded also for Chironectes (Sidebotham, 1885, p. 16). The accessorius is stated by Leche (Bronn's Thierr., p. 904) to be generally lacking in marsupials and perhaps the above described muscle should be regarded as a part of the flexor digitorum communis brevis which is otherwise rather weak and slightly represented (seepostea, p. 57). Whatever its name, it is evident that it is more independent in Ccenolestes than in other marsupials or most other mammals, especially in the distinctness of its tendon for a considerable distance on the hallux. A somewhat similar accessorius found in an insectivore, Gymnura, is regarded as abnormal by Parsons (1898, p. 324). It is of regular occur- rence in edentates. Flexor digitorum tibialis. — Origin from the greater part of the proxi- mal half of the interosseous membrane, from the popliteus, and by a few fibers from the inner side of the inner tuberosity of the fibula. Its tendon, closely associated with that of the tibialis posticus, passes the inner mal- leolus and soon divides into two, one of which runs directly to the ental surface of the large tendon of the flexor fibularis and the other joins the small tendon of the accessorius and after a lateral connection with the main tendon of the fibular flexor it continues to an insertion on the terminal phalanx of the first digit. Peroneus brevis. — Origin tendinous from the inner tuberosity of the fibula and proximally by septa with the muscles lying on either side and May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESTES — Osgood. 53 beneath it. Its large tendon passes beneath the annular ligament out- side the external malleolus and after passing over the front of t^e calcaneum turns downward and inserts on the outer side of the tuberos- ity of the base of the fifth metacarpal. Just above its insertion it is distinctly increased in size and is perforated by the tendon of the peroneus tertius. The same arrangement has been noted in Trichosurus (Thompson and Hillier, 1905, p. 322). Tibialis anticus. — Origin from the deeply excavated outer surface of the proximal part of the tibia. Its muscular part lies mostly in this broad groove but is directly attached to the bone only in its proximal third. Its principal tendon passes along the fibular edge of the tibia and after passing over the astragalus tiuns down entad of the tendon of the extensor hallucis longus and widening slightly inserts on the under side of the entocuneiform bone. A second and smaller tendon runs from an indistinct division of the fleshy part of the muscle and, paralleling the larger tendon, inserts in front of it on the side of the base of the first metatarsal. In Myrmecobius (Leche, Bronn's Thierr., VI, p. 893) it is joined by the tendon of the extensor hallucis longus, but in this case that muscle and its tendon are independently developed. An accessory tendon to the first metatarsal similar to that in Ccmolesies was fovmd in Notoryctes by Thompson and Hillier. Peroneus tertius. — Origin from the external condyle of the femur and the under surface of the collateral ligament jointly with the peroneus longus, from the outer surface of the inner condyle of the fibula and also by a distinct slip or second head from the surface of the fibula just distad of the outer tuberosity. It lies entad of the peroneus longus and although not so completely bicipital there is a distinct correspondence between the divisions of each. It has only slight connection with surrounding muscles, being distinct throughout its fleshy extent. Its tendon passes through the malleolar ligament, perforates the tendon of the peroneus hrevis and continues directly to its insertion in the fascia on the outer side of the base of the first phalanx of the fifth digit. This muscle is regarded by Leche as a division of the extensor hrevis digitorum. Its relations in Didelphis are similar to those in Ccenolesies and also in Thylacinus, Myrmecobius, Cuscus, and in Phascolarctos, but in these latter it has no femoral origin (Leche). Peroneus longus. — Arises by two heads which are separate proximally but which join midway of their fleshy extent to form a single tendon. The inner head lying next to the peroneus brevis takes origin from the inner tuberosity of the fibula and from the outer edge of a collateral Hga- ment running from the external condyle of the femur to the inner tuber- 54 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. osity of the fibula. A few fibers also arise from the outer base of the peroneus brevis. The outer head arises from the outer tuberosity of the fibula and the imier surface of the fibular sesamoid. Its tendon lies deep to that of the peroneus brevis and passes with it through the annular Ugament over the external malleolus. Distad it passes over the peroneal tubercle of the calcaneum and down the side of the cuboid deeply im- bedded in tissue. Tiuning to the under side of the tarsus, it passes over the cuboid and after being somewhat enlarged and attached near the base of the fifth metacarpal, it passes the bases of the third and fourth metacarpals and goes to insertion on the inner base of the hallux. Its course and insertion are thus much the same as in Phascolarctos, Pha- langer and Didelphis. Tibialis posticus. — ^A distinct muscle with its fleshy part lying be- tween the flexor digitorum fibularis and the flexor digitorum tibialis. Its origin is from the inner side of the outer tuberosity of the fibula, from the expanded inner surface of the fibula and from septa of the fibular flexor. Its tendon runs beneath that of t\\Q flexor digitorum tibialis and crosses it midway to the ankle finally inserting on the palmar surface of the scaphoid. Extensor brevis digitorum. — This is in three distinct divisions two of which are of fibiilar origin while the third is on the dorsum of the foot. The first is a thin flat muscle arising from a small space on the outer expanded surface of the fibula slightly mediad and distad of the outer condyle. Its tendon runs through the outer malleolar ligament and inserts in the fascia on the outer side of the base of the first phalanx of the third digit. The second division is slightly larger in its muscular part which arises subjacent to the first and between it and the extensor hallucis longus. Its origin occupies the distal two-thirds of the proximal half of the outer expanded surface of the fibula. The proximal part of the fibula between the tuberosities is without muscular attachments and directly in relation with the inner surface of the peroneus teriius which overlies the above-described divisions of the short extensor. The tendon of the second division passes the outer malleolus with that of the first and proceeds over the dorsimi of the pes to insertion in the fascia on the outer side of the base of the first phalanx of the fourth digit. These two divisions obviously belong to the peroneal group of muscles and arc quite as distinct as the others. They are united in Didelphis and Dasyurus and send tendons to the second, third and fourth toes; in Thylacinus and Myrmecobius, they are in three divisions (Lechc). A very slender tendon imbedded in fascia crosses the third meta- tarsal and connects the tendon of the second division with that of the third or pedal division. The third division or extensor hallucis brevis May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 55 consists of a short flat muscle much involved in fascia and arising chiefly from the dorsal surface of the fibular side of the distal annular ligament and the fascia over the os calcis. Its fleshy fibers scarcely reach beyond the base of the metatarsals and its tendon runs to the fascia on the fibular side of the base of the second metatarsal. Fascial connection with the hallux may include a minute tendon but this was not dis- tinguished. A similar extensor hallucis brevis is foimd in Didelphis, but it is lacking in Dasyurus, Thylacinus and Myrmecobius. Its presence in CcEuolestes appears to be an exclusive resemblance to Didelphis. It is common, however, in other mammals, as for example, the Dasypodida among edentates. Extensor longus digitorum. — ^The digital extensors lie next to the tibialis anticus and take origin from the outer tuberosity of the tibia, the inner tuberosity of the fibula, and septa joining them to the peroneus brevis. Their origin is more largely from the fibula than the tibia. They are united for no more than the proximal third of their fleshy extent and in the remainder of their length are distinct both as to the distal fleshy parts and the tendons. Passing over the ankle they are boimd down in common with the tibialis aniicus and the extensor hallucis by a broad annular ligament (ligamentum cruciatimi) and also by a short stout annular ligament (ligamentum fimdif orme) which serves for the passage only of their fovu ligaments. The most deep-seated of these extensors is that lying next to the tibialis anticus and its tendon goes to the terminal phalanx of the second digit, the next to the third digit and the others to the fourth and fifth, the tendons passing on the iimer side of the second phalangeal joint in each case and thence to the dorsal surfaces of the third phalanges. Extensor hallucis longus. — Origin from the iimer edge of the fibula just distad of the inner tuberosity and thence about one fourth of the way to the jxmction of the fibula and the tibia. A few fibers also spring from the popliteal fascia. Its thin flat muscular part passes beneath the common digital extensor and the peroneus muscles in a diagonal direc- tion from the head of the fibula to the base of the tibial flexure and thence its tendon passes down the tibia beneath the large annular ligament and inserts on the base of the first phalanx of the hallux. Popliteus. — Origin from the greater part of the inner surface of the proximal half of the tibia. Proximally it reaches nearly to the inner condyle of the tibia while distally it extends almost to the imion of tibia and fibula. Its fibers run diagonally across the interosseous space but do not reach the fibula except proximally. DistaUy the fibers reach not more than half way across the interosseous membrane to which they are attached as a thin nearly transparent sheet. Proximally the muscle has 56 Field Museum of Natural History — Zo6logy, Vol. XIV. tendinous attachment to the posterior side of the inner tuberosity of the fibtila and the tendon continues broad through the muscle, which is pirmatifid. An indistinct layer lies superficial to this part of the muscle and is also pirmatifid, but in reverse direction, the tendon attaching to the shaft of the tibia and the fibers radiating toward the fibula. This may represent the so-called pronator tibiae, indications of which are found also in Myrmecohius and Didelphis (Leche, p. 899), forms in which there is some possibility of rotatory movements between tibia and fibula, whereas in CcBnolestes such movements are quite precluded by the closely appressed distal halves of the bones. The retention of these muscles in Ccsnolestes, therefore, is possible evidence that the ar- rangement of the bones is a recent specialization. This is partly nega- tived, however, by the entire absence of the pronator quadratus in the foreleg. There is no trace of a distal pronator tibiae such as is described by Macalister (1870, p. 173) for Phascolomys, Sarcophilus, Phalangista, and Perameles. Muscles of the Hind Foot. The number and relations of the muscles of the hind foot, the so- called intrinsic muscles, are broadly similar to those of various other pentadactylous marsupials. The size and independence of the hallucal adductor and the divided abductor indicis are noteworthy, as well as the sesamoid origin of certain of the short flexors. Although the other adductors and abductors are present it seems doubtful whether many of them can be more than very slightly functional on account of the closely appressed metatarsals. These are almost in contact proximally for nearly half their length in such a way as to permit of only very slight lateral motion. Lumbricales. — These are fairly well developed, but of uneven size, arising from the sides of the tendons of the flexor digitorum fibularis and inserting with them at the ends of the toes. Each tendon has two of these small muscles. Those on the tendons of the second, third and fourth digits are progressively shorter and rise from the sides of the tendons a considerable distance distad of their separation from the com- mon tendon. Those of the tendon of the fifth digit are very unequal, the outer being short and rising far distad while the inner is long and rises as high as the point of separation of the tendon from the common tendon. A single lumbrical rises on the medial side of the flexor digitorum tibialis. Another thin muscle rises on the ventral surface of the common tendon of the fibular flexor just above its digital divisions and sends weak aponeurotic connection to the fourth digit and possibly also to May, 192 1. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 57 others but this could not be determined. It represents, at least in part, the flexor digitorum communis brevis, which is similarly but more highly developed in Didelphis. Adductors. — All the adductors except the medius are present. Those of the outer digits arise in the membranous fascia just proximad of the metatarsals. The indicts goes to the medial or fibular side of the first joint of the index digit, the annularis goes to the tibial side of the same joint of the fourth digit, and the minimi digiti to the tibial side of the fifth digit. In one specimen the indicis and annularis were joined prox- imally for at least half their length, the minimi digiti being distinct from the base of the metatarsus. They are rather flat, wide, and quite delicate, but have small central tendons. The adductor hallucis lies along the lateral surface of the first meta- tarsal between the abductor hallucis and the short flexors and is the largest of the intrinsic hallucal muscles. It is not connected with the other adductors but has independent origin from the scaphoid by a relatively stout tendon which passes along the grooved surface of the ectocuneiform becoming fleshy at the base of the metatarsal. It inserts with the abductor on the tibial side of the distal extremity of the first metatarsal. The adductor hallucis is thus quite different from that of Didelphis and somewhat similar to that of Phascologale as described by Cunningham (1882, p. 55), but i^even more independent, its origin being completely separate from that of the other adductors. Abductors. — These consist of an abductor hallucis^ abductor minimi digiti in two divisions, abductor ossis metatarsi minimi digiti, and four interosseus muscles. The abductor hallucis is rather poorly developed and muscular only in its short fan-shaped proximal part. It arises in the fascia surrotmding the small sesamoid laterad of the base of the first metatarsal and sends a thin tendon to insert on the radial side of the distal extremity of the same phalanx. The abductor ossis metatarsi minimi digiti is well developed arising on the OS calcis and running laterad of the plantar tendon to insert on the tuberosity of the fifth metatarsal. The abductor minimi digiti is in two divisions. The first arises as a thin fan-shaped fleshy muscle from the os calcis ectad of the foregoing and soon becoming a slender tendon continues by a marginal coiu"se to its insertion on the radial side of the distal extremity of the fifth meta- carpal. The second division, which is muscular throughout, arises from the sesamoid at the inner (medial) base of the fifth metacarpal and in- serts on the outer (radial) sesamoid at the distal extremity of the fifth metacarpal, passing between the divided short flexors. The external S8 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. plantar nerve passes entad of it near its origin and its general relations are much as described by Cunningham for Dasyurus, Phascologale and Thylacinus but it is a relatively larger muscle than in these, rather thin and flat, and it seems not impossible that it may be an opponens minimi digiti. The usual four dorsal interossei are present but have a tendency to fusion with the short flexors. With the exception of the first, they are entirely palmar in position and cannot be seen from the dorsal aspect of the foot owing to the neariy united basal metatarsal bones. The abductor indicis is in two divisions. The larger has tendinous origin as high up as the scaphoid near the origin of the abductor hallucis and continues tendinous to the medial base of the first metacarpal where it has slight attachment and becomes a well-formed fleshy belly running diagonally to insertion on the side of the first joint of the index digit. The second and smaller division of this abductor arises on the medial side of the base of the hallux and runs close to the flexor indicis slightly dorso-mediad of the first division and joins the tendon of the first division on its medial side slightly before its insertion. This two- headed arrangement of the abductor indicis is reported for Thylacinus, a tetradactylous animal, and a somewhat similar condition is found in Phalanger which is syndactylous. In Didelphis and Dasyurus the ab- ductor indicis is single-headed. The third metacarpal has the usual two abductors inserting on each side of the first joint on the sesamoids. They are dorsad of the flexors at their extremities but mostly laterad in the middle where they are visible without disturbance of the flexors. The outer one is rather closely associated in its proximal half with the flexor brevis of the f oiu-th meta- carpal. The fourth interosseous is less dorsal in position than the others and runs nearly laterad of the flexor from origin in the palmar cartilage to insertion on the outer side of the end of the fourth meta- carpal. The interossei insert very close to the extensor tendons but do not appear to be definitely connected with them. Near the insertions of the second, third and fourth interossei there is a tendinous connection with the joint opposite the one on which they are directly inserted and thus the ends of the metacarpals are bound together and necessarily have but little freedom of movement. Short flexors. — There are five pairs of short flexors, one for each metatarsal. They arc only slightly connected at their origin in the palmar fascia just above the bases of the metatarsals and thence to their insertions on the distal sesamoids the divisions are clearly marked. Those of the hallux are weaker than the others and the lateral division is partly aponeurotic and smaller than the median division. Those of the second and third digits enclose a small flattened sesamoid in the fascia May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESXES — Osgood. 59 where they arise. This sesamoid may not be homologous with that of Notoryctes, but it is otherwise unique among marsupials and, as noted by Thompson and Hillier,^ is suggestive of certain edentates. The flexors of the fifth digit are separated at their insertion by the tendon of the shorter division of the abductor minimi digiti. It is somewhat doubt- ful as to whether the outer or radial division is properly to be regarded as a flexor, especially since it inserts by a slender tendon whereas its fellow has a broad fleshy insertion extending to both sesamoids. Pos- sibly this supposed outer division of the fifth flexor should be regarded as a third division of the abductor minimi digiti. Summary of Myological Characters. The trunk muscles of Ccenolestes are, as was to be expected, of the prevailing marsupial type. It is in the muscles of the limbs and head that the most significant deviations are found and although these seem quite nimierous when comparison is made only with American forms, there is such variation among Australian forms that similarity is fovmd with first one and then another. It is quite evident that some Australian forms, especially in the Dasyuridae, approach Didelphis more closely than does Ccenolestes. It is also clear that many of the points in which Ccenolestes differs from Didelphis are to be foimd in Australian forms. Although some of these resemblances are plainly cases of convergence, others do not seem so. Therefore, aside from the question as to the nearest re- lationships of CcBfwlestes, it is evident that it contributes in a positive way to the broad general conclusion, already well groimded, that Ameri- can and Australian marsupials are of common derivation. That is, many of the points in which Didelphis fails to show resemblance to Australian forms are supplied by Camolestes. From the standpoint of myology there seem to be few if any distinc- tions that can be definitely drawn between Polyprotodontia and Diprotodontia. Nevertheless, in viewing the possibility that Ccenolestes is to some extent transitional between the two large groups, the muscula- ture can scarcely be adduced as contrary evidence, since it shares many features with the diprotodonts that are not possessed by all polypro- todonts. That it shares more than any pol}T)rotodont cannot be said, * Regarding the sesamoid in Notoryctes, these authors say: "In connection with the plantar sesamoid bone, which as far as we know has not been recorded in any other marsupial, it is interesting to find that in some edentates there is a very similar arrangement. Windle and Parsons state that in the Dasypodidae the tibial and fibular flexors unite in the lower part of the 1^, and are inserted into a very large sesamoid bone in the sole of the foot, which is held in place by a fibrous band from the calcaneum, the equivalent of the accessorius. From the front of the sesamoid bone five tendons pass to the terminal phalanges of the five digits." Jour. Anat. & Phys., XXXIX, p. 326, 1905. 6o Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. although better comparisons than are here possible might prove this to be the case. It is worthy of particular note that it has a considerable number of points in common with the extraordinary form Notoryctes and that, as in Notoryctes, some of its most exclusive features as a mar- supial are suggestive of edentates and insectivores. Among such are the divided trapezius, the dorso-cuticularis, the absence of a pronator quadratus, the sesamoid origins of the supinator and the short flexors of the hind foot, and the peculiar sartorius. It is also to be noted that some of the resemblances between Casnolestes and Didelphis not shared by most other marsupials are however to be found in other mammals, especially edentates, and therefore cannot be taken as certain indications of close relationship between Ccenolestes and Didelphis. The well-de- veloped pedal extensor hallucis brevis and the flexor accessorius pedis are perhaps examples of this kind. The muscles of the legs and feet in Ccenolestes are adapted to a terres- trial, almost cursorial, life. The leg muscles have short thick fleshy parts and very long tendinous extensions, relatively longer even than in such terrestrial forms as Phascologale, and in this respect are perhaps most similar to those of the saltatorial but otherwise generalized Australian polyprotodont Antechinomys, the myology of which has not been thoroughly described. The proportion of tendinous to fleshy parts is about as 60 to 40 and the outline of the leg thus resembles that of a digitigrade animal. It is markedly different from that of Didelphis in which fleshy extensions reach nearly or quite to the carpus and tarsus. Specialization for terrestrial life has proceeded far beyond that in Peramys whose habits are presumably not greatly different from those of Ccenolestes but whose musculature is only slightly different from that of Didelphis} The absence of the pronator quadratus is not accompanied by such reduction of other muscles as might be expected in view of the facts that otherwise a large nimiber of muscular elements are present in the limbs and that their distinctness from each other is marked. There is some reduction of the intrinsic muscles of the feet, especially in the adductorial sets, and the grasping power is distinctly limited. All the important muscles have been worked out with considerable care, but the nature of the material, the small size of the animal, and the lack of comparative material, have made it impossible to be certain of relations in all cases. Such comparative notes as are ventured are based on examination of the scattered literature and the comprehensive work of Lechc in Bronn's Thierreich. Comparison of actual specimens has only been possible with Didelphis, Marmosa, and to some extent with * No careful study of Peramys has been possible, but cursory examination of its feet and legi indicates close similarity to Didelphis. May, 192 1. American Marsupial, CiENOLESXES — Osgood. 61 Peramys and Macropus. That this is not an ideal method of com- parative work can be apparent to no one more fully than the author; but, it is the best that circximstances permit and if small errors have crept in it is hoped that they will not seriously affect general con- clusions. The nomenclatiu-e adopted has been that of Broim's Thier- reich with occasional changes where it seemed feasible to conform to the BNA terms. Features in the myology of Caenolestes which seem especially note- worthy are as follows: Trapezius divided into spinotrapezius and acramiotrapezius. Rhomboideus divided. Dorso-cuticularis present. Distinct rectus capitis posterior superficialis. Pterygoideus externus relatively large and bicipital. Subclavius not extending to scapular spine. Median head of triceps brachii distinct. Origin of supinator brevis including a sesamoid. Pronator quadratus absent. Distinct caudo-Jemoralis present. Femoro-coccygeus practically distinct from gluteus maximus. Gluteus medius partially divided into two layers. Sartorius on inner side of thigh, much reduced, and originating from Poupart's ligament. Extensor carpi ulnaris with ulnar as well as humeral origin. Radial extensors of carpus separate from each other. Median and lateral heads of gastrocnemius partly imited. Fibular divisions of extensor brevis digitorum distinct from each other. Pedal extensor hallucis brevis well-developed. Flexor accessorius present. Pronator tibiae partly separate from popliteus. Short flexors of second and third toes arising from a sesamoid. URINOGENITAL SYSTEM. The interesting urinogenital system has been studied only by gross dissection and the use of the binocular microscope. With the scanty material available and the means at hand, no other course seemed pos- sible. It is to be regretted that serial sections could not be obtained of the embryo. One of the imperfect females examined was pregnant, having three embryos, two in the right uterus, and one in the left. The uteri were greatly expanded and the foetuses lay surrounded by their 62 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. thin membranes and the thickened walls of the uteri. .The largest was approximately 4 mm. in length and well advanced in development. By a most unfortunate accident, these embryos, after being removed and set aside for special study, were totally destroyed. Mere gross dissection, however, is sufficient to show that the re- productive system of CcBnolestes is markedly different from that of the primitive polyprotodonts. Male Generative Organs. Plates VIII-X. The prostate gland is exceedingly large, relatively larger than in any other marsupial known to me and therefore probably larger than in any other mammal. It is a prominent ovate body occupying practically the entire space in the posterior part of the body cavity and extending from the kidneys to the pubis. In a normal adult with a body length of 113 mm., it measures 16 mm. in length and 11 mm. in greatest diam- eter. The bladder, which is small and inconspicuous in comparison, is situated on the dorsal surface of the prostate somewhat caudad of its anterior expansion and thus scarcely visible from the ventral aspect. The gland is not tapering and radiciform as usual but is only slightly smaller posteriorly than anteriorly and the narrow urethral canal makes exit from its walls abruptly on its dorso-caudad surface. The prostate is enclosed in a thin membranous or slightly muscular covering of trans- verse fibers. The thickened portion consists of ntunerous slender cylin- ders of glandular tissue radiating from the urethral canal to the periph- ery. The urethra in its course through the prostate is quite small and is longitudinally plicated on its inner surface (PI. X, Fig. 5). The ureters and vasa deferentia enter a groove between the base of the bladder and the prostate, the former going to their orifices on the dorsal side of the bladder near its neck and the latter turning sharply caudad into a groove in the prostate to a common opening into the ure- thra a short distance beyond its enclosure by the prostate (PI. X, Fig. i). The vasa deferentia have the usual course, leaving the base of the testes and diverging to enter the body cavity and pass dorsally on each side of the colon to their terminations. Before entering the raphe in the prostate they arc somewhat enlarged and slightly convoluted. There are no obvious seminal vesicles. From its exit from the prostate the urethra continues as a slender tube for about $ mm. to its bulbous portion where it enlarges and re- ceives the ducts of the Cowper's glands. This bulbous urethra is short and wide and has a slight forward projection or cul de sac on its ventral May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^enolestes — Osgood. 63 side. There are three pairs of Cowper's glands. The anterior pair are elongate pear shape and open into the anterior part of the bulbous urethra ventro-laterally. These have been designated in the figures as Cowper's gland No. i . The two other pairs are situated dorso-laterally just anterior to the base of the stalk of the corpus spongiosum and h'ave a common opening (PI. IX, Fig. i). In fact the smaller one (No. 2) appears to be scarcely more than a division of the larger (No. 3) since they unite at an appreciable distance from the urethra. This gland No. 3 is very large, several times larger than the others, even larger than the paired testicles, and more than half the size of the enormous prostate. It measures 12 mm. x 8 mm. Although not examined his- tologically, its superficial appearance indicates a structure somewhat different from that of gland No. i. Gland No. 2 appears to have the same structure as No. 3, of which, as noted above, it is scarcely more than a division. In Marmosa and Didelphis there are only two pairs of Cow- per's glands, but in Peramys I find three as in C'goids. The pterygoid processes are essentially similar to those of polyprotodonts although they take the form of slender rounded prongs rather than flattened subtriangular plates. Vomer. — The vomer is narrow in front and expanded posteriorly io6 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. enclosing somewhat more of the ventral surface of the presphenoid than usual. It is not emarginate posteriorly and extends slightly beyond the posterior nares. Its ventral surface has a low median ridge but this has no contact with the palatines nor with the maxillaries except anteriorly. Tympanic. — The tympanic is a simple ring open behind and attached to the alisphenoid bulla by cartilage. It is wider and heavier than in the didelphids but is essentially the same as in Australian polyprotodonts. Periotic. — The petrous part of the periotic is exposed ventrally as a subtriangular bone between the basioccipital, the tympanic and the alisphenoid bulla. It is thus almost wholly exposed as in polyprotodonts and not partly or almost completely covered by the alisphenoid bulla and the tympanic as in diprotodonts. It is less inflated than in the dasyurids but projects below the surface of the basioccipital slightly more than in the didelphids. Internally it shows the usual openings, including a large floccular fossa. The foramina surrounding it are much as in the other marsupials except for the so-called carotid canal which forms a long open slit between the petrous periotic and the basioccipital which are actually in contact scarcely more than enough to separate this opening from the jugular foramen behind and the entocarotid fora- men in front. Such an opening has not been foimd in any other mar- supial examined, although in polyprotodonts it may be represented by the small foramen which Gregory (1910, p. 223) has called the posterior carotid foramen. The mastoid is relatively larger than in any other form examined and is especially characterized by its great lateral extent. Its occipital sur- face is not more than one-third its lateral and between them there is only a gentle curve or an exceedingly feeble ridge. The lateral surface is slightly convex and meets the squamosal evenly. The short flattened paroccipital process and the mastoid process of the squamosal clasp it on either side making the entire mastoid region relatively smooth and continuous with the general outlines of the skull. This lack of promin- ences is in marked contrast to the condition in the didelphids and is nearer to that of Antechinomys and other primitive dasyurids. A very large mastoid foramen is situated at the upper end of the occipital part of the mastoid separating it from the supraoccipital for a considerable distance. A mastoid foramen occurs in the didelphids but in adults it is very small or practically closed, whereas in Cconolestes it is as large in the adult as in the very small pouch young of Dtdelphis. Hyoid. — The hyoid apparatus is of the usual marsupial type. The basihyal is flat agd subcircular with its posterior edge free but its anterior and lateral boundaries united with the ceratoliyals and thyro- hyals. The ceratohyals are slightly arched forward and only ossified May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 107 basally, becoming cartilaginous and slender in their distal two-thirds. The thyrohyals are flattened bars standing nearly at right angles to the general axis and ossified to their tips which are united by a short cartilage to the osseous wing of the thyroid cartilage. Vacuities. — The palate is highly fenestrate, its bony floor being relatively less extensive than in any other living marsupials with the possible exceptions of some of the perameUds. There are two pairs of vacuities of constant occurrence and fairly regular form. The anterior pair extend from the front of the second lateral incisor to the front of the middle premolar and occupy nearly all the space between the tooth- rows. They are divided by the median processes of the maxillaries and premaxillaries which are flattened ventrally to an extent about equalling one-third the width across the paired vacuities. These vacuities are thus about equal to the combined length of the two separate pairs found in peramelids and they are much longer than the single pair of most other polyprotodonts although they are rather closely approached by Smin- thopsis. The posterior vacuities begin at the front of the last premolar and reach nearly to the transverse ridge boimding the palate. Their endings are almost exactly at the level of the back of the last molars. They are divided by a narrow median extension of the maxillaries and a similar one from the palatine, the two meeting midway of the length of the vacuities and forming a slight expansion at their imion. Laterally the boundaries of the vacuities are slightly irregular but anteriorly they are always evenly rounded and the general shape and extent in different specimens is very constant. The palatal vacuities are regarded as secondary developments and, since they vary so widely throughout the marsupial group, it is not probable that their character in CoBnolestes has any special significance. The palate in extinct caenolestids is only imperfectly known. A prominent vacuity on each .side of the face directly above the infraorbital foramen is one of the most unusual features of the skull of C(Bnolestes. It is bounded by the nasal, frontal and maxillary bones and opens into the large sinus between the naso-turbinal and the maxillary. Its relations to the overlying dermal tissues are simple and no glandular or other specialized development is apparent. As noted by Thomas (1895), ^ vacuity in this part of the skull is found in other mammals only among ungulates. Auditory ossicles. — The malleus has the general features usual in marsupials. The neck is relatively short, the lamina very thin, and the processus muscularis is but feebly indicated. The manubriimi is about two-thirds as long as the processus gracilis and forms a thin flattened blade with a pointed apex and a slightly falcate outUne when seen from io8 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. the flat side. The processus brevis at the base of the manubrium is relatively insignificant. The processus gracilis has two thin longitudinal ridges boimding a long v-shaped groove which seats the tympanic ring. The extremity of the process is somewhat expanded and obtuse. The union with the tympanic is close and considerable care is required in forcing the parts away from each other. The malleus differs from that of Perameles {P. hougainmllei) principally in its shorter neck; from that of Didelphis it is distinguished by its generally frailer construction and its closer union with the tympanic. The incus is practically identical with that of Perameles^ differing mainly in the processus brevis which is somewhat compressed and truncate instead of long and conical. The processus longus is very slender distad of the sharp right angle at which it is bent. The Sylvian apophysis is elliptical. The incus in adults is rather firmly attached to the malleus and does not separate except after slight pressure. The stapes is strictly columelliform without trace of an opening and there is not even an appreciable difference in its diameter from the head to the base. The head is very small and the base relatively large and elliptical. In adults, the stapes is well ossified. The auditory ossicles of Ccsnolestes are clearly of a type closely approaching that of Perameles, which was regarded by Doran (1879) as the lowest among marsupials. They also show resemblance to some of the dasyures, which, as described by Doran, have the stapes columel- liform. Whether this simple stapes is in truth a primitive character or not, it serves at least to distinguish Ccsnolestes sharply from the didel- phids, in which the stapes is always bicrurate. So far as the auditory ossicles are concerned, therefore, Casnolestes resembles Australian rather than American forms and especially approaches the peramelids and dasyurids. Mandible. — The mandible is slender and relatively straight ante- riorly, its greatest curvature being just below the base of the coronoid process. The symphysis is long but weak. The rami have exceptionally little divergence. The coronoid is large, broad, and nearly upright. Its anterior border is gently curved but approaches the vertical more closely than in any polyprotodonts. The broad masseteric fossa is rather shal- low and is indistinctly divided into an anterior and a posterior portion by a weak elevation between the tips of the coronoid and the condyle. Near the lower edge of the masseteric fossa is a tiny foramen, indistinct in some specimens, but obvious in others. A similar foramen is found in many Australian diprotodonts but docs not occur in polyprotodonts. Its presence in Abderites and Garzonia has been noted by Amcghino and Sinclair. Mental foramina of the usual character are present, a larger May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 109 one below the posterior root of the middle premolar and a smaller below the anterior root of the first molar. On the lingual side of the mandible the dental foramen is situated as usual at the base of the angular process. In some specimens' a shallow groove runs along the inner side of the proximal half of the jaw but in no case does its position or character seem to warrant any asstmiption that it is a true Meckelian groove. The angular process is moderately inflected and subtriangular in shape with a fairly wide base and a rounded but not decidedly obtuse tip. The inflection is slightly less than in the majority of polyprotodonts and the process is not produced into a slender prong like that in the smaller dasyurids. The condyle is relatively high in position, slightly more than halfway from the angle to the tip of the coronoid and extend- ing well beyond a line drawn between them. In this respect, therefore, it is more like Phascologale and other das>^rids than like the didelphids in which the condyle is seated on a relatively short base. The length of the bony lower jaw is proportionately less than in most polyprotodonts and this is especially true if it is considered in relation to the upper jaw. In two specimens of nearly equal size, the length of the bony part of the jaw in Ccenolestes is 77 per cent of the total length (in- cluding terminal incisors) and that in Phascologale is 95 per cent. Owing to the wide variation in the lower jaws of marsupials, it is difficult to draw any conclusions from the findings in regard to Cceno- lesies. Miss Dederer (1909) has regarded the jaw of Cctnokstes as indic- ative of polyprotodont affinity, believing it to be very similar especially to Antechinomys and Sminthopsis. It differs from these in many respects, as in the broader more upright coronoid, the less inflected and less attenuated angle, the less divergent rami, and in the presence of a foramen in the masseteric fossa, this last being a diprotodont character. Among the didelphids, the mandible shows considerable variation and comparison is difficult. It might be said that as respects the angle, Ccenolestes is somewhat intermediate between Didelphis and Philander and as respects other characters it shows no especial indications of relationship to the didelphids more than to other marsupials. Summary of Cranial Characters. The great range of variation among both polyprotodonts and diprotodonts leaves relatively few characters that are diagnostic of the two groups. Without a complete representation of all known forms it can only be said that certain characters are regarded as polyprotodont or diprotodont because they are mutually exclusive in the majority of forms examined. On this basis, it is clear that the skull of Ccenolestes no Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. shows more polyprotodont than diprotodont characters. These are as follows: 1. Anterior root of zygoma only slightly in advance of end of toothrow. 2. Posterior root of zygoma not inflated. 3. Tympanic narrow and annular. 4. Petrous part of periotic largely exposed ventrally. 5. Alisphenoid bulla not fused with paroccipital process. 6. Foramina of squamosal arranged in general as in Dasyuridae. Practically all of these characters relate to the otic bones or to the backward extension of the palate with relation to the zygomata. In the extinct PalcBothentes, a close relative of Ccsnolestes, the zygomata and palate are practically as in diprotodonts, so the polyprotodont char- acters of the skull in casnolestids are reduced to those of the tympanic region. The additional characters supposed to indicate polyprotodont affinity and cited by Miss Dederer (1909) and Broom (1911) are found in the smaller diprotodonts, as Dromicia and Tarsipes. Hence their importance is doubtful. A few characters are at least in agreement with those of some diprotodonts, and with no polyprotodonts so far as known. These are the following: 1. Upper anterior ethmo-turbinal short and enclosing but little of the maxillo-turbinal. 2. Maxillo-turbinal arising relatively high up on the nasal wall. 3. Glenoid fossa relatively long and with a small postglenoid process which is not extended transversely, 4. A small foramen in masseteric fossa of mandible. Distinctions in cranial characters between Ccenolestes and the didelphids are numerous; in fact the only characters in common are of quite a general nature.^ On the other hand, resemblances to AustraHan forms, especially peramelids, are abundant. In the following respects there is agreement with some or all Peramelidae or Dasyuridae and disagreement with all Didclphyidae: 1. Rostrum slender and elongate. 2. Palatine processes of premaxillae not extending full length of incisive foramina. 3. Basioccipital concave medially. 4. Maxillo-premaxillary suture nearly upright anteriorly. 5. Cribriform plate ajiproaching the vertical. 6. Fronto-maxillary suture broad. • The mastoid foramen mav be an exclusive resemblance, but in the absence of immature specimeiis I am unable to learn whether or not it occurs in dasyurids. May, 192 1. American Marsxjpial, CiENOLESTES — Osgood. hi t 7. Sagittal and lambdoid crests absent. 8. Postorbital processes absent. 9. Paroccipital and mastoid processes small and prostrate. 10. Lacrymal canal with a single opening. 11. Postzygomatic foramen lacking. 12. Stapes columelliform. The first five of these characters are exclusive resemblances to the peramelids while the others are common to the peramelids and certain of the dasyurids. The total number of resemblances to the peramehds therefore, is very large. Moreover, important distinctions between CcBfiolestes and Perameles are comparatively few, being confined mainly to the region between the sphenoidal fissures and to the proportions of the processes of the mandible. In a number of respects the skull of Ccsnolestes differs from all other living marsupials. The most important of these are as follows: 1. A preorbital vacuity between the nasals, maxillary, and frontal. 2. A large mastoid foramen persisting in adults. 3. A long narrow carotid canal between the petrous periotic and the basioccipital. 4. Floor of braincase very wide between sphenoidal fissiu-es. 5. Mastoid large and broadly exposed laterally (approached by peramelids). 6. Olfactory fossa relatively large and wide. DENTITION. Plate XVIII. The dentition and the cranitun of Ccenolestes have been known since the original discovery of the animal and have been variously described, figured, and subjected to comment by different authors, notably Thomas, Bensley, Sinclair, Dederer, and Gregory. The diprotodont modification of its lower incisors combined with a polyprotodont upper incisor formula and quadrate bunolophodont molars at once furnished conditions not found elsewhere among living marsupials and not typically representing either the diprotodont or the polyprotodont group. The teeth have been well described in considerable detail by Thomas (1895), but his specimen was somewhat affected by wear, which obscured a few important points. For this reason and for the sake of completeness and convenience of discussion full description of the teeth is given in the following pages. Unfortunately it is still impossible to give any information as to the succession of the teeth, since all the specimens at hand are fully adult. 112 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. « Number and Homologies of Teeth. The teeth are 46 to 48 in number. In the upper jaw there are one pair of terminal incisors and three pairs of lateral ones, a pair of sharp, well-differentiated canines, three pairs of more or less triconodont pre- molars, and iour pairs of molars, the first and second of which are quadrate and the third and fourth subtriangular. In the lower jaw there is a pair of long terminal chisel-like incisors resembling those of the most pronounced diprotodont dentitions. Behind these in lateral position are four and sometimes five pairs of small unicuspids, practically undifferentiated from each other, which are interpreted as two (or three) incisors, one canine, and one premolar. Next are two pairs of double- rooted premolars and four pairs of molars. The dentition, therefore, is a rather highly modified one but retains approximate numerical agree- ment (at least in certain specimens) with the polyprotodont dentition usually regarded as generalized. With the exception of the didelphids, which have five upper incisors, and Myrmecobius, which has super- numerary molars, no living polyprotodont has more teeth than Cgbuo- lestes. The formula may be written: I. ~ C.7;Pm.|;M.^;x2 = 46-48. This is essentially the classification made by Thomas (1895) who divided the four unicuspids behind the median incisor into two incisors, one canine, and one premolar. "Any other determination, " he says, "would involve the presence of four incisors or fotir premolars, each equally unlikely," It now appears that, although the normal number of lower incisors is three as decided by Thomas, the presence of four would by no means have been unlikely. The number of lower unicuspids or intermediate teeth is normally four, but a variation in which there are five is not infrequent. In one specimen (Field Museum No. 18603), there are five on the right side of the jaw and four on the left. Bensley (1903, PI. 5, fig. 38) has figured a specimen belonging to the British Museum in which there are five on each side of the jaw. Others, so far as examined, have four unicuspids on each side, but since the total number of specimens is very small the percentage of variation is high. It is possible, therefore, that these aberrant specimens represent a condition once normal and in which the lower antemolar formula was equal to that of the didelphids and in excess of other living marsupials. This is further suggested by the occurrence of the same lower antemolar formula in the extinct genus Halntarhiphus, regarded by Sinclair as the direct ancestor of Comolestes. A closely allied form, Garzonia, has as May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESXES — Osgood. 113 many as six unicuspids in the lower jaw, giving it a total antemolar formula of nine, exceeding that of any living mammal. While this formula, as observed in only one specimen, may be abnormal, as sug- gested by Sinclair, it is evident that the formula of Ccenolestes, large though it be, has already undergone a reduction. A further and gradual reduction may be traced in Australian diprotodonts to those in which only the median or terminal pair of incisors and one pair of differentiated premolars remain, two pairs of antemolar teeth in all, as in Phascolarctos and Phascolomys. Representatives in this series with the number of antemolar teeth in each would be as follows: Garzonia, 9; Halmarhiphus, 8; Ccenolestes, 7-8; Phalanger, 6-7;^ Acrobates, 5; Dromida, 4-5; Dis- taechurus, 4; Trichosurus, 3-4; Macropus, 3; Phascolarctos, 2. When the form and character of the teeth as well as their number is considered, the probability that the series is an expression of homologies seems very great. Among the living forms of the Phalangeridae the reduction is going on at present, as indicated by the great instability of the number of the "small intermediate teeth" in various species. This was shown especially in the genus Phalanger by Jentink (1885) who examined a considerable series and found great variation. The subject has been further elaborated by Bateson ( 1 894) . In the extinct forms Palaothentes, Acdestis, and Callomenus, a reduction also has occurred, these having only five or six antemolar teeth. Hence, Ccenolestes is more primitive than these. In fact, so far as mere number of teeth is concerned, Cceno- lestes and the allied extinct forms like Halmarhiphus and Garzonia are almost as primitive as the didelphids. Assuming their common ancestry, it is necessary to believe that the diprotodont modification preceded any numerical reduction. Moreover, it is not impossible that all living and extinct polyprotodonts are more reduced than these primitive dipro- todonts. The case of Garzonia with its nine lower antemolar teeth is of interest in this connection. At least five of these must be regarded as incisors unless reduplication with no reference to homologies be assiuned. This is a larger nimiber of lower incisors than is possessed by any known polyprotodont. Further, if the specialized median incisor is not the first but the second as shown by embryology in the macropods (Woodward 1893), we must asstune the ancestral formula to be six. Such an assump- tion is further justified by Woodward's (1. c.) discovery of vestiges of six upper incisors in the macropods and by the occurrence as an abnormality of six upper incisors in Didelphis (Bateson 1894, p. 247; Allen 1901, p. 158). If there were six in the upper jaw there may well have been six in the lower, although of course it is not yet known that the caenolestids ^ In abnormal cases only. 114 Field Museum op Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. agree with the macropods in the ontogeny of the upper jaw. The dental formula of the primitive diprotodont would then have been as follows: 6 I 3 4 I. ^; C.7;Pm.-;M.-X2 = 56. The earliest known mammals, whether they were pro-marsupials or not, ftunish no indication that such a large mammalian incisor formula ever existed and it must be admitted that the evidence in favor of it is little more than suggestive. Still, if early mammals only were con- sidered, it would be almost as diffictilt to believe in an incisor formula of i as one of I, for the usual number of lower incisors in the Triconodonta and Trituberculata was four. Both Thomas (i888) and Winge (1895) have presented evidence that the primitive formula was at least i and the case for it must be regarded as considerably stronger than that for one of ^ so to that extent the testimony of the little known "pro- marsupials" is weakened. In fact, in this as in some other respects, it is evident that the long known Mesozoic mammals are extremely liable to misinterpretation. Evidence is accumulating to show that even these early triconodonts were not altogether generalized and many connectant forms are needed before the main mammalian stem will be definitely revealed. The highly specialized nature of the dentition in some of the theriodont reptiles, including both secodont and crushing types and even showing a mammalian succession, suggest that some basic lines of the general evolution of mammalian teeth may have been laid down in these early reptiles and, although lost in the triconodonts, persisted in still later forms the immediate ancestors of which are unknown. Although most of these theriodonts had only foiir upper incisors on a side, there were some (e. g. Pristerognathus) which had as many as six. Hence a mammal with six is theoretically open to no serious objection. In any case it is clear that as early as Miocene times caeno- lestids were at least as primitive as polyprotodonts in the number of the teeth in the lower jaw. The number in the upper jaw is one less than in the didelphids and certain of the peramelids, which have five upper incisors, most other polyprotodonts having four. The lateral lower incisors of CcBttolestes are small and while not wholly functionless arc apparently approaching that condition, so variations in their nimibcr are more to be expected than would be the case with fully functional teeth. It is possible that the occasional appearance of an extra unicuspid has no reference to ancestral conditions and therefore that all the specimens of the extinct forms Halmarhiphus and Garzonia arc abnormal. Evidently this would be the conclusion of Batcson (1894) who places no confidence in "reversion" or ancestral influences as the May, 192 1. American Marsupial, C^enolestes — Osgood. 115 explanation of such variations. However, he regards "the variability of a form as much a part of its specific character as any other feature of its organization." Without dissenting from this, it may be added that specific and especially generic characters (regardless of how they were initiated or established) are themselves the result or sequence of ances- tral conditions. Whether or not characters are "presence or absence" characters, that is, "meristic" rather than "substantive," matters little. In specialized dentitions the loss of a series of several teeth can plainly be traced from species or genera in which the whole series is constantly present to those in which all of it is constantly absent. In such a series, the intermediate forms, or those in which the process of reduction is going on, are notoriously variable. How else, it may be asked, could a reduction take place, especially if discontinuous variation be assiuned? No better example of a variable intermediate type could be had than Phalanger, which is treated by Bateson at considerable length. In the artificial series from the extinct caenolestid Garzonia to the modem Phascolarctos the lower antemolar teeth are reduced from nine to two and the "small intermediate" teeth from seven to none. Phalanger lies between the two extremes. Among 76 specimens of one species (P. ortentalts) examined (Bateson, p. 253), 57 had three inter- mediate teeth on each side of the mandible. The remaining 19 varied from those having only one on each side to one specimen having five on one side and four on the other. Of these, 13 had at least three inter- mediate teeth on one side of the jaw. This variability is what might be expected as the result of interbreeding after the occurrence of a discontinuous variation in certain individuals. Or, as seems more probable to a taxonomist and comparative anatomist, it may be the result of the interbreeding of individuals which have in varying degrees gradually developed tendencies toward the loss of certain teeth. Such tendencies are illustrated by the familiar example of the tardily devel- oped and frequently absent third molar or wisdom tooth of Homo. The vestigial incisors (many of which are partly calcified) which have been found in all marsupials investigated by embryologists would doubtless be admitted by everyone as indications of ancestral conditions. These vestigial incisors are shown by Woodward and Wilson and Hill to be, at least in some cases, not members of a pre-existing series (lacteals or prelacteals) but persistent rudiments of suppressed members of the existing series. Hence it seems not improbable that there may be cases in which these vestiges arise in place and become functional as "super- ntmierary " incisors. An embryological study of an extremely variable form like Phalanger should yield interesting results bearing on this point. ii6 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. Therefore, while it is undeniable that some cases of supernumerary teeth are teratological with a basis that may be largely physiological and mechanical, it cannot be admitted that there are no cases of which phylogenetic influence is the chief determining factor. The objectionable term reversion need not be applied to them but it might be justified to refer to them as examples of persistence of ancestral characters. Aside from what has been said above, it is evident to anyone familiar with the dentition of many species of mammals, that cases are inntmierable in which a nonftmctional or slightly functional tooth is present in one species and normally absent but occasionally present in a closely related species. Among bats and rodents instances are particularly abundant. The homology of such a tooth is invariably too clear to be questioned for a moment. That the fifth lower unicuspid sometimes found in Ccenolestes is evidence of an ancestor in which this tooth was normally developed may not now be proved conclusively but the evidence from paleontology, from embryology, and from phylogenetic series is sufficient to render it exceedingly probable. That the primitive diprotodont incisor formula was at least i is also strongly indicated. Hence the main points in the present connection seem fairly certain, that is, that primitive diproto- donts had nimierous teeth and that the diprotodont modification may have arisen prior to any reduction from the primitive nimiber. Upper Incisors. Description. — The median incisors are set near the end of the pre- maxillae in nearly terminal position, only a slight shelf of bone extending in front of them. Their alveoli are more elevated than those of the suc- ceeding teeth and they are separated from the next incisors by a slight space. They are inclined forward slightly away from the perpendicular and their points exceed the lateral incisors. They are separated at the base sufficiently to permit the insertion of a needle or bristle but their points are closely in contact. Their cutting edges are beveled and receive the extreme tips of the lower incisors. They are closely similar in shape to corresponding teeth in the Australian diprotodonts, especially some of the smaller macropods. They have relatively broad faces which suggest the undifferentiated median incisors of Perameles quite as much as they do those of the didelphids. The median upper incisors of typical poly- protodonts (dasyures and didelphids) are usually slender and pcglike and in most cases the tips are not in contact although occasional speci- mens may be found having some resemblance to those of Ccenolestes. The three succeeding inci.sors (second, third, and fourth) are wholly lateral in position and the series on one side is almost exactly parallel May, 1921. American Matrsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 117 with that on the other, a condition approached in no polyprotodonts except Myrmecobius and Perameles. The second and third are in contact with each other, the second being somewhat larger than the third. They are laterally compressed into relatively broad blades, their cutting edges are truncate and their bases narrow. The blades, which are dis- tinctly hatchet-shaped, are somewhat produced anteriorly. These teeth, although small, are completely functional since they engage the sharp, beveled, outer edges of the median lower incisors with which they have a very effective shearing action. Similar action is seen between the incisors of some of the macropods, and especially of certain of the Phalangeridae, as for example, Dactylopsila, in which it is very pro- nounced. Somewhat similar relations occur in Perameles. The fourth upper incisor is abruptly smaller than the preceding ones and is usually separated from them by a slight space. In superficial view it appears to be pointed but closer examination shows that this is due to a partial forward rotation which has elevated the posterior angle of its cutting edge. This cutting edge is thus inclined forward so that it is parallel to the tmbeveled edge of the lower incisor and in this rela- tion it is possible for it to be slightly functional. Discussion. — ^All the upper incisors are definitely adapted for relation with the long procimibent lower incisors. The result is the modification of the lateral upper incisors from simple seizing or grasping teeth to cutting or shearing blades. Such a modification, as shown by Bensley,is easily derived from the conical tooth by lateral compression accom- panied by the movement of its anterior edge to a horizontal position and its posterior edge to a vertical one continuous ^4th the root. The original apex of the tooth thus becomes the posterior angle. In less marked degree this change has been noted and figured in Myrmecobius and Perameles by Bensley (1903, p. 105) who speaks of it as a "curious appearance, due to a subcaniniform modification of their tips," and makes a rather obscure comparison with a condition in the degenerate teeth of the Madagascan viverrine Eupleres. In viewing these teeth comparatively in Myrmecobius, Perameles, and Ccenolestes, one is at once impressed with the practical identity in form and function in all three forms and it is evident that the modifica- tion of the lateral upper incisors is correlated with the elongation and specialization of the median lower incisors. In other words, this form of lateral upper incisor is an indication of beginning diprotodonty and is only found in the Australian diprotodonts and forms conceivably ancestral to them. This subject is discussed elsewhere. It may only be said fiirther that the reciprocal relations of the median lower incisors and the lateral upper ones are exceedingly well-developed in Cc^nolesies. ii8 Field Museum of Natural History — ZoOlogy, Vol. XIV. In fact they appear so efficient for cutting that their relation to the animal's insectivorous habits is not obvious. Functionally, they are quite as well adapted for cutting vegetation as those of strictly her- bivorous forms and the possibility that they may have passed through a herbivorous or partly herbivorous stage is to be considered. Lower Inqsors. The median pair of lower incisors are long, slender, and only slightly curved, merely continuing the inferior outline of the mandibular ramus. They are strongly beveled on the upper side anteriorly and their outer edges are sharp and almost bladelike. They are separated from each other by a considerable space and in this and in the other foregoing respects they are closely similar to the lower incisors in the macropods. Their inner edges are not highly developed for cutting and seem to show a slight tendency to imitate even this character of the macropods. The lower incisors of most phalangers are close-set and decidedly up- curved. Among those examined, the only form showing general resem- blance to CcBfiolesies is Petauroides. Of the small unicuspidate, single-rooted, "intermediate" teeth situated between the terminal incisors and the two-rooted premolars, there are two, and in some cases three, which are to be regarded as incisors. They are indistinguishable by size or shape from the supposed canines and anterior premolars except that the foremost one shows an extreme of pronation which is slightly less pronounced in the succeeding ones. Their crowns are turned forward and lie overlapping each other, the first being in contact with the base of the median incisor and the second with the upper exposed surface of the root of the first. Thus the original apex of each tooth is directed forward and the posterior side of the tooth including a part of the exposed root has come into horizontal position. This arrangement appears to be unique among living mar- supials although slight approaches to it are seen in some of the Phalan- geridae. It is duplicated in every fcatiu-e, however, in the extinct Patagonian caenolestids. Canines. The upper canines in Ccenolestes obscurus and apparently in most specimens of C. fuliginosus arc simple slender prongs slightly more curved but otherwise similar to the canines of other omnivorous or carnivorous marsupials. In the male they are much more prolonged than in the female, the exposed part measuring 2.5 mm. in a male and only 1.3 mm. in a female. In a specimen of C. fuliginosus figured by Bensley (1903, pi. V, fig. 38) the canine is shown to have a deep lateral May, igai. American Marsupial, CiENOLESTES — Osgood. 119 groove extending from the middle of its outer surface to the broad single root. In the closely allied genus Oro/^5/^5 recently described by Thomas, the canine is said to be double-rooted, and shaped like a premolar. Hence we have in the caenolestids now living a graded series showing a change in the character of the canines from a two-rooted premolarif orm condition to a single-rooted caniniform condition. That this is the direction of the change and not vice versa seems fairly clear. In the first place, the two-rooted condition is the more primitive. Moreover, although it might be reacquired through "retrogression," as held by Bensley, it is very unlikely that the reversal would be represented by these particular stages. Thus, while the grooved root is the obvious intermediate state in change from a double to a single root, it is scarcely what would be expected if the direction of change were reversed. The logical intermediate stage, if we were dealing with a retrogression from a single to a double-rooted condition, would be a lengthening of the crown with possible appearance of antero-posterior cusps before tend- encies to division of the root began. Hence it seems that the change in this case is toward rather than away from a long single-rooted piercing type of canine. It is plainly a very recent specialization and is quite in accord with the animal's present insectivorous and predaceous habits. Of still further interest in this connection is the fact that this change has progressed farthest in the northermnost form, that is, the one presumably most distant from the parent stock. The lower canines have no intrinsically distinctive characters but are quite like the incisors preceding them upon which they he in semi- prostrate position. Upper Premolars. The anterior premolar is small, greatly compressed laterally, and its crown In side view is nearly triangular, its anterior outHne being prac- tically straight and its posterior slightly concave. In wholly unworn condition, traces of a posterior cusp are evident but none of an anterior one. It is situated about midway between the canine and the middle premolar and is separated from each of these by a space equal to approxi- mately one and one-half times its own length. The middle premolar is somewhat larger than the anterior, but is similarly compressed. Its posterior outline is concave and sweeps back- ward to a definite posterior cusp. It is separated from the posterior premolar by a slight space about half as long as that between it and the anterior premolar. The posterior premolar, which is probably a replacing tooth, is separated by a slight space from the middle premolar. It is situated 120 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. somewhat obliquely with its small anterior cusp slightly internal to its high triangular posterior blade. Posterioriy it stands closely against the first molar and, although its principal cusp is higher than any of the molars, it is functionally a member of the molar series and fairly well separated from the anterior teeth as in diprotodonts generally. It is slightly thickened posteriorly but has no internal cusps although the cingulum is well-developed. Of its two roots, the anterior one beneath the small antero-internal cusp is the longer and heavier. Upper Molars. Description. — The first and second molars are essentially alike in structure and size, the first being only very slightly longer relative to its width. They are quadrate and have four principal cusps, two inner and two outer, i. e., paracone, metacone, protocone, and hypocone.^ At the inner base of the metacone is a small but high and very distinct inter- mediate conule which in worn teeth is sometimes obliterated. In lateral view, the paracone and metacone appear as nearly equilateral triangles rising from the cingulum. The angle between these two cusps is more acute in the first molar than in the second and both cusps of the first are slightly higher than those of the second. The protocone is well developed and more thickened but is somewhat lower than the outer cusps. At its antero-internal base it is distinctly bulging. A distinct internal cingulum bounds its base and extends to the anterior base of the hypocone. The hypocone is about half as high as the protocone and its apex scarcely reaches the height of the intermediate conule, so it is much the smallest of the four principal cusps. Protocone and paracone are connected anteriorly by a commissure which forms the front boundary of the deep central depression of the tooth. A low commissure connects the proto- cone and the hypocone and near the middle of this is a slight ridge some- what imperfectly connecting the posterior base of the protocone with the intermediate conule. Between the hypocone and the intermediate conule there is an open channel to the back of the tooth. The third upper molar is subtriangular and the hypocone is prac- tically imdcveloped, although a very slight shelf exists between and slightly posterior to the intermediate conule and the protocone. The first, second, and third molars have three strong roots each and these are dttiated respectively beneath the protocone, paracone, and meta- cone. The external cingulum in all these teeth is well-marked, but shows no differentiation into styles. The fourth molar is very small, scarcely ' These tenns and others are used without reference to homologies to designate the cusps to which they have been commonly applied in connection with the Cope- Osbom tritubercular theory. May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^enolestes — Osgood, 121 one-sixth as large as the third, and it is turned slightly inward from the toothrow. It is roughly triangular and carries three small cusps appar- ently representing paracone, protocone, and metacone. They are scarcely higher than the commissures which connect them and inclose a central depression. There is still retained an external cingulum, a minute anterior shelf, and two roots, one of which is larger and obviously formed by coalescence. This tooth is plainly undergoing reduction and is in about the same stage as the fourth molar of Dronticia. In Acrohates and Distaechurus it has quite disappeared. Discussion. — The upper molars of CcEtiolestes show an obvious resem- blance to those of the diprotodont family Phalangeridae. Two principal types of molars are found in this family: (i) the bunoid and (2) the selenoid, respectively characterizing the two subfamihes Phalangerinae and Phascolarctinae. In general, the bunoid group are without styles or intermediate conules while the selenoid group usually have at least traces of both styles and conules, but in these respects there are excep- tions in both groups.^ Several theories have been advanced as to the origin and mutual relationships of the two groups. Winge considered them derivative the one from the other and regarded Phascolarctos ancestral to the bunoid Phalangerinae with Pseudochirus as a connecting form. On the other hand, students of placental molars have usually inclined to the belief that, among ungulates especially, bunoid types were ancestral to selenoid. Bensley, however, comes to the conclusion that "the molars of the Phascolarctinae and Phalangerinae have been de- rived by a divergent evolution from a common insectivorous secodont type," that is, independently from a tritubercular or post-tritubercular type similar to that seen in the Peramelidae. This divergent evolution took place, according to Bensley, as follows: 1. The selenoid type evolved by the simple addition of a hypocone and the reduction of the styles, no change in the shape of the principal cusps being required since they are already selenoid in the tritubercular molar. This method was recognized also by Winge. For the production of the molar of Pseudochirus the addition of the intermediate conules was fiirther required and that these were secondary elements which arose de novo seems to have been taken for grarited, although, as shown later, there is some evidence that they are not. 2. The bunoid type evolved also by reduction of styles but accom- panied by a lowering of the principal cusps and a gradual change in their form from crescentic to subconical. These and other changes involved > In the Phalangerinae, traces of a metacxjnule occur in Petaurus and a large persistent style is present in Dactylopsila. On the other hand, the Phascolarctinae include some species of Pseudochirus in which styles are lost and Phascolarctos in which conules are scarcely evident. 12 2 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. with them are foreshadowed in the molar of Philander. As in the selenoid group the quadrate form was produced by the addition of a hypocone. It is in their relation to these theories of the origin of bunodont and selenodont molars and also to some of the still more debatable theories of the general evolution of mammalian teeth that the molars of Ccbtw- lestes must be viewed. The essential difference between the bunoid and selenoid groups of Phalangeridae is in the shape of the outer labial cusps of the upper molars, these being in the one convex in their external aspect and in the other concave. Judged by this character alone, the molar of Ccsnolestes at once classifies itself with those of the bunoid Phalangerinae. Among these, however, it stands out as a relatively primitive type. This is evidenced by (a) the high lanceolate labial cusps, (b) the difference in height between the labial and lingual cusps, (c) the practical absence of a hypocone in the third molar (d) the presence of a distinct metaconule in the first, second and third molars.^ When, in addition to these characters of the molars themselves, the primitive nature of the antemolar formula is considered, it is clear that there are strong reasons for considering the molar of CcBnolestes as possibly protot)T)al to those of the Phalangerinae. It is of course conceivable that it is now becoming specialized in an insectivorous direction secondary to a previous bunodont stage. This possibility is suggested by the cursorial adaptations in the skeleton of Ccsnolestes, but, as shown by the Peramelidae, these may accompany relatively slight modifications of molar structure. Assimiing that the molar of CcBnolestes represents a late stage in the development of bunodonty, it becomes difficult to harmonize it with current theories. Such a molar would scarcely be produced by the lower- ing and thickening of cusps which appear in Philander. These changes are only relatively slight deviations from the conditions prevailing among all Didelphiidae. They are seen to some extent also in Didelphis where, as in Philander, they are probably related to habits which are more frugivorous and omnivorous than those of Peramys and Marmosa. It is conceivable that they might have led either to the bunoid or the selenoid section of the Phalangeridae or to some of the conditions seen in the Peramelidae. But they cannot be accepted as any indication of the genesis of the quadrate buno-lophodont molar of Ccenolestes. How, then, was this molar derived? Considerable evidence points to a possible evolution by persistence of stylar elements rather than by their reduction and total elimination. The theories of Bcnslcy and others, with the exception of Wingc (1882), invariably give a minor role ' The intcrprctatioa of the metaconule as primitive is discussed on a later page. May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESTES — Osgood. 123 to the styles, although they are so highly developed in the tritubercular molar. They are supposed to grow up from the dngulum and then to shrink back into it to complete extinction. In some cases this may occur, especially in placentals, but in the marsupials there is much to show that the styles have played an important part and that they may be the principal elements preserved in the outer cusps of the molars of CcBnolestes and the bunoid Phalangerinae. In some cases they may have wholly supplanted the paracone and metacone and in others they may have fused wholly or partly with them, the resxilting cusp usually preserving more of the character of the style than of the so-called primary cusps. This hypothesis favors Winge's theory that the styles are the original elements of the molar crown persistent from the tri- conodont stage, but it is only facts bearing on the evolution of the bunoid molar from the tritubercular that are of present importance. Some of these are the following: 1. The stylar elements of the molar crown are deep-seated struc- tures, being recognizable in many early mammals and in developmental stages of recent ones. 2. They occupy the outer or labial side of the teeth which is phylo- genetically older than the inner or Ungual. 3. They are well developed in polyprotodont marsupials and show a high degree of consistency in general relations (Bensley, 1906). 4. Morphologically they are bunoid, at least conical or compressed conical in section. 5. The cusps of the trigon in the tritubercular molar are selenoid, essentially alike and essentially different from the styles. 6. Hence the crown of this molar consists of two elements one of which is fundamentally bunoid and probably primitive while the other is selenoid and secondary. 7. The styles are situated directly over the buccal roots and in Une with the primitive longitudinal axes of the premolars in the identical position of the outer cusps of the quadrate bunoid molar. 8. On the contrary, the paracone and metacone are midway between the lingual and buccal roots and in order to become the outer cusps in the bunoid molar would require not only a change in form but a migra- tion from their position, 9. Aside from the confusing factors introduced by minor adapta- tions, therefore, the general relations in the tritubercular molar are favorable for positive participation of stylar elements in the formation of the bunoid molar. With these broader facts in view, evidence may be sought as to detailed methods of change other than that of downward reduction 124 FiEi-D Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. and elimination of styles. The high bladelike cusps in the molar of CcBfwlestes suggest an evolution along lines similar to those which have produced the carnivorous dentitions. In the Dasyuridae, the carnivorous evolution obviously has proceeded by lateral compression and fusion of styles and cusps. In this process it is difficult in all cases to demonstrate to what extent one element dominates the other, but the styles are quite as consistent as the so-called cusps of the trigon. In Sarcophilus, the style dominates the paracone in the first and second molars and the two are evenly divided in the third. Metacone and style, on the other hand, are evenly divided in the first molar, while the metacone dominates in the third. The character of the outer aspect of the teeth in all cases seems determined by that of the styles. In Thylacinus, stylar elements persist in reduced condition anteriorly and posteriorly but in the inter- vening region have completely fused with the metacone, doubtless some- what after the manner indicated in Sarcophilus. Even after these extensive changes, the resulting cusp, which is derived principally from the metacone, is situated in the same relation to the roots as the meta- cone of the tritubercular molar of the didelphids and dasyurids. In the carnivorous evolution, therefore, although the tendency to con- solidation of cusps is very great, the styles have been reduced only when their corresponding cusps were reduced and in cases of fusion they have given their character to a large part of the combined product. In the formation of the molar of Ccenolesies with its decidedly convex labial surfaces it seems probable that fusion of styles has played quite as large a part as in camiverous forms. In the bunoid Phalangerinae it is possible that fusion and reduction may have been combined in some cases. As compared with the upper molars of other living marsupials, those of CcBfiolestes are unique in the possession of a marked undiffer- entiated external cingulum. It forms a continuous faintly crenulate ledge along the bases of all the molars. A similar structure is found in various degrees of perfection in the extinct casnolestids but nothing exactly comparable occurs in modern forms. It is not necessarily evidence of reduction of styles and may easily have been developed independently. In fact an exactly analogous structure is found at the inner base of the protocone of the first upper molar and cingula of the same character appear on the lower molars to which no suspicion of reduced styles attaches. The irregular swelling at the bases of the upper molars in primitive Phalangeridae, as Dromicia and Petaurus, is regarded by Bensley as a vestigial external cingulum which "appears to be equivalent to that bearing the external styles in polyprotodont forms." In a certain sense this is apparent enough, but I believe that at most only the minor stylar elements are represented and that the principal May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^enolestes — Osgood. 125 ones (styles b and c) are no more reduced than they are in the anterior molars of Sarcophilus in which there is a similar slight basal ridge com- bined with large obvious styles. Evidence of combined fusion and reduction is seen in the first upper molar of Daciylopsila. In this the quadrate form is complete so far as the principal cusps are concerned, but there remains on the antero-extemal border of the tooth a single well-marked style, which is well distinguished from the paracone. Apparently the other styles have fused, but this one has changed only little and that by reduction. It is to be noted also that this style retains a primitive relation to the root. Most interesting is the fact that the antero-extemal surface of the paracone, that is, the part opposite the style, is concave or semi-selenoid while its postero- external surface is convex like that of the succeeding molars. In other words, it seems that where fusion takes place, the outer surface of the style is added to the cusp making it convex and where fusion does not take place, the outer surface remains concave as at first. To produce a bunoid molar from a tritubercular one by this method requires less change than by reduction of styles. In the primitive Dasyurinae and in Marmosa and Peramys the styles are very well- developed and their convex external surfaces and sublanceolate form closely parallel the conditions in Ceenolestes and some of the primitive Phalangerinae. Moreover, the paracone in these forms is obviously derived from the styles, in most cases being subordinate to them and in none reaching a stage of development which overshadows them. In the first upper molar of Phascologale crtsticauda the paracone is not yet differentiated and in the corresponding tooth in Dasyurus viverrinus nearly the same condition obtains. This tooth, on account of its anterior position, is probably more primitive than those posterior to it. In these forms, its antero-extemal cusp has all the characteristics of a style (style b). A very shghtly bifid tip indicates the beginning of the separa- tion of the paracone and its complete differentiation is seen progressively emphasized in the succeeding third and fourth molars. This first upper molar in the dasyurids is at least superficially similar to the deciduous molar of the didelphids in which, as suggested by Bensley, the antero- extemal cusp appears to be the result of fusion of style and paracone and may be retrogressive. However this may be, the tendency to persistence of the styles is evident and the conclusion seems justified that the same elements are still represented in the quadrate bunoid molars of diprotodonts. If this be true it is possible that the small metaconule in the molar of Coenolestes is not a new element but a per- sistent unfused vestige of the metacone of the ancestral tritubercular tooth. This at first seems improbable on accotmt of the large size and . I 126 Field Museum op Natural History — ZoOlogy, Vol. XIV. functional importance of the metacone in polyprotodonts, Gregory (1916, p. 248) has suggested even that the metacone in these forms represents the apex of the origirtal two-rooted tooth. It is to be noted, however, that with the reduction of the metacone spur and the growth of the hypocone the relative importance of the metacone decreases and in some cases (e. g. Dactylopsila) the postero-extemal cusp, presumably the metacone element, is exceeded by the hypocone which was non- existent when the metacone dominated the tritubercular crown. In Phascologale, Antechinomys and other generalized dasyurids, the stylar element (style c) is very well-developed and only slightly exceeded by the metacone. According to Sinclair, style c is well-developed also in Microhioiherium tehicelchum of the Patagonian Miocene. To totally eliminate this style and change the selenoid form of the metacone to bunodont, meanwhile transposing the relations of the two to the root, woiild be a much more extensive process than fusion of style and meta- cone or even more than increased growth of the style and elimination of the metacone. Moreover, it would be contrary to general evidence on cusp migration, most of which is negative (Gidley, 1906; Tims, 1903). Lower Premolars. Description. — The single-rooted, imicuspid, anterior lower premolar lies in series with the canine and the lateral incisors and is essentially like them in size, form, and implantation. It is separated from the middle premolar by a slight space. In the abnormal specimen having five unicuspids, this space is unaffected, indicating that the extra tooth is an anterior rather than a posterior one. The middle premolar is two-rooted and tricuspid but it is in a rather advanced stage of reduction toward the unicuspid condition. The principal or middle cusp has taken an anterior position directly above the anterior root leaving a long sweeping curve between it and the posterior cusp. The anterior cusp is practically eliminated, although its position is still indicated by the angle between the root and the front of the main cone. A further reduction involving the loss of the small posterior cusp and root would produce a tooth like the unicuspid anterior premolar. The posterior lower premolar, like the corresponding upper tooth, is functionally associated with the molars rather than with the an- terior premolars. A slight space separates it in front from the middle premolar but posteriorly it is closely engaged with the front of the fint molar. It rises considerably above the anterior teeth and even exceeds slightly the level of the molars. It has one large upright cusp risiiig above its anterior root and a short depressed heel which is over- May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESXES — Osgood. 127 lapped by the anterior shelf of the first molar. Thus, although higher, it is slightly shorter than the middle premolar. On its antero-extemal surface is a faint indication of a dngulimi. Discussion. — The lower premolars, like the upper ones, show tenden- cies toward the condition prevalent in diprotodonts. This is evidenced principally by the reduction of the anterior teeth and the separation of the posterior one from them to a position at the head of the row of grinding teeth. The only approach to this among polyprotodonts is seen in the PerameUdae. Lower Molars. Description. — The first lower molar has a relatively small trigonid and an enlarged talonid. The protoconid, which is only very slightly larger and higher than the other cusps of the trigonid, is connected by crests with the paraconid and metaconid. The talonid is broad and extended and the lateral angle between the protoconid and the entoconid is relatively shallow. No hypoconulid is distinguishable. A distinct external cingulum is present and continues forward to form a slight anterior shelf. The second lower molar is similar in general to the first, but is larger and its trigon is relatively wider, although still somewhat narrower than the talonid. There is a slight indication of a hypoconulid and the paraconid is flattened or even emarginate anteriorly where it meets the entoconid of the preceding tooth. The third molar is smaller than the second and approximately equal to the first. The talonid exceeds the trigon in width only very slightly and the general outline of the tooth from above is rectangular. The flattening of the paraconid is more pronounced and almost divides it into two distinct tubercles. The fourth molar is compressed and greatly reduced in size, being narrower and only slightly longer than the trigon of the preceding tooth. The metaconid persists nearly as large and well-differentiated as in the other molars but the other cusps are rudimentary. The entoconid is slightly elevated and distinguishable; the hypoconid is represented merely by the postero-intemal angle of the short blunt talonid; the protoconid has disappeared; and the imperfectly divided paraconid is vestigial. Despite its small size, this tooth is two-rooted, agreeing in this respect with the extinct form Halmariphus, but disagreeing with Garzonia. Discussion. — The lower molars, as compared with those of primitive polyprotodonts, show three conspicuous tendencies. (i) The reduction of the protoconid and the general reduction in size and height of the outer cusps as compared to the inner ones. (2) The elevation of crests connecting all the cusps. (3) The production of a 128 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. subrectangular tooth by the extension of the talonid and the antero- posterior compression of the paraconid. These characteristics are seen to a somewhat lesser extent in the PerameHdae and in general they lead to conditions found among diprotodonts. The talonid still remains slightly wider than the trigon, the individual cusps are still distinctly elevated above the crests, and the molars as a whole are relatively long and narrow. These appear to be primitive features and it is evident that the lower molars are less advanced than the upper. Among the extinct caenolestids, as noted by Sinclair, some are even slightly more primitive in these respects than Ccsnolestes while others show increased develop- ment of transverse crests making the evidence quite clear for the derivation of buno-lophodont types from tuberculo-sectorial. THE ORIGIN OF DIPROTODONTY. The diprotodont modification of the antemolar teeth has arisen in so many diverse groups of mammals that it may well have had different causes and courses of development in different cases. In some, however, at least the general factors involved must have been the same. It occurs in multituberculates, modem marsupials, insectivores, primitive eden- tates, rodents, ungulates, bats and the lemuroids. In its most specialized condition it consists in the complete suppression of all the antemolar teeth except one pair of incisors in each jaw, these being functionally modified and situated terminally. Among living marsupials, the pro- gressive steps of this modification are illustrated by a series which is so nearly complete that, except for the incipient stages, it could scarcely be more convincing if it were in reality a linear phylogenetic series, which of course it is not. Of living forms in which diprotodonty is unmistakably developed, Ccenolestes undoubtedly has the most gen- eralized dentition. From Ccenolestes to the more primitive phalangers, as Dromicia and DistcBchuruSf the step is very slight; thence to the herbivorous phalangers of the genus Trichosurus and on through Hypsiprymnodon and Bettongia we come to the more typical macropods ; and in Phascolotnys, although in other respects it is not a true terminal member of this series, we see diprotodonty highly developed. This has been traced in great detail and described by Bensley (1903) in the important paper to which reference is so frequently necessary. Begin- ning with Ccenolestes, the gradation from one form to another is almost as complete as could be desired. The idea that CcBnolestes is not a true diprotodont, but has only paralleled the diprotodonts in dentition, need not here be considered at length, since it is only dentition that is important in this connection May, 1921. American Marsupial, Cenolestes — Osgood. 129 and so fax as that alone is concerned there could be no possible objection to considering Ccenolestes directly prototypal to the Australian diproto- donts. It may be said, however, that the ancestor of diprotodonts by merely a priori reasoning would at some point have the general charac- ters of CcBnolestes, that is, it would have a diprotodont dentition while retaining a number of polyprotodont characters. This will be discussed elsewhere, but in the series of diprotodont dentitions we can at least place that of CcBnolestes as the first and most generalized among living forms. The uncertainty lies in the steps preceding the development of the caenolestid type of dentition, for the gradations between generalized polyprotodont dentitions and the caenolestid stage of diprotodonty are not recognizable with certainty among known living or extinct forms. Hence the most constructive stages in the development of diprotodonty in this case must be supplied theoretically. Bensley, whose opinion is most important, states that "the diprotodont modification, although characteristic of the herbivorous section of the Marsupials, is the result of an insectivorous adaptation which must have been developed in the minute ancestors of the Phalangeridae during the incipient stages of the omnivorous evolution, but after the separation of the peramehd stem." He therefore finds the beginnings of diprotodont tendencies in small polyprotodonts such as Phascologale and Peramys which have undiffer- entiated lower incisors but show a slight differentiation of the median upper ones. Since primitive diprotodonts like Dromicia have upper incisors of this same character he concludes that such incisors are part of the cotirse toward diprotodonty. With enlargement of the median lower incisors in a form like Phascologale^ he would expect a shortening of the lower jaw and consequent disturbance and reduction of the "intermediate " antemolar teeth. These conditions he finds exemplified in Dromicia and Ccenolestes. This explanation by Bensley may be the true one, for it is difficult to gainsay; but if applied to Ccenolestes it practically assumes a direct didelphid ancestor and therefore needs careful examination. Before granting that diprotodonty arose ex- clusively in this manner, it may be inquired whether there is any other way in which it might have originated among marsupials. The didel- phids and caenolestids were already well distinguished in the Patagonian Miocene. Hence the origin of the diprotodonty of Ccenolestes is still farther back, perhaps in the Mesozoic, and it is certain that the ancestral form was not the present day didelphid but an ancient generalized type, all the characters of which are not preserved in any recent forms. 1 A much greater development of the anterior incisors is found in Oxygomphius Jrequens, a European Miocene form usually referred to the Didelphiidae, I30 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. Besides the didelphids and dasyurids there are at least two other groups which may have retained some of the characters of the generahzed marsupial and which may throw some light on the origin of diprotodonty . These are the Myrmecobiidae and the Peramelidae, the former group with only one living species and the latter with a considerable number. Myrmecobius, as is well known, has a very remarkable dentition com- bining an excessive number of molars and a relative degeneration of all its teeth. This apparently incompatible condition has been explained in at least three ways. Owen, Thomas, Leche and others believed it to be a primitive survival from ancestral forms having numerous post-canine teeth such as Dryolestes of the North American upper Jurassic. Winge has advanced the hypothesis that it is due to the retention of teeth originally belonging to the deciduous series. In this he is followed by Gidley (19 15), who points out that "it requires but the addition of two more permanently retained deciduous molars to equal the greatest number of post-canine teeth found in this species, namely, nine." A third explanation is offered by Bensley who believes that the extra molars of Myrmecobius are due to a "simple reduplication of teeth from the posterior position of the dental lamina" induced by "the favorable conditions of increased space in the molar region." This conclusion is obviously influenced by the reduced incisor formula of Myrmecobius which he believes is derived through the dasyurids from the didelphids which have a more primitive number of incisors. But he fails to take into account the fact that similar reductions of incisors have taken place in the early history of marsupials in Tertiary or even Mesozoic times. To the writer, these different explanations seem equally theoretical and the original one of Owen, if stated in general terms, is not less probable than the others; that is, the resemblances between Myrmecobius and Mesozoic forms seem quite as great as those between it and the modem forms and, since other considerations point to great antiquity for several different types of marsupials, there would seem to be no great improb- ability in the belief that the extra molars are a survival rather than a modem development. At the present time Myrmecobius is obviously in process of losing rather than gaining teeth. This has been noted by Gidley who says: "The variability in the molar series in Myrmecobius seems due to the presence or absence of the last molar, probably a disappearing tooth. In the upper jaw the last molar seems to be normally wanting, while the second is apparently in the process of disappearing, being sometimes present and sometimes wanting." It seems highly improbable that the catises which originally brought about an increase in the tooth formula are the same as those now producing a decrease. A more reasonable May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESTES — Osgood. 131 assumption would be that the increase took place before degeneration of individual teeth began and for a different reason. The process of reduction now beginning in Myrmecohius may perhaps be compared to the more advanced condition in Tarsipes which retains but three or at most four post-canine teeth and is evidently well on the way to an edentulous state. Gidley makes the unequivocal statement that "There is in our present knowledge nothing to support Owen's hypothesis regarding the derivation of Myrmecohius J' But in succeeding pages of the same paper he argues for an anciejit origin of the Myrmecobiidae, which he supposes to have been well differentiated from the didelphids and dasyurids as early as the Paleocene. Evidently he believes in a Mesozoic ancestor for Myrmecohius and to that extent at least agrees with Owen. Whatever the case may have been with respect to the history of the extra molar teeth of Myrmecohius, the view that all the living families of marsupials were well differentiated early in the Tertiary seems to be well founded. Therefore, without reference to possibly archaic characters other than teeth, it is still possible to believe in an early predidclphid origin for Myrmecohius. As a possible forerunner of diprotodonts, the Myrme- cohius line is thus entitled to some consideration. It has the same antemolar formula as Ccenolestes, its upper canines are somewhat reduced, and its median lower incisors are greatly specialized and relatively larger than in any other polyprotodont. These incisors are completely terminal in position and, although slightly reairv^ed at the tips, are essentially proclivous with their roots nearly in the principal longitudinal axis of the mandible and set at a decidedly different angle from the lateral incisors. Thus the median lower incisors of Myrme- cohius are essentially like those of diprotodonts. If these teeth are as much reduced as the rest of the dentition, they must have been derived from a type which might easily have led to the diprotodonts. The median upper incisors of Myrmecohius are reduced in size and slightly smaller than the lateral ones. They are set very far apart and are slightly procumbent, obviously in a secondary condition which differs from that of polyprotodonts and diprotodonts alike. Hence no con- clusion is to be drawn from them although it is to be noted that the median upper incisors are widely separated at the base in diprotodonts more generally than in polyprotodonts. The first pair of upper lateral incisors are modified to meet the median lower ones as in diprotodonts and all the lateral incisors are laterally compressed. The differentiation of the median upper incisors is scarcely to be regarded as a diprotodont character for it is not pronounced except in a few extreme cases, as Phascolarctos and Phascolomys, and in many it is distinctly less than in 132 Field Museum of Natural History — Zo6logy, Vol. XIV. some polyprotodonts. In Trichosurus, for example, and in CcBuolestes, the median upper incisors are less differentiated than in some species of Phascologale. For the development of diprotodonty from such a form as Marmosa the following are among the changes which would be necessary: Reduc- tion in number of incisors; enlargement of median lower incisors; reduc- tion in size of canines and anterior premolars; decrease in the depth of the mandible; increase in craniofacial length; formation of short diastem- mata between at least some of the teeth; assumption of proclivous and fully terminal position by median lower incisors; assumption of wholly lateral position by posterior incisors; lateral compression of incisors and development of long and forwardly directed cutting edges, especially in those of the upper jaw. All of these modifications are fotmd to a con- siderable degree in Myrmecohius and in these respects this form re- sembles the diprotodonts more closely than do any of the didelphids or dasyurids. Whether these characteristics were more or less pronounced before the present degeneration of teeth began cannot be said, but at least it must be conceded that Myrmecohius has some claims to a position in or near the line of the diprotodonts whether it be regarded as an ancient type derived from Jurassic forms or a more recent one proceeding from the dasyiuids. Leaving Myrmecohius for further discussion later, it may now be inquired whether the peramelids could have furnished the beginnings of diprotodonty. Although Bensley finds in the Peramelidae many indications of an ancestral relation to the modem diprotodonts and an advance over the primitive dasyurids and didelphids, he is not inclined to regard the diprotodont dentition as directly derived from them. In this he was influenced largely by the undifferentiated condition of the median upper incisors in the peramelids; by the retrogressive (?) char- acter of the upper canines and premolars, the existence of primitive and advanced stages of the hypocone in both groups, and the hypsodonty of the peramelids. The development of the hypocone and the hypsodont modifications in the peramelids are progressions beyond the most primitive stages of the known diprotodonts. But they need not be considered wholly homoplastic and their inception may have preceded the divergence of the pcramelid stem. In any case they do not preclude a belief in a common ancestry for the peramelids and the diprotodonts and one which was not very remote. Such an ancestry at most need only be removed to a stage in which the hypocone and the hypsodonty were approximately at the most primitive stage common to both peramelids and diprotodonts. This would carry us back to a brachyodont condition but not to a total absence of the hypocone. So of the two characters May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESXES — Osgood. 133 involved, only one — hypsodonty — needs to be accounted for. This may well be regarded as a recent specialization for it is of a very peculiar nature, a sort of half -hypsodonty confined to one side of the teeth and not fairly comparable with the full hypsodonty of the most advanced diprotodonts. The undifferentiated median upper incisors of peramelids and the supposed retrogressive canines and premolars, in the light of a study of Ccenolestes, do not seem at all unfavorable to a hypothesis that a dipro- todont dentition might have proceeded from the peramelid stem. The incisors, while not differentiated for seizing as in the dasyurcs and didelphids, are unquestionably in a secondary condition of which no further development is seen elsewhere, unless it be among diprotodonts. These incisors have become broad and somewhat bladelike with their cutting edges in the same horizontal plane as those of the adjacent lateral incisors. In fact they are practically indistinguishable in shape from the pair of lateral incisors situated next to them. Hence it seems that the same factors which have led to modification of the lateral teeth, may have affected the median ones. The principal of these factors is the functional interaction with the lower incisors. In Perameles the three pairs of lower incisors are collectively so modified in form and especially in position that their functional relation to the upper incisors is much like that of the elongated single pair of lower incisors in diprotodonts, certainly much more so than in any other polyprotodont. They are set so closely together that their cutting edges are practically continuous. In addition they are exceedingly proclivous with their roots almost as near the long axis of the mandible as in diprotodonts. Thus the fimc- tional effect of the three incisors in Perameles is practically the same as that of the one in diprotodonts and it is probable that specialization in the lower jaw has conditioned that in the upper rather than vice versa. Another interesting character correlated with the proclivity of the lower incisors in Perameles is found in their exposed roots, those of the first and third especially being without bony covering in front. The second incisor is more fully rooted, but the other two, although well- developed, are very weakly attached to the jaw. Perhaps enlargement of any one of the three might lead to the loss or reduction of the others which would result in a diprotodont dentition. This is uncertain, but it is probably fair to assimie that the proclivity and the exposed roots of these teeth are indications at least of some instability, possibly following the loss of the fourth pair or foreshadowing a changed relation of those remaining. The reduction that has already taken place in Perameles corresponds to the reduction in the diprotodonts, that is, the first pair of lower incisors has been lost and thus one of the stages preliminary to 134 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. diprotodonty has been passed. Embryological evidence so far adduced points to the conclusion that this is the case. Woodward's (1893) studies of developing teeth in the Macropodidae led him to believe that the large functional lower incisor is a persistent member of a series in which it formerly stood in second place. Wilson and Hill (1897), from extensive work on the development of Perameles, find that the first lower incisor has been lost and that the one now found in terminal position is homo- logous with the large lower incisor of the macropods. These authors say (p. 509): "It is interesting to compare the condition in Perameles with that described by Mr. Woodward for Petrogale. In that form he found two small calcified vestigial incisors. The anterior of these was entirely in front of the large permanent lower incisor, which latter he therefore regarded as really i 2. . . . And may it not be that Woodward's second vestigial incisor (his iz) to which he was unable to recognize any ancestor, is really the homologue of our d«i whose legitimate successor is Woodward's h, the almost certain homologue of our 'ii' of the adult Perameles?" The dasyurids have the same number of lower incisors as Perameles, but whether they also have lost the first pair has not as yet been demon- strated. Embryological evidence in their case seems lacking. It was formerly supposed (Cf. Thomas, 1887) that the dasyures had lost the fourth incisor and therefore that the maximum of three incisors in higher mammals represented the first, second, and third of the primitive series. The evidence for this supposition adduced by Thomas now seems inadequate, but in connection with theories of the origin of diprotodonty it would be important to know whether the dasyurids have lost the same incisor as the peramelids. The canines and premolars, which Bensley interprets as retrogressive, constitute a similarity between Perameles and Ccenolestes and would seem to favor a common ancestry rather than otherwise. Whether they are in reality retrogressive is another question. Retrogression in this sense is a sort of reversed homoplasy which can be recognized only if the imme- diate ancestry of the form in question is known. That is, in the case of Perameles, a didelphid ancestry is essential to a belief in the retrogressive nature of its canines. On the other hand, if Perameles had no distinct didelphid ancestry but descended from a more primitive form also ancestral to the didelphids, it may have retained a primitive prcmolari- form canine. Highly specialized canines appeared very early, in fact they were well differentiated among some early reptiles, and various Mesozoic mammals had simple single-rooted canines, but others, like the Jurassic Triconodon, possessed double-rooted or grooved canines similar to those now found in Perameles, Ceenolestes, and Myrmecohius — May, 1921. American Marsupial, Cjenolestes — Osgood. 135 all of which it should be noted are forms having certain primitive char- acters not retained by the didelphids. Double-rooted canines are not unknown in other groups than marsupials but are very rare except in insectivores, another primitive group. Among these, premolariform canines show no evidences of retrogression. Double-rooted canines are said to occur also in the Miocene pig, Hyotherium (Beddard). In Antechinomys laniger, one of the most primitive polyprotodonts, the canine is single-rooted but has its crown distinctly premolariform. To interpret this as primitive seems quite as reasonable as to call it retro- gressive (see p. 119). Canines with lateral or antero-posterior cusps are found also in certain bats (e. g. Cynopterus, Harptonycterts). In the Miocene caenolestids the canine is mostly imknown, but in ParaB- panorthus, as figured by Ameghino (1903, fig. 62), the canines are small and single-rooted, not unlike those of many phalangers. These teeth may have been derived from double-rooted ones but indicate no tendency toward them. Such a form as Paraipanorthus, however, is evidently farther advanced in some respects than Ccetwlestes, for its incisors are more reduced in nimiber. On the whole, it appears that double-rooted, groove-rooted, or premolariform canines are found almost exclusively among forms exhibiting various primitive characters. The Peramelidae are primitive in certain other respects and, although it is not unlikely that their canines may have passed through various changes prior to recent times, it seems quite as possible that they may have retained an early condi- tion like that shown in the Jurassic Trtconodon. The same may be true of Myrmecobius and of Ccenolestes. The objections to a diprotodont evolution from the peramelids therefore, are not insuperable. In fact it is clear that many of the changes necessary to a transition from a didelphid to a phalanger or caenolestid are already present in Perameles and it does not seem demon- strable that these changes took place subsequent to the separation of the peramelid and diprotodont stems. In other words, the early peramelids may have become considerably differentiated from the generalized didelphoid marsupial and later divided into one line leading to the modem peramelids and another to the diprotodonts. At least, the con- clusion is unavoidable that among living forms those most suggestive of what the ancestor of Ccntolestes and other diprotodonts was like, are the Peramelidae. Moreover, if the early Tertiary form Myrmecoboides is in reality a "properamelid," as suggested on another page (p.'i42), belief in the origin of diprotodonty from this group is greatly strengthened. The following resemblances between CcEnolestes and Peratneles are to be noted; Six or more exclusive cranial characters (see p. no), tooth 136 Field Museum of Natural History — ZoOlogy, Vol. XIV. formula, molarifomi teeth with hypocone, lower incisors proclivous, lateral upper incisors compressed, reduced canines and premolars, specialized posterior premolar, movable cervical rib, osseous patella, large median vagina, cursorial structure of legs, first and fifth toes of forefeet reduced, caecum small, tail not prehensile. Many of these characters, while not diagnostic of the diprotodonts as a group are present in the majority of that group and absent in the majority of polyprotodonts. It may be concluded, therefore, that diprotodonty in the caenolestids may have originated in one of three ways: (i) from didelphid pre Miocene types through undiscovered inter- mediate forms existing prior to the differentiation of the peramelids. (2) from an ancient line now represented by Myrmecobius. (3) from primitive peramelids after their separation from the dasyiuid- didelphid stem. The first of these is the theory of Bensley and in general of those who have followed him. The second is perhaps less entitled to con- sideration, but is still not wholly baseless. The third is to the writer more probable than either of the others. RELATIONSHIPS OF WYNYARDIA. The extinct marsupials known from the Australian region are nearly all of Pleistocene age and unequivocably diprotodont or polyprotodont. The most conspicuous exception to this is Wynyardia hassiana Spencer (1900) from beds at Table Cape, Tasmania, which are regarded as late Eocene or early Oligocene. This form, the remains of which include parts of limb bones and an imperfect skull without teeth, exhibits such a curious mixture of characters that it has so far been omitted from formal classifications. Spencer summarizes his study of it as follows: "A consideration of all the features would appear to lead to the conclusion that the fossil is the representative of a now extinct series of forms which were more nearly allied to ancestral Polyprotodonts than are any of the existing Diprotodont forms. It may, in fact, be regarded as inter- mediate between the former and the latter, and as indicative of a stage in the development of Australian marsupials when the ancestors of the recent diprotodontia were beginning to diverge from the original Polyprotodontid stock from which they have been developed within the limits of the Australian region." Bensley (1904, p. 200) is somewhat more definite, saying: "While it would be difficult to add to the excellent comparisons presented by Spencer, it is probable that the reference to the animal as an inter- May, 1921. American Marsupial, C2enolestes — Osgood. 137 mediate fonn must be excluded, if for no other reason, on account of its large size. . . . All the fonns which approach the hypothetical inter- mediate type are of small size. Not only this, but the diprotodont modification itself may, as already explained, be shown to represent an insectivorous adaptation which could only have taken place in com- paratively small animals. The relations of Wynyardia are more probably with one of the advanced genera, such as Pseudochirus, PhascolarctoSf or Phalanger." Osbom (1907) says: "Among fossil forms the gap between the two suborders is largely bridged over by the extraordinary genus Wynyardia of Baldwin Spencer, which presents a perfect melange of characters seen elsewhere only in the Opossums and Dasyures (Polyprotodonts), and in the Phalangers and Kangaroos (Diprotodonts)." Gregory (1910, p. 214) speaks of Wynyardia as "another form that helps to bridge over the structural gap between the Poly protodontia and theDiprotodontia." Later (Osbom, 19 10) it fails to receive formal classification. Spencer, in summarizing the important characters of Wynyardia finds five which he interprets as indicating polyprotodont affinities. These, as nimibered and stated by him are as follows: "(i) Proportionate length to breadth of the skull, 100:67. This approximates most nearly to Dasyurus, and shows a decidedly greater width than in the Phalangeridae. " (2) Lambdoidal crest well developed, as in Dasyurus. " (3) Sagittal crest strongly developed, resembling that of Das3ruridae and species of Diddphys. " (5) The wide sweep and upward curvature of the zygomatic arches, as in Dasjruridae. " (7) The transverse elongation of the glenoid cavity, the downward produced plate of bone which forms the boundary is not con- nected with any structure forming part of the auditory passage. In this respect it agrees with Dasyuridae and Feramsles, and differs markedly from the Phalangeridae, amongst which it forms the anterior part of a bony auditory canal." At least the first three of these characters cannot be regarded as exclusively polyprotodont. Taking them up ntunerically, it is found as to (i) that, although Dasyurus and Sarcophilus have very wide skulls, polyprotodonts in general have relatively narrow ones. The ratio runs from only 39.7 in Perameles to 81.2 in Sarcophilus (see p. 99). On the other hand the average relative width is greater in diprotodonts than in polyprotodonts, the only very narrow type seen among diprotodonts being in the primitive CcBnolestes. As to (2), it is to be noted that a high lambdoid crest is no more than a generic character among polyprotodonts. Within the limits of the 138 Field Museum of Natural History — ZoOlogy, Vol. XIV. Dasyuridae and the Didelphiidae it is extremely variable. Various diprotodonts, including most of the macropods and some phalangers have considerable indications of a lambdoid crest and in Phascolarctos it is highly developed. Thylacoleo also is described as having a high crest. As to (3), much the same is true of the sagittal as of the lambdoid crest. In the Didelphiidae we find a high sagittal crest in Didelphis and none in the closely related Peramys and Philander. A sagittal crest of some prominence is seen in the skull of Trichosurus. Its presence is less frequent than its absence in both polyprotodonts and diprotodonts and cannot be regarded as of great significance. Spencer's characters (i), (2), and (3), therefore, cannot be taken as evidence of the polyprotodont affinity of Wynyardia. Characters (5) and (7) seem somewhat correlated and it is evident that in the region of the glenoid fossa and the posterior base of the zygoma we have a more pronounced resemblance to the condition in polyprotodonts than in any living diprotodont with the exception of CcBHolestes. In the relatively high position of the glenoid fossa, however, there is approach to the phalangers. It seems, therefore, that only one of the supposed resemblances to polyprotodonts is important and this is approximated in the primitive diprotodont Ccenolestes. The resemblances to diprotodonts are almost as variable and as difficult to regard as diagnostic, but there are more of them and on the whole they seem more convincing of relationship. This is especially true if comparisons are made only with typical polyprotodonts (as didelphids and dasyiirids) and with typical diprotodonts (phalangers), leaving aberrant forms, as Perameles on the one hand and Casnolestes on the other, out of consideration. Thus the large squamosal is found in Phascolarctos much as in Wynyardia completely excluding the alisphe- noid from contact with the parietals; and in general the squamosal tends to forward extension among diprotodonts but, while this offers con- siderable contrast to the condition in the Dasyuridae and Didelphidae, it is fully equalled or even outdone in the Peramelidae. One of the characters suggesting diprotodont relationship of Wynyardia is the large premaxilla but here again the pcramelids must be ruled out. The relatively large cranium, the high position of the glenoid fossa, the elevated mandibular condyle, the position and shape of the anterior root of the zygoma, the massive ischiimi, and the proportionately long hind limbs all seem to point to diprotodont affinity in Wynyardia. Hence, while it may be agreed with Spencer and others that it combines many features of the two groups, it seems best for practical purposes to classify it with the diprotodonts and in recognition of its various unique features to regard it as the type of a distinct family, the Wynyardiidae. May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^enolestes — Osgood. 139 A comparison of Caznolesies with Spencer's figures and description of Wynyardia, although rather unsatisfactory as a basis for positive con- clusions, reveals a number of points in common. These may be enu- merated as follows: (i) Cranial part of skull large as compared to facial. (2) Relations of glenoid fossa to auditory meatus similar. (3) Squamosal not inflated and posterior base of zygoma somewhat Dasyurine. (4) Glenoid fossa relatively high. (5) Nasals extended anteriorly and expanded posteriorly. (6) Premaxillae large and separated from the maxillae by a suture which is only slightly oblique. (7) Mandibular condyle relatively high. (8) Femoral trochanters similar and a third tuberosity present as in Phascolomys . Comparison of Wynyardia with extinct American forms allied to CcBfwlestes, as Palcsothentes and Abderites, also shows several interesting points. Thus PalcBothentes has lambdoid and sagittal crests combined with zygomata of a type similar to those of Wynyardia and the frontals are widest in their cranial part. In Abderites, as previously noted by Spencer, the seat of the large lower sectorial tooth forms a deep trans- verse furrow in the mandible which seems closely comparable to the condition in Wynyardia. Present material is not adequate for the positive conclusion that Wynyardia is intimately allied to the American forms but the above similarities are most suggestive and must be regarded at least in some degree as strengthening belief in extensive commimity of relationship between Australian and American marsupials, both polyprotodont and diprotodont. RELATIONSHIPS OF MYRMECOBOIDES. The genus Myrmecoboides was established by Gidley in 191 5 for an incomplete lower jaw from the Paleocene (Fort Union) of Montana. It was tentatively classified as belonging to the family Myrmecobiidae and characterized as follows: "Canine semipremolariform, being irregularly triangular in cross section and but slightly curved; canine and the three simple premolars evenly spaced with short intervening diastemae. There is also a short diastema between the canine and tj (the position of the other incisors is not known) . Fourth tooth behind the canine (probably dpi retained) completely molariform; true molars tritubercular, with well-developed basin heel, but with inner cusps of trigonid (paraconid and metaconid) as high or higher than main outer cusp (protoconid)." The principal characters regarded by Gidley as suggesting possible affinity with Myrmecobius are (i) the diastemata between the premolars, 140 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. (2) the indicated straightness of the jaw anterior to the canine, (3) the premolariform canine, (4) the compressed premolars, (5) the absence of cingula, (6) the relatively high inner cusps (metaconid and entoconid). He also points out that the extinct form differs from Myrmecohius in at least three important particulars (i) the possession of the normal ntim- ber of post-canine teeth, (2) the approximation of the paraconid to the metaconid, (3) the more elevated and better defined trigonid. Comparison of Gidley's figures and description with several species of Peramelidae shows at once that practically all the above entmierated points of resemblance are to be found in that family and none of the important points of difference. This is indicated by the following parallel: Myrmecohoides and Perameles Myrmecohius Canine eqvial to or lower than pre- Canine higher than premolars, molars. Protoconid and hypoconid well Protoconid and hypoconid small or developed. rudimentary. Paraconid and metaconid approxi- Paraconid and metaconid not approxi- mated, mated. Trigonid elevated and distinct. Trigonid not differentiated. Post-canine teeth seven. Post-canine teeth more than seven. The important points of difference between Myrmecohoides and Perameles are (a) the imicuspid anterior premolar in the extinct form, (b) the large last molar with its well-developed hypoconulid, (c) the exceptionally large paraconid of the first molar, and (d) the somewhat more brachyodont condition of the molar series. The unicuspid pre- molar is a specialization such as might be expected in an ancestral diprotodont but the other characters are primitive and doubtless hark back to a tritubercular stage. The resemblances to Perameles are pronoimced, however, and cannot be overlooked, although the classifica- tion of such an ancient form on fragmentary material has much possi- bility of error. In view of the many similarities to Perameles shown by Caenolestes, the occurrence in the early American Tertiary of a form with distinct leanings to Perameles becomes especially significant. The hypothesis can scarcely be avoided that, provided Myrmecohoides is a marsupial, it may well be ancestral to the cajnolestids. A point of espe- cial interest and significance is the unicuspid premolar which is paralleled among marsupials only in caenolestids and diprotodonts. PHYLOGENY AND TAXONOMY. The great range of variation in structure and adaptive characters shown by existinf; marsupials makes it possible without reference to extinct forms to construct linear scries in which the sequence from May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 141 generalized to specialized types is remarkably free from interruptions. If their present distribution also be disregarded, that is, if both American and Australian forms be included, the problem is simplified. As worked out in great detail by Bensley (1903), the American Didelphiidae stand in a prototypal morphogenetic relation to the remaining groups of marsupials. This conclusion is based upon their possession of a com- bination of various generalized features which are distributed over at least three different Australian groups. They have the primitive tritubercular molar as in the Dasyuridae, the upper incisor formula and upper molar stylar characters as in the Peramelidae, and the pedimanous foot-structure (including incipient s>'ndactyly in one form) as in the Phalangeridae. As the probable ancestor of the modem Didelphiidae, Bensley finds the Oligocene Peratheriutn fulfilling practically all theoretical require- ments including a distribution in both Europe and North America which might permit its dispersal either to South America or Australia or to both. This dispersal he supposes to have taken place in at least three radiations, the first being represented by the Australian fauna, the second by the Miocene fauna of South America and the third by the present day Didelphiidae of South America, this last being in its incipi- ency. The evolutionary series so thoroughly expovmded by Bensley is an exceedingly plausible one in spite of its having been based largely upon existing forms. The various modem polyprotodonts are ob\'iously reducible to a common type and, although the diprotodonts offer more difficulty, they may at least be traced from one to another. Between the two groups is a rather definite hiatus but there is little room for doubt that diprotodonts proceeded from polyprotodont ancestors. Indications of some of the steps leading from one group to the other are seen prin- cipally in the Peramelidae, the Wynyardiidae, the Myrmecoboididae and the Palaeothentidae. No one of these aberrant groups is free from objection as an ideal transitional type, yet taken together they serve to bridge quite thoroughly the gap between the generalized polyprotodonts and the more primitive diprotodonts. Bensley dealt chiefly with modem Australian forms, giving relatively little attention to Wynyardia or CcBnolesies, and Myrmecoboides was unknown to him. But the Pera- melidae he regarded as proceeding from a hypothetical stem-group called Properamelidae, one branch of which led to modem perameUds and another to the diprotodonts. This group prestunably had begim to acquire subquadrate upper molars with incipient hypocones as in modem peramelids but had not developed a terrestrial foot structure. The Properamelidae themselves were supposed to have evolved from the generalized polyprotodont having the characters of the Didelphiidae 142 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol, XIV. and giving rise through another line to the Dasyuridae and modern polyprotodonts. Interesting in this connection is the fact noted by Bensley (1903, p. 11 1) that the modern peramelids agree with the Oligocene Peratherium more closely in the character of the important styles of the molars than they do with the Australian dasyurids. The fossil record is very incomplete but its testimony accords in a surprising degree with the hypothetical requirements of Bensley's scheme. Myrmecohoides might without serious objection be looked upon as in the direct line between the " Properamelids " and the diprotodonts, since it has begun to reduce its premolars, the first being small, unicuspid, and single-rooted as in many diprotodonts. Furthermore, CcBnolestes shows numerous resemblances to Peranteles, so many that a common ancestry subsequent to the generalized polyprotodont stage is by no means impossible. The material representing Myrmecohoides is too imperfect to warrant more than a provisional conclusion that it may be an early stage in the line of the csenolestids. Nevertheless the evi- dences of affinity between Myrmecohoides, Perameles, and Ccenolestes cannot be overlooked. Moreover, if Myrmecohoides is in truth a repre- sentative of the early differentiation of a diprotodont stem then it is the first form of the kind to be discovered outside the southern continents and goes far toward explaining the present day occurrence of diprotodont types in both Australia and South America. Further points of interest in connection with the resemblances of CcBnolestes to the peramelids are found in the slight indications of com- mon relationship to Notoryctes. This peculiar form is so highly spe- cialized that its affinities are very problematical, but Bensley is inclined to regard it as an offshoot of the "properamelids." Certain features of the myology (see p. 60) and osteology of Ccenolestes and Notoryctes are similar and favor belief in a common (properamelid) derivation rather than otherwise. The actual course of evolution must be inferred to a considerable extent even under the best of circumstances. The view that Ccenolestes is a primitive diprotodont is not proved but is strongly supported by its resemblance to the peramelids which of all polyproto- donts are the ones most suggestive of the incipient stages leading from one large group to the other. It is probably not too much to say that if the cacnolestids had been discovered in Australia instead of South America they would have been accepted withput question as ancestral diprotodonts. This geographical difficulty is at least partly overcome by the presence of Myrmecohoides, also with peramclid affinities, in North America. Hence it is a hypothesis of considerable probability that the caanolestids, like the Australian diprotodonts, developed May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 143 from "properamelid" ancestors and that the characters or tendencies fundamentally distinguishing them from polyprotodonts were a heritage which they had in common with the Australian diprotodonts. Increased knowledge frequently, perhaps usually, leads to increased difficulty in defining taxonomic concepts. This is especially true if it be attempted to express both morphogenetic and phylogenetic relation- ships in one and the same scheme of nomenclature. The division of modern marsupials into polyprotodonts and diprotodonts was made originally upon a morphological basis and until the discovery of extinct forms, which not only were connectant themselves but drew attention to connectant characters in certain modem forms, the two groups were clearly defined. In the case of the peramelids, a position with the polyprotodonts was generally conceded, notwithstanding their syn- dactyly which was otherwise characteristic of diprotodonts; Wynyardia was left without definite allocation; and Ceenolestes^ as detailed in pre- ceding pages (pp. 6-15), was regarded by some authors as a diproto- dont and by others as a polyprotodont. The foregoing study of Ccenolestes, while adding much to knowledge of fact, does not make classification easier. It is believed that the caenolestids and the peramelids, possibly with Notoryctes also, proceeded from the same stem as the phalangeroid diprotodonts. Hence these might be brigaded as one group. To characterize such a group on the basis of the morphological characters exhibited by modem forms, espe- cially with relation to degree of specialization, however, seems practically impossible. After trying various alternatives and considering the present state of knowledge, no more satisfactory primary division of marsupials offers itself than the old one into Polyprotodontia and Diprotodontia. In such a classification, as already shown, Ccenolestes and Wynyardia may be placed with the diprotodonts. The line must be drawn some- where and the least objectionable place for it seems to be between the caenolestids and the modem peramelids. The position of Myrmecoboides must remain doubtful until better material is forthcoming, but its close alliance with Perameles is scarcely to be doubted unless it should prove to have placental affinities. The recognition of a superfamily Caenoles- toidea, as in the classification of Osbom and Gregory, serves to divide American and Australian diprotodonts and has its advantages as a matter of convenience. The modem genus Ccsnolestes, however, need not take separate family rank but may be included in the PalcBothentidae with the very closely allied extinct forms from the Santa Cruz beds of Patagonia. To rank it as a subfamily, Caenolestinae, would be convenient. 1'^ May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 145 The accompanying diagram (p. 144), like others of its kind, has many shortcomings and some inconsistencies. It is oflfered only provisionally as an aid in indicating the relative position of Ccenolestes. Various prob- lems in the phylogeny of marsupials must somehow be met in such a diagram even though they seem properly beyond the scope of the present study. So far as any conclusions are indicated, they are to be regarded mainly as suggestive rather than decisive, as indeed they would be in any case. Myrmecobius is separated from the main polyprotodont stem and from the das3rurids in order to indicate its possible direct descent from mesozoic types, but a position nearer the dasyurids is almost equally probable.^ The problem of the relationship of Propoly- mastodon has not been studied and its uncertain position is merely suggested (see Gregory, 1910, p. 212). The same is true of Pediomys and Dtdelphops, while the multituberculates (Allotheria), which Broom contends are monotremes rather than marsupials, are indicated as probably proceeding from the unknown forms indefinitely termed "generalized marsupials" and in reality meaning very little. DISPERSAL OF MARSUPIALS. Broadly speaking there are only two theories of the dispersal of marsupials, one that the group originated in Holarctica and spread southward, the other that it had its beginnings in Antarctica, the hypothetical southern continent which formerly may have connected part of present-day South America and Australia. Advancing knowl- edge has from time to time favored one or the other hj^Dothesis but opinions are still divided. A review of the subject with many references is given by Osbom (i 910, pp. 64-80). Before the discovery of the extensive extinct faima of Patagonia, the distribution of marsupials offered no serious objection to a theory of northern origin for the group. Practically the only fossils known were didelphids from the Upper Miocene and Oligocene of Europe and North America, and the conclusion was fairly obvious that these might repre- sent the ancestral stock from which both Australia and South America received their marsupial populations. The best known advocate of this theory was Wallace. A reference to his work on the Geographical Dis- tribution of Animals (1876), however, shows at once that the information ^ Although this disposition of Myrmecobius is somewhat heretical, I am led to it through the cimiulative effect of encountering in this study and in the publishai work of others the continual necessity of special theory or explanation to account for first one and then another peculiarity of this animal. Much of this woxild be obviated by carrying its origin farther back. The possibilities for longer lines of descent than usually assumed is evidenced by Ccmolestes itself in its persistence from Miocene times to the present in practically unchangwi condition. 146 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. on which his conclusions were based was vastly inferior to that now available. Although it may be admitted that some of the Mesozoic mammals were generalized marsupials, it is hardly possible to consider them in efforts to f oUow the course of differentiation and dispersal of the modem groups. For present purposes the multituberculates also may be dis- regarded. From the early Tertiary we now know relatively primitive types of marsupials from North America, Eiu"ope and South America. Correlation of these different forms has been a matter of much difficulty but according to the most recent authorities, there is little difference in age between the northern and the southern types. Thus in North America and Europe we have the didelphoid forms collectively placed in the genus Peratherium and regarded as of upper Eocene and Oligocene age. We also have in North America Myrmecoboides, which, although a less primitive form, is found in the Basal Eocene (Fort Union) . Of still earlier age, but more doubtful relationship, are Pediomys and Didelphops from the North American Upper Cretaceous. From South America the most primitive type known is Proteodidelphys from the Notostylops beds the age of which has been variously placed from Lower Cretaceous to Upper Eocene. From Australia the earliest known form is Wynyardia which is of at least Oligocene age and, although not primitive, has a combination of diprotodont and polyprotodont characters which at this early period is significant. Subsequent to these primitive types there are three large marsupial faunas the members of which show various similarities to each other and any or all of which may have been developed from the early gen- eralized forms. These faunas are represented by (i) the Miocene fossils from South America including the caenolestids, the borhyasnids and the so-called Microbiotheridae which have didelphid characteristics; (2) the present day Australian fauna with its diversity of specialization; and (3) the present day American fauna all referred to the single family Didelphiidae. The first and second of these faunas, broadly speaking, are mutually representative, that is, the South American caenolestids are at least to some degree counterparts of certain Australian diproto- donts; the borhyaenids stand in the same or even closer relation to the Australian thylacine; and probably it is not too much to say that the Microbiotheridae, in spite of didelphid similarities, are not far removed, structurally, from the generalized Australian polyprotodonts. This correspondence between the South American Miocene forms and the Australian recent forms has not unnaturally led to the con- clusi(m that a direct interchange between the faunas actually took place May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 147 perhaps in Cretaceous times by means of an Antarctic land bridge. Further evidence of the former existence of such a bridge is afforded by plants, mollusks, crustaceans, insects, amphibians, reptiles, and other forms of life of which closely allied species are now found inhabiting both Australia and southern South ^America. Enimieration of these forms has been made at great length by various authors and need not be repeated. It is sufficient to admit that the evidence is very extensive and if the southern continent be supposed to have been one of no great permanence, but, as Hedley (1895) has indicated, may have been attenu- ated, irregular and unstable at many points, belief in its existence is greatly strengthened and the objections based upon geological and isostatic data do not weigh so heavily against it. To cite only a few of the believers in Antarctica, it may be said that among its most recent adherents have been Sinclair (1906), Ortmann (1905), Scott (1913), and Osbom (1910). One of its earliest and most distinguished advocates was Huxley. In general it seems to have been conceded that with so much and so varied evidence there could be little doubt that some sort of connection must have existed. The northern origin of many and very important groups, however, covdd scarcely be denied and the general theory of mammalian dispersal was thus a bipolar theory. Nevertheless the Argentine paleontologist Ameghino went so far as to regard South America as the original home and center of dispersal of practically all the larger groups of mammals. In contradistinction to these views and in reversal of his own previ- ous acquiescence to belief in Antarctica, Matthew (1915) has presented a powerful argimient for the dispersal of mammalian life exclusively from Holarctic centers.^ His conclusions are based upon a broad and comprehensive survey of geological and biological data and the similari- ties between certain southern faunas are regarded as exceptions to the general rule to be explained either by the imperfection of the paleonto- logical record, by natural raft transportation, or by convergent evolution. The case of Ccenolestes is mentioned by Matthew and treated as one. of convergence, the views of Broom and Dederer as to its polyprotodont affinities being accepted. A similar view of CcBnolestes and its allies has been taken by Gregory. The present study does not favor a great degree of convergence, but it tends to substantiate the opinion that an Antarctic land connection is not required to explain the presence of CcBnolestes in South America. The many resemblances which Ccenolestes shows to the Australian ^The north polar theory had been presented also by Haacke in 1887 and by Haseman in 19 12. 148 Field Museum op Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. peramelids would be diffioilt to interpret from the distributional stand- point were it not for the occurrence in the Eocene of North America of Myrmecoboides , the imperfect remains of which are so suggestive of peramelid relationship. This form seems to show that diJfferentiation along diprotodont lines was well advanced in North America during the basal Eocene at an earlier period than the appearance of any of the South American caenolestids, all of which are of Miocene age. Since all modem peramelids are Australian while Ccsnolestes and Myrmecoboides are American, the simplest explanation of their distribution is found in a common northern origin subsequent to the generalized polyprotodont stage; in other words, it may be assumed that the main lines of diver- gence between polyprotodonts and diprotodonts were laid down in the northern hemisphere. In this case the supposed convergence or parallel- ism exhibited by Caenolestes may be merely of a superficial nature, all its fundamental characters having been derived directly from its northern ancestor. The absence of fossil marsupials from Asia leaves us without direct evidence of the history of the group in that region, but a wide distribu- tion of the early Tertiary fauna throughout the Holarctic region is generally admitted. Hence it may be assumed that if a division of the marsupial stem had taken place in the early Tertiary of North America the same division or one arising in a similar manner may have extended to Eurasia and thence to Australia. The lack of ancient fossil types from Australia is almost as complete as that from Asia. Still it is important to note that Wynyardia, from the Upper Eocene or at latest Oligocene, is the oldest known Australian form and has many diprotodont char- acters. Moreover, the diprotodonts exhibit various primitive features, in some respects (e. g. auditory ossicles) being more primitive than the didelphids. They reached a very high degree of specialization in the Reistocefie of Australia when such forms as Diprotodon and Thylacoleo were abimdant. At the present time the group is decidedly the dominant one in Australia. The time of the introduction of marsupials into Australia has been variously estimated from the Jurassic to the Eocene, recent authors being inclined to the later period. Benslcy concludes that it is "unlikely that the marsupial radiation could have begun until well on into the middle of the Tertiary period." Elsewhere (1903, p. 86) he speaks of the possibility "that the ancestors of the Australian fauna passed the incipient phases of their evolution in another country, such as Asia or even South America." The same idea is expressed by Matthew (1915, p. 267) as follows: May, 1921. American Marsupial, C^nolestes — Osgood. 149 "There is nothing unlikely in the view that they (Diprotodonta) originated primarily in the North like their polyprotodont and allo- therian relatives and were driven southward with the former group and somewhat more thoroughly extingviished in the north, while in Aus- tralia they blossomed out into a great adaptive expansion paralleling the absent ungulate mammals." Therefore, the conclusion that the South American and Australian marsupials had a common Holarctic origin is in accord with the conten- tions of Matthew as to the origin of mammalian life in general. In fact the case of Caenolestes might be regarded as exemplifying the manner in which he has assumed that forms with irregular distribution are to be explained. Thus it is not only a case in which some convergent develop- ment may have occurred, but also one in which a slight addition to the fossil record (i. e. Myrmecoboides) is of great importance. The evidence in this case may be divided as follows: 1. The many primitive features of Ccenolesies indicating the possible development of diprotodont characters very early in the history of the order Marsupialia. 2. The existence of very primitive characters among Australian diprotodonts (see Gregory, 1910, p. 227). 3. The large nimiber of minor resemblances between CcBtiolesies and the. peramelids. 4. The probable affinity of Myrmecoboides to the modem peramelids. 5. The correspondence of Myrmecoboides with the hypothetical ancestor of diprotodonts, that is, the " properamelid " of Bensley. 6. The diprotodont characters shown by the earliest known Australian fossil, Wynyardia. 7. The lack of any special affinity between the caenolestids and the didelphids. 8. The probability of a more ancient origin for various mar- supial groups than has been supposed (see Gidley, 1915, p. 400). 9. The fact that the Miocene caenolestids were specialized to a high degree and coeval with polyprotodont types which differed from them in essentially the same characters as those which separate modem diprotodonts and polyprotodonts. 10. The presimiption of a northern origin of all mammalian groups as indicated by Matthew. 150 Field Museum of Natural History — ZoSlogy, Vol. XIV. GENERAL SUMMARY. The most significant resvdts of the foregoing study may be sum- marized as follows: 1. CcBfwlesies is a surviving member oj an ancient group and retains many primitive characters. Among these may be mentioned: (a) small size and insec- tivorous habits; (b) in the brain — the very large olfactory bulbs and tubercles and the small simple cerebellum; (c) in the myology — the agreement in certain respects with edentates and insec- tivores, as in the divided trapezius, the dorso-cuticularis , the reduced sartorius, the sesamoid origin of the supinator and the absence of the pronator quadratus; (d) in the reproductive system — the possession of a median vagina of similar primitive type to that of Perameles; (e) in the alimentary canal — the short colon; (f ) in the skeleton — the movable cervical rib and the short pubic symphysis; (g) in the skull — the smooth braincase, large olfactory fossa, proximally expanded nasals, broad frontals, small paroc- cipital processes, annular tympanic, large persistent mastoid foramen, and columelliform stapes; (h) in the dentition — the large upper incisor formula only exceeded by certain peramelids and didelphids, the large nimiber of lower antemolar teeth, the premolariform canines. 2. It has numerous resemblances to modern peramelids. These are not of equal importance, but collectively seem significant of affinity. Among them are the following: (a) in external characters — first and fifth toes of forefeet reduced and having nails instead of claws, ear with double antihelical folds, limbs cursorial, tail not prehensile; (b) in the brain — general primitive structure; (c) in the myology* — general cursorial adaptations; (d) in the skeleton — movable cervical rib, imper- forate atlas, short spine of first thoracic vertebra, ossified patella; (e) in the skull — elongate rostrum, short palatine processes of prcmaxillae, concave basioccipital, nearly perpendicular maxillo- premaxillary suture, long fronto-maxillary union, absence of postorbital processes, lateral exposure of mastoid, small paroc- cipital and mastoid processes, lacrymal canal with single opening, postzygomatic foramen lacking, stapes columelliform; (f) in the dentition — large incisor formula, quadrate molars with hypocone, proclivous lower incisors, compressed lateral upper incisors, * Adequate coropariaon of the myology of Ccmolesles and Perameles has not been made. May, 1921. American Marsupial, Cjsnolestes — Osgood. 151 premolaxiform canines, specialized posterior premolar; (g) in the urinogenital system — presence of round ligament, median vaginae indicating parturition by direct median passage; (h) in the alimentary canal — small caecimi. 3. It has few non-marsupial characters and no great degree of specialization. The important characters not shared with at least some other marsupials are: (a) the preorbital vacuity found elsewhere only among ungulates; (b) the large persistent mastoid foramen; (c) the large carotid canal; (d) the very short pubic symphysis; (e) the extended articular surface of the trochlea of the humerus; (f) the sesamoid in the supinator tendon. The cardiac gland of the stomach has a counterpart in Phas- colarctos and Phascolomys; otherwise it is unique among mar- supials. 4. It has no especial affinity to the American Didelphiidae. Except for a few relatively unimportant myological char- acters concerning which data are not available for many Australian forms, CcBnolestes shows practically no exclusive resemblances to the didelphids. On the other hand it differs from them in numer- ous characters including nearly all the above-mentioned resem- blances to the Peramelidae. 5. The ancestor of the ccenolestids was probably a northern form which had already separated from the generalized polyprotodont stock. This conclusion is based chiefly upon the probable affinity of Ccenolestes to modem peramelids and of both to the Eocene Myrmecohoides which partially fulfils the hypothetical require- ments of the ancestral diprotodont. Many considerations favor this assumption. 6. The North American ancestor of the coenolestids possibly extended throughout Holarctica and therefore may also have given rise to the Australian diprotodonts. This assumes that the main lines of divergence between dipro- todonts and polyprotodonts were established in the north prior to the Australian and South American radiations. Hence an Antarc- tic land connection is not necessary to explain the resemblances between American and Australian marsupials. 7. The phylogenetic and morphological relations of Ccenolestes are best expressed by classifying it in the subordfr Diprotodontia, family Palceothentidae, subfamily Coenolestinae. 152 Field Museum of Natural History — ZoClogy, Vol. XIV. This does not emphasize its supposed phylogenetic relationship to the peramelids, but recognizes its advance beyond them to greater morphological similarity to the specialized diprotodonts. On the basis of present findings, the only logical alternative would be to remove peramelids from the Polyprotodontia and unite them with the caeno- lestids in a group co-ordinate with (i) the Australian Diprotodontia and (2) the remaining Polyprotodontia. This, however, could not be done consistently without further division, especially of polyprotodonts, which does not seem advisable in the present state of knowledge. LITERATURE CITED. Allen, J. A. 1901. A Preliminary Study of the North American Opossums of the Genus Didelphis. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., XIV, pp. 149-188, June 15, 1901. Alston, E. R. 1880. Biologia Centrali- Americana, Mammalia. 1 879-1 882. 1880. On Aniechinomys and its Allies. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., pp. 454-461, 1880. AllEGHINO, FlORENTINO. 1897. MammifSres cr&tac^s de I'Argentine. DeuxiSme contribution h la connaissance de la faune mammalogique des couches h Pyrotherium. Bol. Inst. Geog. Argent., XVIII, pp. 1-117, 1897. 1899. On the Primitive Type of Plexodont Molars of Mammals. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., pp. 555-571. 1899. 1903. Los Diprotodontes del Orden de los Plagiaulacoideos. Anales del Museo Nac. Buenos Aires, ser. 3, vol. II, pp. 81-192, July, 1903. Bardeleben, Karl von. 1894. On the Bones and Muscles of the Mammalian Hand and Foot. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., pp. 354-376, 1894. Bateson, William. 1894. Materials for the Study of Variation. Pp. 1-598. Beddard, F. E. 1902. Mammalia. Camb. Nat. Hist. Pp. 1-590. London, 1902. 1895. The Visceral Anatomy and Brain of Dendrolagus bennetti. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., pp. 131-137, figs. 1-6, 1895. 1908. On the Anatomy of Aniechinomys and Some Other Marsupials with Special Reference to the Intestinal Tract, etc. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., p. 561, 1908. Bensley, B. Arthur. 1903. On the Evolution of the Australian Marsupialia; with Remarks on the Relationships of the Marsupials in General. Trans. Linn. Soc. London (2), IX, pp. 83-217, 3 pis., 6 figs., 1903. 1906. The Homologies of the Stylar Cusps of the Upper Molars of the Didel- phyidae. University of Toronto Biological Series, No. 5, pp. 149-159, 1906. Broom, R. 1911. On the Affinities of Canoleites. Proc. Linn. Soc. N. S. W., XXXVI, p. 3»5. 1911- May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESTES — Osgood. 153 CouES, Elliott. 1872. The Osteology and Myology of Didelphys virginiana. Mem. Bost. Sec. Nat. Hist., II, pp. 41-154. figs. 1-35, 1872. Cunningham, D. J. 1882. Report on Some Points in the Anatomy of the Thylacine {Thylacinus cynocephalus), Cuscus {Phalangista maculata), and Phascogale {PhascogaU calura), collected during the Voyage of H. M. S. Challenger in the years 1873- 1876; with an account of the Comparative Anatomy of the Intrinsic Muscles and Nerves of the Mammalian Pes. Voy. H. M. S. Challenger, Zool., V, pt. XVI, pp. 1-192, pis. I-XIII, 1882. Dederer, Paltline H, 1909. Comparison of Canolestes with Polyprotodonta and Diprotodonta. Amer. Nat., XLIII, pp. 614-618, figs. 1-2, Oct., 1909. DORAN, A. H. G. 1879. Morphology of the Mammalian Ossicula auditus. Trans. Linn. See. Lond., (2), I, Zool., pp. 371-497. pis. 58-64. 1879- Gidley, James Williams. 1906. Evidence Bearing on Tooth-Cusp Development. Proc. Wash. Acad. Sci., VIII, pp. 91-110, July 10, 1906. 1909. Notes on the Fossil Mammalian Genus PtUodus with Descriptions of New Species. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., XXXVI. pp. 611-626, 1 pi., 9 figs., 1909. 1915. An Extinct Marsupial from the Fort Union with Notes on the Myr- mecobidae and other Families of this Group. I*roc U. S. Nat. Mus., XLVIII, PP- 395-402, pi. 23, Jan. 28, 1 91 5. Gregory, William K. 1 9 10. The Orders of Mammals. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., XXVII, pp. l- 524, Feb., 1910. 1 9 16. Studies on the Evolution of Primates. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., XXXV, pp. 239-355, June 16, 1916. 1920. Studies in Comparative Myology and Osteology; No. IV. A Review of the Evolution of the Lacrymal Bone of Vertebrates with Special Reference to that of Mammals. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., XLII, pp. 95-263, Dec. 4, 1920. Haacke, W. 1887. Der Nordpol als Schopfungscentrum der Landfauna. Biol. Centralblatt, VI, pp. 363-370, 1887. Haseman, J. D. 19 1 2. Some Factors of Geographical Distribution in South America. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sd., XXII, pp. 9-1 12, May 31, 1912. Hedley, C. 1895. Considerations on the Surviving Refugees in Austral Lands of Ancient Antarctic Life. Jour. & Proc. Roy. Soc N. S. W., XXIX, pp. 278-286, 1895. Hill, James P. 1899. Contributions to the Morphology and Development of the Female Urogenital Oi^ans in the Marsupialia, I. On the Female Urogenital Organs of Perameles, with an Account of the Phenomena of Parturition. Proc. Linn. Soc. N. S. W., XXIV, pp. 42-82, 12 pi., 3 figs., 1899. 1900. Contributions to the Morphology and Development of the Female Urogenital Organs in the Marsupialia. II. On the Female Urogenital Organs of Myrmecohius fasciatus. Proc. Linn. Soc. N. S. W., XXV, pp. 519-532, pis. XVII-XIX, 1900. 154 Field Museum of Natural History — ZoOlogy, Vol. XIV. Huxley, T. H. 1880. On the Application of the Laws of Evolution to the Arrangement of the Vertebrata, and More Particularly of the Mammalia. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., pp. 649-661, 1880. Jentink, F. a. 1885. A Monograph of the Genus Cuscus. Notes Leyden Mus., VII, pp. 87-119. Johnstone, James. 1898. The Thymus in the Marsupials. Jour. Linn. Soc. Lond., XXVI, pp. 537-557. 3 pl-. 2 figs., 1898. 1899. On the Gastric Glands of the Marsupialia. Jour. Linn. Soc. Lond., Zool., XXVII, pp. 1-I4, I pl., I fig., 1899. 190 1. The Neck Glands of the Marsupialia. Trans. Liverpool Biol. Soc, XV, PP- 354-362, 3 figs., 1 90 1. Leche, W. 1874-1900. Bronn's Klassen u. Ordn. Thierreichs, Bd. VI, Abth. V, Mammalia, Bd. I., Leipzig, 1874-1900. Lydekker, Richard. 1894. A Hand-Book to the. Marsupialia and Monotremata. Allen's Nat. Lib., London, 1894. 1899. The Dental Formula of the Marsupial and Placental Camivora. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., pp. 922-928, pl. LXII, 1899. Macalister, Alexander. 1870. On the Myology of the Wombat {Phascolomys wombata) and the Tas- manian Devil (Sarcophilus ursinus). Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist., (4), V, pp. 153- 173, March, 1870. 1872. Further Observations on the Myology of Sarcophilus ursinus. Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist., (4), X, pp. 17-20, July, 1872. 1872. The Muscular Anatomy of the Koala {Phascolarctos cinereus). Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist., (4), X, pp. 127-134, Aug., 1872. Matthew, W. D. 19 1 5. Climate and Evolution. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci., XXIV, pp. 17 1-3 18, Feb. 18, 1915. Metcalf, M. M. 1920. Upon an Important Method of Studying Problems of Relationship and of Geographical Distribution. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., VI, pp. 432-433, 1920. Mitchell, P. Chalmers. 1905. On the Intestinal Tract of Mammals. Trans. Zool. Soc. Lond., XVII, Pt. V, pp. 437-535. 1905- OSTMANN, A. E. 1902. Tertiary Invertebrates. Repts. Princeton Univ. Exped. to Patagonia, IV, Paleon., pp. 45-332, pis. XI-XXXIV, April 19, 1902. OsBORN, Henry Fairfield. 1907. Evolution of Mammalian Molar Teeth. Pp. 1-250. New York, 1907. 1910. The Age of Mammals in Europe, Asia and North America. Pp. XVIII— 635. New York, October, 1910. Osgood, Wilfred H. 191a. Mammals from Western Venezuela and Eastern Colombia. Field Mus. Nat. Hist., Zool., X, pp. 33-66, Jan. 10, 1913. May, 1921. American Marsupial, CiENOLESTES — Osgood. 155 Parsons, F. G. 1896. On the Anatomy of Pelrogale xanthopus, Compared with that of Other Kangaroos. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1896, pt. 3, pp. 683-714, 10 figs., 1896. 1898. The Muscles of Mammals with Special Relation to Human Myology. Joum. Anat. & Phys., XXXII, pp. 428-450, 721-752, 1898. 1898. The Limb Myology of Gymnura rafflesii. Joum. Anat. & Phys., XXXII, pp. 312-324, 1898. 1903. On the Anatomy of the Pig-footed Bandicoot (Charopus castanotis). Joum. Linn. Soc. Lond., Zool., XXIX, pp. 64-80, 10 figs., 1903. POULTON, E. B. 1883. On the Tongues of the Marsupialia. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lend., pp. 599-628, pis. LIV-LV, 1883. RuGE, Georg. 1878. Untersuchung uber die Extensorengmppe am Unterschenkel und Pusse der Saugethiere. Morph. Jahrb., IV, pp. 592-643. pls. XXXII-XXXV, 1878. 1878. Zur vergleichenden Anatomie der tiefen Muskeln in der Fusssohle. Morph. Jahrb., IV, pp. 644-659, pis. XXXIV-XXXV, 1878. Scott, W. B. 1913. A History of Land Mammals in the Western Hemisphere. Pp. 1-693. SiDEBOTHAM, E. J. 1885. On the Myology of the Water-Opossimi. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., pp. 6-22, 1885. Sinclair, W. J. 1905. The Marsupial Fauna of the Santa Cruz Beds. Proc. Amer. Philos, Soc., XLIV, pp. 73-81, 2 pis., 1905. 1906. Mammalia of the Santa Cruz Beds. Marsupialia. Repts. Princeton Univ. Expeds. to Patagonia, IV, Paleon., I, pp. 333-460, Sept. 14, 1906. Spencer, Baldwin. 1900. A Description of Wynyardia bassiana, a Fossil Marsupial from the Tertiary Beds of Table Cape, Tasmania. Proc. ZooL Soc Lond., pp. 776-794, pis. XLIX-L, 1900. Stirling, E. C. 1 89 1. Description of a New Genus and Species of Marsupialia, Notoryctes typhlops. Trans. Roy. Soc. South Aust., XIV, pp. 154-187, pis. II-IX, 1891. Stone, Wither. 1914. On a Collection of Mammals from Ecuador. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., pp. 17-19, Mch. 31, 1914. Sweet, Georgiana. 1904. Contributions to our Knowledge of the Anatomy of Notoryctes typhlops Stirling. Parts I and II. Proc. Roy. Soc. Victoria, N. S., XVII, pp. 76-1 1 1, 4 pis., 1904. 1907. The Skin, Hair, and Reproductive Organs of Notoryctes. Contributions to our Knowledge of the Anatomy of Notoryctes typhlops StirUng. Parts IV-V. Quart. Jour. Micr. Sc., LI, pp. 325-344, 2 pis. I fig., 1907. Symington, Johnson. 1898. The Thymus Gland in the Marsupialia. Jour. Anat. & Phys., XXXII, N. S. XII, pp. 278-291, figs. 1-4, 1898. Thomas, Oldfield. 1887. On the Homologies and Succession of the Teeth in the Dasyuridae. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond., CLXXVIII, B, pp. 443-462, pis. 27-28, 1887. 156 Field Museum of Natural History — ZoOlogy, Vol. XIV. 1888. Catalogue of Marsupialia and Monotremata in the British Museum. Pp. 1-401, pis. I-XXVIII, 1888. 1895a. Descriptions of Four Small Mammals from South America, Including One Belonging to the Peculiar Marsupial Genus " Hyracodon" Tomes. Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist., (6), XVI, pp. 367-370, Nov., 1895. 1895b. On CcBTiolestes, a Still Existing Survivor of the Epanorthidae of Ame- ghino. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., p. 870, 1895. 1896. On Coenolestes n. g. of Marsupials. (Abstr.) Zool. Anz., XIX, no. 493, p. 31, 1896. 1917. Preliminary Diagnoses of New Mammals Obtained by the Yale-National Geographic Society Peruvian Expedition. Smiths. Misc. Coll., LXVIII, p. 3, Apr. 10, 1917. 1920. Report on the Mammalia Collected by Mr. Edmund Heller during the Peruvian Expedition of 1915 under the Auspices of Yale University and the National Geographic Society. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., LVIII, pp. 217- 249, pis. 14-15, 1920. Thompson, Peter, and Hillier, W. T. 1905. The Myology of the Hind Limb of the Marsupial Mole (Notoryctes typhlops). Jour. Anat. & Phys., XXXIX, pp. 308-331, pis. XXXVIII-XXXIX. Tims, H. W. M. 1903. Evolution of the Teeth in the Mammalia. Jour. Anat. & Phys., XXXVII, pp. 132-140, 1903. Tomes, R. F. i860. Notes on a Second Collection of Mammalia Made by Mr. Fraser in the Republic of Ecuador. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., p. 213, i860. 1863. Notice of a New American Form of Marsupial. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., PP- 50-51. pl- VIII (col.), 1863. Trouessart, E. L. 1898. Catalogus Mammalium, V, p. 1205, 1898. Waterhouse, G. R. 1846. Natural History of the Mammalia, Vol. I., Marsupiata, 1846. Weber, Max. 1904. Die S4ugethiere. Pp. 1-866. Jena, 1904. Wilson, J. T. 1894. On the Myology of Notoryctes typhlops, with Comparative Notes. Trans. Roy. Soc. South Aust., XVIII, pp. 3-74, pis. II-XV, 1894. Wilson, J. T., and Hill, J. P. 1897. Observations upon the Development and Succession of the Teeth in Perameles; Together with a Contribution to the Discussion of the Homologies of the Teeth in Marsupial Animals. Quart. Jour. Micr. Sci., XXXIX, N. S., pp. 427-588, pis. 25-32, 1897. WiNDLE, Bertram C. A., and Parsons, F. G. 1898. On the Anatomy of Macropus rufus. Jour. Anat. & Phys., XXXII, N. S., XII, pp. 11^134. »«98- WiNGB, Hbrlcf. 1883. Om Pattcdyrenes Tandskifte, isaer mod Hensyn til Tajndcmcs Former. Vid. Medd. f. d. Naturh. Foren., Kj6benhavn, pp. 15-67, 1882. Woodward, M. F. 1893. On the Development of the Teeth in the Macropodidac. Proc. Zool. Soc. Load., pp. 450-473. 1893. 1896. On the Teeth of Certain Insectivora. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., pp. 557-594* May, 1921. Brain of CiENOLESTES — Herrick 157 THE BRAIN OF C^NOLESTES OBSCURUS. By C. Judson Herrick. Plates XXI-XXII. These notes are based on a single female specimen which had been preserved in formalin and later transferred to alcohol. Since the cranial cavity had not been opened before the specimen was put into the harden- ing fluid, the preservation of the brain is not as perfect as might be desired. In particular, the swelling of the brain tissue produced by the formalin has caused considerable compression of the brain within the endocranial cavity, thus possibly exaggerating somewhat the superficial relief, so far as this conforms to the sculpturing of the endocranial cavity, and obscuring some other features. The brain was very skillfully removed from the skull of the alcoholic specimen in the Anatomical Laboratory of the University of Chicago by Dr. G. W. Bartlemez and drawn under the Zeiss stereo-binocular microscope by Mr. A. B. Streedain. Since it seemed desirable to pre- serve the brain intact in the hope of a later opportunity to prepare it for microscopic examination, this report must of necessity be limited to the superficial anatomy. Measurements. — The dimensions as measured on the alcoholic specimen are as follows: — Total length, tip of olfactory bulb to first spinal nerve 14. i mm. Length, tip of olfactory bulb to rostral end of cerebral hem- isphere 2.6 mm. Length of cerebral hemisphere 1 0.0 mm. Length of cerebellum on longitudinal axis of brain in me- dian plane 3.0 mm. Greatest width of both olfactory bulbs 7.6 mm. Greatest width of both cerebral hemispheres . . 1 1 . 8 mm. Total width of cerebellum and fiocculi 1 1 . o mm. Width of cerebellum exclusive of fiocculi 8.8 mm. For our most precise knowledge of the brains of lower mammals we are indebted to the researches of Elliot Smith. Throughout this account we shall make frequent references to his papers and base our interpretations to a large extent upon them. His papers cited in the appended bibliography give references to the other relevant literature. The general form of the brain of this little marsupial is evident from the figures. It is apparent that we have here before us one of the simplest types of mammalian brain hitherto described. The brain is strongly macrosmatic, as shown by the enormous size of the olfactory bulbs and secondary olfactory area. 158 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. The olfactory buWs are closely appressed to each other in the me- dian plane, convex above and concave below. They are very slightly overlapped dorsally by the cerebral hemispheres. From the widely flaring lateral borders of the bulb the lateral olfactory tract passes spinal- ward and ventralward along the lateral border of the very large tuber- culum olfactorium. The cerebral hemispheres extend backward quite to the cerebellum, these two structures being in intimate contact for the entire width of the body of the cerebellum. There is a very slight divergence of the posterior borders of the hemispheres from the median plane, which is somewhat exaggerated in Figure i (PI. XXI), so that even if the meninges were entirely removed from the median longitudinal fissure (as has not been done), but little if any of the mesencephalon would be visible from the dorsal surface. This is in contrast to the usual marsupial arrangement, for the corpora quadrigemina are in most cases well exposed dorsally. (JPeiaurus is another exception; see Elliot Smith, '95, p. 168.) Superficially the cerebral hemisphere, exclusive of the olfactory bulb, exhibits three chief regions: — (i) the dorsal convexity; (2) the lateral convexity, or pyriform lobe; (3) the ventral convexity, or tuberculum olfactorium. The dorsal convexity of the hemisphere is purely neopallial ; that is, it is non-olfactory cortex. About one-fifth of the distance backward from the frontal to the posterior pole of the hemisphere there is a distinct, though shallow, transverse sulcus which probably represents the sulcus orbitalis of Elliot Smith's descriptions. Otherwise the dorsal convexity is smooth. The dorsal convexity is bounded laterally by an imperfectly devel- oped fissura rhinalis. This begins anteriorly as a sharp sulcus in the transverse fissure between the olfactory bulb and the cerebral hemisphere at the dorso-lateral angle of the tuberculum olfactorium (PI. XXI, fig. 2) and extends backward. On the lateral aspect of the hemisphere it is obscurely confluent with the orbital sulcus, and behind this level it disappears in a depressed area on the lateral wall of the hemisphere. Two-thirds of the distance back from the anterior to the posterior pole of the hemisphere this depressed area is slightly deepened, thus marking more precisely the location of the fissura rhinalis in this region; and at the posterior end of the hemisphere there is a wide, shallow notch which marks the posterior end of this fissure (PI. XXI, figs, i and 2). The pyriform lobe (lobus piriformis) comprises the larger part of the lateral and ventral aspects of the hemisphere. As we have seen above, it is very imperfectly separated from the dorsal neoijallial cortex, though the location of this boundary, the fissura rhinalis, is evident. May, 1921. Brain of Cenolestes — Herrick 159 Antero-ventrally it is separated from the tuberculum olfactorium by a very sharp fissura endorhinalis. The ventral surface of the p>Tiform lobe shows two shallow depressions separated by an elevated ridge run- ning obliquely backward and lateralward from the posterior margin of the tuberculum olfactorium. Further information regarding the internal structure is desirable before the signification of this sculpturing is ex- plained. It may be due merely to the conformation of the brain to the wall of the craniimi. The tuberculimi olfactorium is very large and strongly convex ventrally. The medial borders of the two tubercula are divaricated posteriorly, exposing a portion of the anterior perforated space in front of the optic chiasma which probably includes the diagonal band of Broca (PI. XXII). The lateral olfactory tract arises from the ventrolateral border of the olfactory bulb and can readily be seen as a clear white stripe accom- panying the fissura endorhinalis. This band of fibers lies distinctly on the ventromedial side of the fissura, that is, within the tuberculum olfactorivim, though we may infer by analogy with other mammals that many of the fibers are distributed within the pyriform lobe on the other side of the fissure. Microscopic examination will probably show that a portion of the tract lies in the floor and walls of the fiss\ire. The tuberculum olfactoriimi in mammals generally is a basal, that is, subcortical, reflex center, receiving olfactory fibers of the second order from the olfactory bulb. The pyriform lobe, on the other hand, is a structure of transitional type. So far as it and the tmderlying amygdala receive secondary olfactory fibers from the lateral olfactory tract it should be considered as a part of the basal secondary olfactory area (nucleus olfactorius lateralis). So far as its differentiated cortex is in physiological connection with this secondary olfactory area it should be regarded as archipallial in type, i. e., olfactory cortex of the same type as the hippocampal cortex. So far as its cortex is in physiological con- nection with the non-olfactory thalamic projection fibers it is neopallial, i. e., of the same type as the dorsal cortex. The surface characteristics suggest that in Ccmolestes these three components of the pyriform lobe are very incompletely differentiated, thus resembling the still more generalized reptilian condition (cf. EUiot Smith, '10, and Crosby, '17). In higher mammals, on the other hand, these components of the pyriform lobe attain much more distinct spatial localization in the gyrus hippo- campi formation, though even in the hirnian brain we find the same transitional type of structure in the vmcus region. The cerebellum. — The cerebellimi is smaller and simpler than in any hitherto described mammals with the exception of Notoryctes and i6o Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. Perameles, though the elephant-shrew, Macroscelides, has a cerebellum but little more complex than that of Perameles (Elliot Smith, '02b). The cerebellum is composed of a simply organized transverse body and the two lateral floccular lobes. (In the preparation of the brain the left flocculus was destroyed. In the figures it has been restored after the one on the opposite side.) Each flocculus is mushroom-shaped with a slender pedicle and a widely expanded cap or pileus, whose surface is somewhat lacerated but apparently was smooth or nearly so. The body of the cerebellum, so far as it is visible from the surface, is a transverse bar with two shorter convolutions under its posterior border. The main bar consists of a plump median lobe and two lateral lobes, each of which is somewhat less than half the length in the transverse plane of the medial lobe. The median lobe and the two smaller posterior convolutions apparently correspond with the vermicular portion of higher cerebella and the lateral lobes with the hemispheres. Since only a part of the cerebellum is visible in the undissected specimen, it is impossible to deterrriine with certainty the homologies of the exposed structures. But comparison with the very similar cerebella of Notoryctes and Perameles as described and figured by Elliot Smith ('03a and '03b) suggests that in CcBnolestes the lobus anterior and fissura prima are entirely concealed in the transverse fissure between the cerebellum and the cerebral hemispheres, the transverse bar is the lobus medius, the fissure limiting it posteriorly is the fissura secunda, the first of the two shorter convolutions is the uvula, the fissure behind the latter is the fissure postnodularis, and the posterior one of the shorter convolutions is the nodulus, these names being used as defined by Elliot Smith ('03a). The brain stem. — On the ventral surface (PI. XXII) the optic nerves are seen to be very slender. Behind the optic chiasma is a rather wide tuber cineretim whose surface is somewhat obscured by meninges which in view of the poor state of preservation of the specimen it seemed inexpedient to attempt to remove. The pituitary body is mushroom- shaped and elevated on a very short infundibular stalk. On account of the flexure of the brain in the isthmus region the cerebral peduncles are entirely concealed. Stumps of the third and fourth cranial nerves are seen in the usual relations. The medulla oblongata under the cerebellum is very wide. The sculpturing of the ventral surface is obscured by pressure against the floor of the cranial cavity and posteriorly by a blood clot in the meninges. Nevertheless the roots of all of the cranial nerves were identified. The trigeminus is large, arising from the posterior border of the pons, which is very slender. The abducens is very minute and is recognized (with May, 1921. Brain of C^nolestes — Hesrick 161 some uncertainty) at the posterior border of the pons. Immediately below the pons is a broad, flat, transverse band which is probably the trapezoid body and at whose lateral ends are the sttimps of the VIII nerves. The facialis root arises from the infero-lateral surface of the trapezoid body; the IX, X and XI nerves arise from the lateral surface of the medulla oblongata; and medially of these are the XII roots. The pyramidal tracts are visible as light colored bands near the mid-ventral line extending downward from the posterior surface of the pons. At the level of the first spinal roots there is a strong cervical flexure. General considerations. — Comparing the brain as a whole with those of other mammals, it is seen to resemble most closely those of Notoryctes and Perameles. In all three cases the rhinencephalon is enormously developed, the olfactory bulbs and tubercles being very large. The cerebral cortex is nearly smooth and apparently relative to the total size of the brain less extensive than in any other mammals hitherto described. ElUot Smith's figures of Notoryctes ('95) indicate that in this genus the cerebral hemispheres are relatively smaller than in Ccenolestes; his figure of the ventral surface of Perameles (*o2, p. 171, fig. 52) suggests that here the hemisphere is relatively as large as in Ccmolesies or larger. In absolute dimensions the brain of Notoryctes is about the same size as that of Ccenolestes, while that of Perameles is more than three times as long. The simplicity of these brains cannot, therefore, be correlated directly with the size of the animals. In fact, our figure of the ventral view of the brain of Ccenolesies resembles more closely Elliot Smith's figure of the ventral surface of the larger Perameles than oi the Notoryctes of equal size. Both Notoryctes and Perameles belong to the Polyprotodontia. The larger members of the Diprotodontia, such as the kangaroos, have larger and more highly convoluted brains than any of the Polyprotodontia. The brain of Ccenolestes is more simply organized than that of any Australian diprotodont. LITERATURE. Crosby, Elizabeth Caroline. 1917. The Forebrain of Alligator mississippiensis. Jour. Comp. Neur., Vol. 27, pp. 325-402. Smith, G. Elliot. 1894. A Preliminary Communication upon the Cerebral Com- missures of the Mammalia, with special Reference to the Monotremata and Marsupialia. Proc. Linnean Soc. New South Wales, Series 2, Vol. 9, pp. 635-657. 1895. The Comparative Anatomy of the Cerebrum of Notoryctes typhlops. Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, 1895, pp. 167-193. 1 899. Further Observations on the Anatomy of the Brain in the Monotremata. Jour. Anat. and Physiol., Vol. 33, pp. 309-342. i62 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. 1899a. The Brain in the Edent3+^. Trans. Linnean Soc. London, Series 2, Zoology, Vol. 7, Part 7, pp C/7-394. 1902. Descriptivp ^iid Illustrated Catalogue of the Physiological Series of Comparative Anatomy contained in the Museum of the Royal College of Sur- geons of England, 2 Ed., Vol. 2. 1902a. On a Peculiarity of the Cerebral Commissures in Certain Marsupialia, not hitherto Recognized as a Distinctive Feature of the Diprotodontia. Proc. Roy. Soc. London, Vol. 70, pp. 226-231. 1902b. Notes on the Brain of Macroscelides and other Insectivora. Jour. Linnean Soc. London, Zoology, Vol. 28, pp. 443-448. 1902c. The Primary Subdivision of the Mammalian Cerebellum. Jour. Anat. and Physiol., Vol. 36, pp. 381-385. 1903. Notes on the Morphology of the Cerebellum. Jour. Anat. and Physiol., Vol. 37, pp. 329-332. 1903a. Further Observations on the Natural Mode of Subdivision of the Mammalian Cerebellum. Anat. Anzeiger, Bd. 23, pp. 368-384. 1903b. On the Morphology of the Brain in the Mammalia, with special Reference to that of the Lemurs, Recent and Extinct. Trans. Linnean Soc. London, Series 2, Zoology, Vol. 8, Part 10, pp. 319-432. 19 10. The Arris and Gale Lectures on Some Problems Relating to the Evolu- tion of the Brain. The Lancet, Jan. i, 15, and 22, 1910. Plate II. External Characters. Three times natural size. Fig. I. Head. Fig. 2. Dorsal aspect of rhinarium. Fig. 3. Sole of hind foot. Fig. 4. Sole of fore foot. FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY. PLATE M. ZOOLOGY. External Characters. Three times natural size. < u to < 5 ?5 f1 w .. nj 03 :3 M o 3 C 3 S N n, < > o Pi a: ^ 6 U] O S 2 .!! o S" 'Sbl^ 'o .. e to O " J3 c c ; 3 c 3 .3 o o P 3 ^ s E vS ci « c w) o • - C XI 3 rt '^j rt whs ^ £ 5 > -I b' C 10 3 +j 4) c w Ui u m W (U (U t/3 £ £ 4-> 4-3 c s TS Ui to 1 ^ a o £ c 3 S 3 w o o o to 3 a •.-^ C CO O re a a '1 "^ ^ ■»* s *^ s iiii "vf PLATE V. Muscles of the Legs. Two and one-half times natural size. Fig. I . Left hind leg from outside. b.f., biceps femoris; C.C., cruro-coccygeus; c/., caudo-femoralis; ex., extensor-caudae; f.c, femoro-coccygeus; j.d.j., flexor digitorum fibularis; g., gastrocnemius; Fig. 2. Right a., anconeus; 6.a., brachialis anticus; h.h., biceps brachii; 6r., brachioradialis; d., clavicle; d.m., cleido-mastoideus; d.o., cleido-occipi talis; C.W., cutaneus maximus; i., deltoideus; ex.r., extensor carpi radialis brevis; et., epitrochlearis; /.c.r., flexor carpi radialis; /.c.«., flexor carpi ulnaris; S-d.p., flexor digitorum profundus; l.d,, latissimus dorsi; I.S., levator scapulae; 0., omohyoideus; g.m., gluteus maximus; p., peronei; r.f., rectus femoris; sm., semimembranosus; St., semitendinosus; t.a., tibialis anticus; v.e., vastus extemus. foreleg from inside. o.c.t.d., omo-cleido-transversarius dorsalis (atlanto-scapularis) ; o.c.t.v., omo-cleido-transversarius ventralis (atlanto-acromialis) ; p.l., palmaris longus; p.mi., pectoralis minor; p.mj., pectoralis major; p.t., pronator teres; sc, subclavius; s.nt., serratus magnus; ss., subscapularis; tr., trapezius; tx.l., triceps brachii, caput laterale; tx.lo., triceps, caput longum; tx.m., triceps, caput mediale; t.tn., teres major. FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY. PLATE V. ZOOLOGY. i I ' I CI. \ ^ p.t.\ f.d.p. p. I. \ it. t.c.lo fc.r. Jc.r. /.c'.u. Muscles of the Legs. Two and one-half times natural size. irafworia '^ Plate VI. Muscles of the Throat and Inner Side of Hind Leg. Three times natural size. Fig. I. Muscles of the throat. cl.m., cleido-mastoideus; cl.o., cleido-occipitalis; d., digastricus; gh., geniohyoideus; hg., hyoglossus; l.gl., lymphatic gland; o., omohjroideus; o.c.t.d., omo-cleido-transversarius dorsalis; o.c.t.v., omo-cleido-transversarius ventralis; sc, scalenus; st.h., sterno-hyoideus; st.m., sterno-mastoideus; sl.t,, sterno-thyroideus; t.gl., thyroid glands; t.h., thyro-hyoideus. Fig. 2. Inner side of hind leg showing innervation of sartorius muscle by saphenus nerve. a. I., adductor longus; a.m., adductor magnus; c.n., crural nerve; g., gastrocnemius; g.m., gluteus maximus; gr., gracilis; l.p., ligamentum poupartii; o.e., obliquus extemus; o.i., obliquus intemus; p., pectineus; ps.nt., psoas major; r.f., rectus femoris; sa., sartorius; sm., semimembranosus; s.n., saphenus nerve; St., semitendinosus; t.a., tibialis anticus; v.i., vastus intemus. Fig. 3. Same as Fig. 2 with sartorius muscle in situ. PLATE VI. ZOOLOGY. Muscles of throat and Inner Side of Thigh. Enlarged. ^ PLATE VII. Parts of Alimentary Canal. Two to three times natural size. Fig. I. Spleen (x2). Fig. 2. Ventral view of liver and adjoining organs. Anterior part of liver ele- vated and posterior lobes spread apart. Duodenum reverted and displaced to left cJ., , cystic duct; p.v. , portal vein; cJ. , caudate lobe of liver; r.c., , right central lobe of liver; d., , duodenum; r.l. , right lateral; d.ch., , ductus choledochus; r.v. , renal veins; g.b., , gall bladder; sp.ca. , caudal division of spighelian lobe; h.d., , hepatic duct; sp.cr., , cranial division of spighelian lobe; 1.1. , left lateral lobe of liver; St., , stomach; oe., , oesophagus; v.c, , vena cava. p.d. , pancreatic duct; Fig. 3. Caecum or vermiform appendix (x3). Figs. 4-5. Stomach (x2). e.g., cardiac gland; gl., glandular structure of stomach C.S., cardiac division of stomach, with after removal of outer coat; specialized glands; o«., oesophagus; d., duodeniun; oe.s., oesophageal division of stomach; p.s., pyloric division of stomach. FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY. PLATE VII, ZOOLOGY. V.g. Parts OF alimentary System. Enlarged. , J <*5 .i?' »- w 3 3 3 3 *- ^ 8 8 8 CIS w is ^ •S S § ^ O TO 11 .. bo o" c '-S "• • !r! i^ -^ « «^ n .- ^ -S i g| 613 0 IS 5 "o ^ ir S o 2 *:?" "3' d "^ w '' I- 2 t/l 4) Ih •^ *• o -^ E> 8 « •^ S "« a 8 » R :^ a CM «k. >8. s ix^^wtnq 'H inniLijJijin «ij, M 1 l:ji;(V|»f?»*i^ ..*.**• PLATE IX. Dissections of Male Organs. Enlarged. Fig. I. Dorsal view of parts surrounding bulbous urethra. Two Cowper's glands removed from left side (x3i/^). Fig. 2. Ventral view of bulb of corpus cavernosum and adjoining parts (x6). Fig. 3. Longitudinal section of urethra with adjoining parts (xs). b.u., bulbous urethra; b.w., body wall; C.C., corpus cavernosum; cent., muscular bulb of corpus cavernosum; C.S., corpus spongiosum; cs.m., muscular bulb of corpus spongiosum; gl., lymphatic gland; g.p., glans penis; »./., tendon attaching corpus cavernosum to ischium; /., median line; m^w^.w', small paired muscles at anterior end of bulbous urethra; p.p., penis pouch; pr., prepuce; p.t., tendon running to pubis; r., rectum; r.m., rectal muscle; r.p,, rectractor muscle of penis; sp.f., fascia to covering of bulb and to sphincter; /./., tendinous fascia connecting bulb and muscle in front of bulbous urethra; UM., anterior urethra. FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY O' ua. PLATE IX. ZOOLOGY. Dissections of Male Organs. Enlarged. sin»3Si Itei PLATE X. Parts of Reproductive, Alimentary, and Respiratory Systems. Enlarged. Fig. I. Dissection of base of bladder showing endings of ureters and vasa deferentia (xs). Fig. 2. Ventral aspect of lungs and trachea (x23^). Fig. 3. Lateral view of tongue (x3j/^). Fig. 4. Base of tongue from above (xio). Fig. 5. Transverse section of prostate gland (xs). oz., azygos lobe of lung; bl., bladder; c.p., coronate papillae; c.v.p., circumvallate papillae; ep., epiglottis; fg.p., fungiform papillae; /./., left lobe of lung; p.t., columnar tissue of prostate gland; rJ.a.. anterior division of right lobe of lung; rJ.p., posterior division of right lobe of lung; u.a., anterior urethra; v.d., vas deferens. FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY. PLATE X, ZOOLOGY. Parts of Reproductive, Alimentary, and Respiratory Systems. Enlarged. .(X 3TAJS ■J L UU-.I T'J 1 / II' irno) nt nobfi'riav gatwoda sifiubtvtbm ia^rj ; i.: \r.jr/T*-j .avootg « ol tiooubsi isns3 l£; Plate XI. Cervical Vertebrae. Five times natural size. Fig. I. Atlas, posterior aspect. Fig. 2. Atlas, anterior aspect. Fig. 3. Atlas, dorsal aspect. Figs. 4-6. Seventh cervical from different individuals showing variation in form and occurrence of vertebrarterial foramina. Fig. 7. Axis, left lateral aspect. a.z., anterior zygapophysis; h.t., hypapophysial tubercle; i.v., intervertebral notch; I.S., lamina of spinous process; n.f., nutrient foramen; o.p., odontoid process; p.p., pleurapophysis or cervical rib; p.z., postzygapophysis; tr., transverse process; V.C., vertebrarterial canal; vx.g., vertebrarterial canal reduced to a groove. FIELD MUSEUM OF NATJRAL HISTORY. PLATE XI. ZOOLOGY. ^^ h vx.g. ^K-# /-• r op. Cervical Vertebrae. Five times natural size. .■; |S. /Oioa^ ^lOAflOI; io eaxoS .3oo^i& idiuo ,iutaa\ io iicq aainiofta diiw aludd boe sidiJ .to'iq?;f2 Tot.'jo .?;-*n>.n/l3pjB boa edn bnoo3£ Im; :93bh iTumsHotaif JI3V«>5. rtt K .A .1 .\ .H y? PLATE XII. Bones of Sternum, Hind Leg, and Thoracic Region. Five times natural size. Fig. I. Right femur, posterior aspect. Fig. 2. Stemimi and attachment of ribs. Fig. 3. Right tibia and fibula with adjoining part of femur, outer aspect. Fig. 4. First and second ribs and attachments, outer aspect. Fig. 5. Clavicle. c' ., seventh cervical vertebra; /., fibula; }b., fabella; g.t., greater trochanter; h., head of femur; i.r., intertrochantenc ridge; l.l., lesser trochanter; tn., manubrium of sternum; p., osseous patella; r^, first rib; s., shaft of femur; /., tibia; /./., rudimentary third trochanter of femur; t^., first thoracic vertebra; /^., second thoracic vertebra; *., xiphistemum; X.C., xiphoid cartilage; 2-7., costal attachments of second to seventh ribs. FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY. PLATE XII, ZOOLOGY. ^/. kN /./. ..t.i. S- i A- BONES OF STERNUM. HiND LEG. AND THORACIC REGION. Five times natural size. .litX «7A- . _^ i% .': PLATE XIII. Scapula, Pelvis, and Lumbar Vertebrae. Five times natural size. Fig. I. Lumbar vertebrae, left lateral aspect. Fig. 2. Lumbar vertebrae, ventral aspect. Fig. 3. Scapula, right lateral aspect. Fig. 4. Pelvis, right lateral aspect. ac, acromion; CO., coracoid process; »., ilium; ip.t., iliopectineal tubercle; «./., ischial tuberosity. FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY. PLATE XIII, ZOOLOGY. ,><*■. Scapula, Pelvis, and Lumbar Vertebrae. Five times natural size. PLATE XIV. Sacral and Caudal Vertebrae. Five times natural size. Fig. I. Sacral and first six caudal vertebrae, dorsal aspect. Fig. 2. Second to ninth caudal vertebrae, ventral aspect. c'^.,(?.,c^.,<^., caudal vertebrae; ch., chevron bone; s^., first sacral vertebra. FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY. PLATE XIV, ZOOLOGY. Sacral and Caudal Vertebrae. Five times natural size. ^.yi ;oaLfi ic: Plate XV. Humerus, Ulna, and Radius. Five times natural size. Fig. I. Right humerus, posterior or caudal aspect. Fig. 2, Right humerus, anterior or cranial aspect. Fig. 3. Right radius and ulna, outer lateral aspect. Fig. 4. Right ulna, anterior aspect. ca., capitellum; d.r., deltoid ridge; e.f., epicondylar foramen; g.s., greater sigmoid cavity; ; g.t., greater tuberosity; h., head of humerus; «.a., inner articular surface of distal end of humerus; i.c., inner condyle; /./., lesser tuberosity; ol., olecranon and fossa; f., radius; s.r., supinator ridge; tr., trochlea; u., ulna. FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY. PLATE XV. ZOOLOGY. .-X'/- i.u. tr. ca. tr. I- a. g.%. ol. oi Humerus, ulna, and Radius. Five times natural size. /u9 'I Manus am(0 Pes. Plate xvi. Manus and Pes. Enlarged. Fig. I. Right manus, anterior aspect (x5). Fig. 2. Right pes, anterior aspect (xs). Fig. 3. Left astragalus, posterior aspect (xio). Fig. 4. Left astragalus, anterior aspect (xio). Fig. 5. Right OS calcis, anterior aspect (xio). a./., facet for ligament to astragalus; na., navicular; as., astragalus; »./., navicular facet; c, cuneiform; o.c, os calcis; CM., cuboid; p., pisiform; ec, ectocuneiform ; r., radius; «./., ectal facet; 5C., scaphoid; en., entocuneif orm ; s.f., sustentacular facet; /./., fibular facet; /./., tibial facet; i.tn., inner malleolar facet; tr., trapezium; /., lunar; tz., trapezoid; m., magnum; m., ulna. me., mesocuneiform ; FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY. PLATE XVI, ZOOLOGY. // /./ ^ n./. manus and Pes. Enlarged. a.L m — y w, o3 5 S o o •S 12 13 -u o 5 •S C " *- T) «- ^ o rt .a 10 D' .S c « .0 Cl S3 ^ r2 "o 1 "^ S "^ "^ S ■^' "55 "^^ "^^ **^ **• "^' '*^ S ^ •S "S P OJ ^ i* ^ S t- g o rt C r*. 522tiSJCwirtij3oi35'-'02j' _- V *^--. V-. Ss. S' B c .'2 6 o :=; J^ 6 (U rt bo •- fS rt o i3 .S - J3 >^ O rt G c c o a.a.a-G.ci,a<5)42 > t- S 5; -^ v^ » ■ft. ^ B J? -" g > o 6 S V V- s... X' PLATE XVIII. Dentition and Hard Palate. Enlarged. Fig. I. First upper molar, inner lateral aspect (xio). Fig. 2. Left lower molar series from above (xio). Fig. 3. Hard palate (x5). Fig. 4. Left upper molar series (xio). Fig. 5. Left lower molar series, outer lateral aspect (xio). FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY. PLATE XVIK. ZOOLOGY. Dentition and Hard Palate. Enlarged. \ i PLATE XIX. Fig. I. Mounted Skeleton of Nesogale dobsoni. Fig. 2. Mounted Skeleton of Ccenolesles obscurus. FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY. PLATE XIX. ZOOLOGY. 1. Mounted Skeleton of Nesogale Dobsoni 2. Mounted Skeleton of Caenolestes Obscurus. ;mi ■ '-ir.v 'jt'.ih '^1 >UiA Plate XX. Skull i OF CiENOLESTES. Adapted from Miss Dederer. Fig. I. Palatal aspect. Fig. 2. Lateral aspect. ang., , angular process of mandible :; w»./., mental foramen; a.o.v., antorbital vacuity; Ms., mastoid; a.pl.vac., anterior palatine vacuity; ms.f., masseteric foramen; As., , alisphenoid; Mx., maxilla; AsM., , alisphenoid bulla; Na., nasal; Bo., , basioccipital; Os., orbitosphenoid ; Bs., , basisphenoid; Pa., parietal; c, , mandibular condyle; Per., periotic; car. can. , carotid canal; p.gl.f., post glenoid foramen; car.f. , carotid foramen; PL, palatine; c.f. , condyloid foramen; p.l.f., postero-lateral foramen; cor.pr., coronoid process; pl.r., palatal ridge; eust.f. , eustachian opening; Ptnx., premaxilla; Exo., , exoccipital; p.pl.vac, posterior palatine vacuity; f.l.a., , sphenorbital foramen; Ps., presphenoid; f.l.p- , foramen lacerum posterum ; PL, pterygoid; J.ov. , foramen ovale; pLp., pterygoid process of palatine; Fr., , frontal; s.sq.f., subsquamosal foramen; f.v.f. , venous foramen in frontal ; sl.m.f., stylomastoid foramen; L. , lachrymal; tr.can., transverse canal; l.d., , lachrymal duct; Ty., tympanic; Ma., , malar; V^., infraorbital foramen. FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY. PLATE XX, ZOOLOGY. Skull of Caenolestes. Adapted from Miss Dederer. / a DunB'j I i Plate XXI. Dorsal and Lateral Views of Bralv, Five times natural size. Fig. I. View of the dorsal surface of the brain. b.oL, bulbus olfactorius; cb., body of the cerebellum; floe, flocculus; f.rh., fissura rhinalis; s.orb., sulcus orbitalis. Fig. 2. View of the brain from the right side. b.ol., bulbus olfactorius; cb., body of the cerebellum; f.erh., fissura endorhinalis; floe, flocculus; f.rh., fissura rhinalis; l.pir., lobus piriformis; s.orb., sulcus orbitalis; t.o., tuberculum olfactorium; tr.ol.lat., tractus olfactorius lateralis. FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY. PLATE XXI. ZOOLOGY. ferh ro. DORSAL AND Lateral Surfaces of Brain. Five times natural size. .IIXX 3TAJS .V.UflS «D PLATE XXII. Ventral Surface of Brain. Five times natural size. b.oL, bulbus olfactorius; f.erh., fissura endorhinalis; floe, flocculus; hy., hypophysis; // to XII., cranial nerves; l.pir., lobus piriformis; pyr., pyramid; t.o., tuberculum olfactorium; tr.ol.lat., tractus olfactorius lateralis; trap., corpus trapezoideum. FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORV. PLATE XXII, ZOOLOGY. VENTRAL View of brain. Five times natural size. ^2> Field Museum of Natural History ' Publication 222 Zoological Series Vol. XIV, No. 2 REVIEW OF LIVING CAENOLESTIDS WITH W DESCRIPTION OF A NEW GENUS FROM CHILE BY Wilfred H. Osgood Curator, Department of Zoology REPORTS ON RESULTS OF THE captain MARSHALL FIELD EXPEDITIONS Chicago, U. S. A. October 20, 1924 REVIEW OF LIVING CAENOLESTIDS WITH DESCRIPTION OF A NEW GENUS FROM CHILE BY WILFRED H. OSGOOD Among many interesting mammals obtained by the Captain Mar- shall Field Expedition to Chile in 1923, the most important nov- elty is a small marsupial representing an undescribed genus related to Caenolestes and Orolestes. It was found in the forests of the island of Chiloe nearly two thousand miles from the known habitat of its nearest relatives. Thus it not only provides valuable material for further study of an archaic group of mammals, but constitutes an im- portant addition to the fauna of Chile. In 191 1, when an expedition from Field Museum found Caenoles- tes obscurus living in the mountains of Venezuela, the interesting group to which it belongs was represented in the museums of the world by only half a dozen imperfect native-collected specimens. The fresh material obtained at that time, including complete skeletons and soft parts in preservative for dissection, was considered so important it was made the subject of a special monographic study (antea, pp. 1-162). Continued work by trained American collectors in South American fields has resulted in an unexpectedly large increase in knowledge of the group. At the present time, including the form described below, there are recorded not less than seven species of living caenolestids belonging to three well-marked genera. The original example of Caenolestes fuliginosus from Ecuador was described by Tomes under the generic name Hyracodon in 1863 and no further specimens appeared for more than thirty years, when the British Museum received four collected in 1895 by natives employed by Mr. G. D. Child, on the La Selva Hacienda, near Bogota, Colombia. One of these was acquired by the American Museum of Natural His- tory and three remained in the British Museum, one being the type of the new species Caenolestes obscurus. Another long period ensued until 191 1, when the present writer secured a series of eleven specimens in Venezuela and Colombia not far from the Bogota region. Later, in the same year, Mr. S. N. Rhoads collected for the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia two specimens at Hacienda Garzon, Mount 165 1 66 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol. XIV. Pichincha, Ecuador, in the region from which came the original type of C. fuliginosus. Two additional specimens were collected at Gualea, Ecuador, by Mr. Walter Goodfellow and presented to the British Mus- eum in 1914. Then, in 191 5, Mr, Edmund Heller found caenolestids in abundance in a new region about the upper waters of the Urubamba River in Peru. He secured a large series numbering thirty or more specimens upon which was founded the new genus and species Oroles- tes inca. This series is in the U. S. National Museum at Washington. In 1920, Mr. H. E. Anthony, of the American Museum of Natural History, discovered a well-marked new species, Cacnolestes caniventcr, in the province of Oro, Ecuador, and in 1922 the same author described a third species from Ecuador, Caenolestcs tatei, collected by Mr. G. H. H. Tate in the province of Azuay. Series of both these species, as well as additional specimens of C. fuliginosus, have been obtained re- cently in Ecuador by Mr, Anthony and Mr. Tate. Meanwhile, Dr. Einar Lonnberg, in 1921, recorded six specimens from various localities in Ecuador obtained through Consul L. Soderstrom, Finally, as stated above, a third genlis has now been found in Chile. In connection with the description of this genus, it has seemed desirable to present the brief statement of the systematic status of the whole group which follows. Specimens of forms not in the Field Museum, loaned by the American Museum of Natural History and the U. S. National Museum, are gratefully acknowledged. Caenolestes Thomas. (Plate XXIII, figs. I, la, ib.) Caenolestes Thomas, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist., (6), 16, pp. 367-368, Nov. 1895 — tyjje, Hyracodon fuliginosus Tomes i863, from Ecuador. Characters. Size small; form soricine; tail longer than head and body, non-prehensile; feet pentadactyl eleutherodactyl ; marsupi'um absent; mammae ^==4, injruinal; habits cursorial and insectivorous; color uniform. Skull with elongate facial region ; braincase large, deep and thin-wallcd, without external ridges or crests; interorbital and lacrymal regions swollen; nasals long and slender, abruptly expanded posteriorly; a marked vacuity between the nasals, frontals and maxil- laries; zygomata slender, their roots rising at the plane of the third molar; i>alatc highly fenestrate; tympanic annular; a carotid canal be- tween the jKrtrous jxiriotic and the basioccipital. Teeth ntuncrous and highly differentiated; anterior pair of incisors terminal and of the "diprotodont" type; second and third pairs of upper incisors in con- Review of Living Caenolestids — Osgood. 167 tact with each other, lateral in position and laterally compressed in form, their functional edges entire, forming cutting blades slightly in- clined forward; last pair of incisors similar to others but smaller and separated from them by a slight space; canine well-developed, falcate, single-rooted; anterior molariform teeth quadrate bunolophodont with a basal external cingulum; a small metaconule usually present. Tooth formula: I. |; C. }; Pm. f; M. i;=46. Remarks. Four species of the genus Caenolestes have had nomi- nal recognition, three from Ecuador and one from Colombia. All of these are obviously very closely related and the material has been so limited that characterizations of them have been rather unsatisfactory. C. fuliginosus, C. obscurus and C. tatei are so much alike in color and all general characters that further study with more material may prove them to be no more than subspecifically separable. Comparison has been made of a small series of C. obscurus from Paramo de Tama, Colombia- Venezuela boundary with a half dozen specimens from Ecua- dor, representing fuliginousus, caniventer and tatei. Collectively, the specimens of obscurus may be distinguished from those from Ecuador by the slightly more slender facial part of the skull and by the un- notched cutting edges of the second and third incisors. In one speci- men of obscurus, the second incisor shows a faint indication of a notch, but in all others it is entire, whereas in all Ecuadorean specimens ex- amined, this tooth is definitely notched and in some cases the third incisor is similarly notched. This character, to which attention has been called by Mr. Anthony, is accompanied by a somewhat greater forward rotation of the tooth and by a closer contact of the second incisor with the first. The supposed large size and the closing of the anteorbital vacuities mentioned by Thomas and Lonnberg as characters of obscu- rus are not appreciable in the material at hand. In the largest male of obscurus from Paramo de Tama, having a skull length of 32.5 mm,, the combined length of the three anterior molars is only 5 mm. In the largest male from Ecuador (type of caniventer), with a skull length of 33.5, the three principal molars measure 5.4, In all speci- mens of obscurus from Paramo de Tama and, likewise, in all Ecuado- rean skulls examined, the anteorbital vacuities are open. The type of C. tatei is a very small female and rather dark in color, but there is much variation in these respects among other Ecuadorean specimens. C. caniventer seems to be well characterized by average large size and by its more sooty, less brownish, coloration on the upperparts and its decidedly pale grayish underparts. A peculiar circumstance is the oc- currence of both C. tatei and C. caniventer at the same locality (Mol- 1 68 Field Museum of Natural History — Zoology, Vol, XIV. leturo). It is greatly to be hoped that Mr. Anthony, with his field ex- perience and the considerable series of Caenolestes which he is accum- ulating from Ecuador, will be able to clear up all uncertain points in connection with the variation, distribution, and pelage changes of these forms.* Orolestes Thomas. (Plate XXIII, figs. 2, 2a, 2b.) Orolestes Thomas, Smiths. Misc. Coll., 68, No. 4, p. 3, Apr. 10, 1917; Proc. U. S Nat. Mus., 58, pp. 244-247, pi. 14, fig. 5, 1920 — type, Orolestes inca Thomas, from Torontoy, Peru. Characters. External form, size and coloration much as in Caeno- lestes; cranial characters also generally similar to those of Caenolestes ; jugal broader and more flattened anteriorly; external boundaries of infraorbital foramina slightly farther back. Antemolar teeth showing various differences from those of Caenolestes ; fourth upper incisor sharply pointed and slightly retrorse, separated from the third and from the canine by a space equal to or greater than its alveolar length; canine double-rooted and premolariform, only slightly higher than in- cisors; first premolar a small blunt peg scarcely projecting above the gums, one third to one fourth as large as in Caenolestes; molariform teeth practically as in Caenolestes; fourth upper molar very small, scarcely more than half as large as in Caenolestes ; lower canine smaller than incisors; fourth lower molar reduced in size. Remarks. Orolestes is characterized principally by its low double- rooted canine and its minute first premolar. The food habits of Oro- lestes and Caenolestes are presumably the same and it is difficult to find teleological grounds for a pronounced difference in their canines. Only one species (O. inca) of Orolestes has thus far been dis- covered. The original series from the upper Urubamba region of Peru has not been duplicated. Mr. Heller, who collected this series, has recently worked again in Peru somewhat north of the Urubamba valley in the upjwr Marafion and Huallaga region, but failed to obtain any cacnolcstids. One of the specimens of Orolestes examined (No. 194948 U. S. N. M.) shows an interesting abnormality in the fusion of the lower canine and the first premolar, forming an imperfectly three-rooted tooth •Since thin wm written a fourth species from Ecuador hns bcon described by Mr. Anthony (Ca««(»/«i(