OCR Text |
Show 1882.] PROF. OWEN ON THE STERNUM OF NOTORNIS. 689 1. O n the Sternum of Notornis and on Sternal Characters. B y Professor O W E N , C.B., F.R.S., F.Z.S., &c. [Eeceived November 10,1882.] In the ' Proceedings' of this Society for 1882, referring to the meeting held January 7th, it is stated that "Professor Newton exhibited the skin and bones of the trunk of a specimen of Notornis mantelli, obtained in the province of Otago eighteen months before." O n these specimens the sole remark recorded is, " that the sternum figured in the Society's ' Transactions,' vol. iv. pl. 4. figs. 5-8, as of this species must belong to a totally different form" (loc. cit. p. 97). As a means of judging of the degree and kind of difference, it may not be unacceptable to ornithologists to compare the subjoined figures (pp. 690, 691) of the sternum of Notornis mantelli, of the natural size, with those of the sternum in the plate above cited, the original of which may be seen in the Geological Department of the Museum of Natural History, Cromwell Road. Prior to the date of Prof. Newton's communication I had received from Prof. T. Jeffery Parker, University of Otago, N e w Zealand, a notice of the arrival there of the skin and following parts of the skeleton of a Notornis mantelli, viz. the bones of the trunk with some lower cervical and anterior caudal vertebrae, the scapular arch with sternum, and both femora articulated with the pelvis. As it was Prof. Parker's expressed intention to submit a description of these unique specimens to the Otago Institute, and as he was so good as to send m e an impression of the plate, giving reduced views, front and side, of the sternum with other bones of the trunk, I reserved any remark thereon until the reception of the Professor's full and instructive ' Memoir,' which has appeared in the 14th volume of the ' Transactions of the New-Zealand Institute,' 8vo, p. 255 (1882). Not until the year 1870 had I the opportunity of describing the sternum of Aptornis, the extinct Ralline genus surpassing in size Notornis. I then remarked :-" The inferiority of size of the sternum figured (plate 4. figs. 5-8 *) to the sternum of Aptornis defossor is greater than that of the femur of Aptornis otidiformis as compared with that of Aptornis defossor." This might have favoured the conclusion arrived at, or inclined to, in 1850, and indicated in the title to m y former paper, in vol. iv. p. 1, of our 'Transactions.' But further insight was to be had by comparison of the subject of plate 4. figs. 5-8 with the parts of the skeleton of Aptornis otidiformis subsequently acquired. Such comparison suggested, in 1870, the following remarks :- " The relative size of the smaller sternum to the femur of Aptornis otidiformis is more like the relative size of the sternum of Aptornis defossor to the femur of that species, than is the relative size of the * smaller sternum' to the femur of Notornis. Seeing, therefore, in 1 Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. iv. pp. 1-18, Febr. 1850. 46* |