FELIS TIG RINA
TH E MABGAY.
FELIS TIGRINA, Erxl. Syst. Regn. Anim. (1777) p. 617. sp. 11— Gmel. Syst. N a t (1788) vol. i. p t 1, p. 80. sp. 13— F. Cuv Hist Nat Mamm
(1 8 2 6 ) vol. u. p. 144— Temm. Mon. Mamm. (1827) vol. L p. .153— Fiscli. Syn. Mamm. (1829) p. 204. sp. 16. - J E Gray Proc Zool'
Soo. (1867), pp. 271, 4 0 4 - I d . Cat. Cam. Mamm. (1869) p. 2 2 -E llio t , Proc.' Zool. Soc. (18 7 7 ) p. 7 0 4 -A ls to n , Biol. Cent-Amer.’
(1880; p. 61.
CAYENNE CAT, Penn. Hist. Quad. (1 7 8 1 ) p. 271. sp. 163.
GUIGNA, id. ibid. (1793) p. 299. sp. 198.
FELIS GUIGNA, Molina, Sag*. Stor.' N a t Chili, (1810) p. 244. sp. 6 .-B e sm . D ie t H is t Nat. (1816) p. 114— Philippi, W ie™ Arch (18731
p. 8. tab. ii. & iii. figs. 2 & 3.
FELIS MITIS, F. Cut. Hist. Nat. Mamm. (1820) vol. ii. pl. 137.—Azara, Nat. Hist. Parag. (1838) p. 226.—Burm. Syst. Uebers. Thiere, (1854)
p. 86. J. E. Gray, Proc. Zool. Soc. (1867) pp. 271, 404.—Id. Cat. Cam. Mamm. (18 6 9 ) p. 22.
FELIS MACROURA, Pr. Max. Beit. z. Naturg. Bras. Band ii. (1826) p. 371.—Fisch. Syn. Mamm. (1829) p. 203. sp. 12.—Less. Suppl. Buff.
(1847) p. 113.—Burm. Syst. Uebers. Thiere Bras. (1854) p. 87.—J. E. Gray, Proc. Zool. Soc. (1867) p. 271.—Id Cat Cam Mamm
(18 6 9 ) p. 22.
FELIS CHATI, Griff. Anim. King. (1 8 2 7 ) vol. ii. p. 479, pl.
FELIS BRASILIENSIS, F. Cuv. Nat. Hist. Mamm. (1828) vol. ii. pl. 139.
FELIS ELEGANS, Less. Cent. Zool. (18 3 0 ) p. 69, pl. 21.
FELIS MARGAY, Azara, Nat. Hist. Quad. Parag. (18 3 8 ) p. 237.
FELIS SMITHII, Swains. Aniin. in Menag. (1 8 3 8 ) p . 120.
LEOPARDUS MITIS, J. E. Gray, List Mamm. Brit. Mus. (1843) p. 42.
LEOPARDUS TIGRINOIDES, id. ibid.
FELIS (NOCTIFELIS) GUIGNA, Severtz. Rev. e t Mag. Zool. (1858) p. 386.
FELIS MEXICANA, De Saussure, Rev. e t Mag. Zool. (I8 6 0 ) p: 1 (née Desmarest).
PANTHERA BRASILIENSIS, Fitz. Sitzungsb. Akad. Wiss. Wien, (1869) lix. p. 236.
PANTHERA MACRURA, id. ibid. p. 242.
PANTHERA YENUSTA, id. ibid. p. 244.
Catizel o f Costa-Ricans ( A l s t o n ) .
H a b . Mexico (D e S a u s s u r e ) ; Central America southwards to Paraguay.
T h e above list of synonyms very fairly shows how frequently the many variable patterns of this most changeable animal
have, by different writers, been considered and described as representing distinct species Some have based their specific
characters upon the style of the markings, others upon the “ kind” and colour of the fur, while still others have been
contented with the average length of their specimens’ tails. In certain cases these so-called “ distinct species” were
determined from single examples. To ascertain the value of the characters mentioned above, and to impartially decide how
far they were entitled to be deemed of specific value, was a matter of some considerable difficulty; for it is always much
easier to describe a specimen as a new species than to prove that it should not be so considered, even if, as in the present
instance, the characters were, to say the least, not of a tangible quality. The first thing was to get as large a number of
examples of all the species together, from as many and as widely separated localities as possible, and ascertain if there were
clearly defined differences of any kind, which would make the various forms recognizable from each other. An examination
of the specimens contained in the museums of Europe and America failed to show that any such differences existed; and
while there were many varieties of patterns and hues of coloration (as is the case among individuals of every species
of spotted Cat),'yet no one character could be found by which more than one species of this particular form could be
differentiated.