196 CARNIVORA.
, Genus Me le s, Gesner.
* M e l e s (A r c t o n t x ) c o l l a r i s , E. Cuvier.
Arctonyx collaris, F. Cuv. Hist. Nat. des Mammif. p. 220, Sept. 1825 ; Fischer’s Syn. Mamm,
1829, p. 152; Horsfield, Cat. Mamm. East Ind. Co. Mus. 1851, p. 114; Blyth, Cat. Mamm.
As. Soc. Beng. Mus. 1868, p. 71; Jerdon, Mamm. of India, 1867, pp. 77 and 78; Gray (in
part),. Cat. Camiv. Mamm. B. M. 1869, pp. 128 and 124.
Mydaus collaris, Gray, "Wagner, Schreber, Saugeth. voi. ii. 1844, pp. 186, 187; Gray and Hardwicke’s
HI. Ind. Zool. vol. i. tab. v i.; Cat. Mammif. Brit. Mus. p. 70; Scbinz, Syn. Mamm.
1844, i. p. 817.
This species ranges as far as Teng-yue-chow, where I obtained a skin. I t is
distinguished from the nearly allied species A . taxoides, Blyth,1 by its shorter
and rougher fur, its broader muzzle, larger ears, and longer tail; also by its
colour and markings being less intense than in th a t species.2 I t is also larger
than A . taxoides, the skull of which in the adult female is only dr75 inches
in length, while in the female of M. collaris the skull is 6’38 inches long.
There is also much greater breadth, and the palatal region is considerably longer
and of greater transverse capacity than in A . taxoides, as has been fully proved
by Blyth’s 8 measurements of the respective skulls. In this species the greatest
breadth across the zygomatic arch is 3 64 to 2*38 in A . taxoides, and the length
of the palate in the former is 3*88 to 2-75 in the latter. The narrow character
of the snout in A . taxoides is borne out by the relative breadth of the palate
as compared with the palate of this species, in which the diameter a t the last
molar is 1*07, whilst in the former it is only 0-81. And in connection with these
measurements it is noteworthy th a t the species M. leucurus, Hodg.,4 and M. taxus
are distinguished from each other by similar.differences in the relative breadth and
development of their palatine surfaces, which, of course, influence the character of
the muzzle in these different badgers, which are _also separated by the differences
they present in the breadth of their skulls both across the zygomatic arch and basal
portion of the brain-case. As pointed out by Blyth, these two species have a nearly
similar distribution, ranging eastwards from Nepal to Assam, Sylhet, and Arracan.
M. (A.) collaris, as I have observed, extends to Western Yunnan.
The badger of Eastern China6 closely resembles Meles taxus in external appearance,'
but is separated from it by the pronouncedly different characters of its skull.
I t has been fully described by A. M.-Edwards from specimens obtained by the late
M. Eontanier in the vicinity of Pekin, and has been satisfactorily identified by
him with M* chmensis, Gray. Dr. Gray has stated th a t he saw no appreciable
1 Joum. As. Soc. Beng. 1853, p. 591.
9 Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1856, p. 398, pl. L.
3 i.e.
* Joum. As. Soc. Beng. 1847, vol. svi. p. 763, pi. s sis.
6 Rech. Mammif. 1868-74, pp. 190-195, pis. sxv. to ssv iii.; Ann. des.Sc. Nat. 1867, 5m" Série, vol. viil. p. 374;
Gray, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1868, p. 207, fig. of skull, et Cat. Carniv. B. M. 1869, p. 126; Swinhoe, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1870,
p. 622.
difference between the sknll of M. leucurus, Hodg., from Lassa, in Tibet, and the skull
of M. chmensis,1 Gray; and after a careful examination of the skull of the type
M. leucurus1 with four skulls of M. chmensis, I see no reason to differ from Dr. Gray.
I hare also compared the skin of Hodgson’s typical specimen of M. leucurus with the
figure and account of M. leptorhynchus, A. M.-Edwards, and they seem to me
identical—a conclusion which I have arrived at from a consideration of osteologies!
as wefi as external characters. I have also carefully examined the types of M.
leptorhynchus. The skull of M. chmensis which Dr. Gray figured belonged to a
slightly immature female, and is somewhat smaller than the skull of M. leucurus,
which belonged to the same sex. The only difference that I can detect between
them is, that the contraction of the brain-case behind the external orbital angle
is less in the latter than in the former, but the difference is so slight that no
importance can be attached to it, more especially as the other skulls of M. chmensis
vary quite as much among themselves, as is demonstrated in the accompanying table.
These skulls also show considerable variation in their basal breadth when measured
between the auditory processes. Any little variation manifested by the skull of
M. leucurus seems to me to have its counterpart in one or other of these skulls of
M. chinensis.
The skull of M. leucurus,3 which in its basicranial length exceeds only by a very
little that of the skull of M. leptorhynchus, practically agrees with it in the length
of the palate, in the breadth across the infra-orbital foramina, across the zygomata,
a t the condyles, and across the base of the skull between the auditory processes.
The zygomatic arch, however, of M. leptorhynchus is considerably stronger, but this
may be a sexual character, or individual variation. The depth, too, through the
coronoid process of these skulls of M. chmensis, in the females, is less than in
M. leptorhynchus, and the female skull of M. leucurus resembles them also in
this respect.
Measurements of skulls of M. leucurus, Hodgson, and of M. chinensis, Gray:
Prom tip of premaxillffl to end of sagittal crest (greatest length)
„ anterior margin of foramen magnum to inner border of incisors
Length o f palate to inner border of i n c i s o r s .......................................
„ from transverse line connecting posterior border of last molars
to end of palate ,
Breadth across zygomata at condyles
,, auditory processes
„ behind external angle and eye (least)
Length o f lower .jaw.from angle
Height through coronoid process
4-90
4-20
065
2-65
2-36
0 95
3 1 2
1-47
Mblbs chikbnsi
2-60
0-83
3 31
4-71
4-00
2-40
0-66
2-45
215
0-87
305
1-41
4-57
3-93
2-32
0-60
2-47
1 Cat. Camiv., B. M., 1869, pp. 127 and 128.
2 Joum. As. Soc, Bengal, 1847, pp. 763-770, pis. xxix, xxx et xxxi, fig. B.
» Dr. Gray, writing on M. leucunZs, Proc. Zool. Soc., 1853, p. 190, says that he had compared the skull with those
of the various badgers in the India Museum Collection, and that having mentioned to Hodgson that it was very distinct
from the Taxidea of North Amerioa, Hodgson had proposed to name it Pseudo-meles leucurus, under which
name i t ‘now stands in the India Museum, London.