OCR Text |
Show 1873.] DR. J. HECTOR ON CNEMIORNIS CALCITRANS. 763 Prof. Owen read the twentieth of his series of memoirs on the extinct birds of the genus Dinornis and their allies. This contained a restoration of the skeleton of Cnemiornis calcitrans, and gave remarks on its affinities with the Lamellirostral group. This paper will be published in the Society's 'Transactions.' The following papers were read :- 1. On Cnemiornis calcitrans, showing its Affinity to the Natatores. By J A M E S H E C T O R , M.D., F.R.S. (Plates LXV.-LXVIII.) [Eeceived October 16, 1873.] Since the discovery of the very interesting specimen of the Moa's neck* with well-preserved muscular tissue and integument, in the Earnscleugh Cave in the interior of the Province of Otago, the locality has been visited several times, and especially in February of last year by the Hon. Capt. Fraser, who obtained, besides Moa-bones, several belonging to a smaller-sized birdf, being part of a skeleton, most of which had been previously removed by some gold-diggers. I recognized these to belong to Cnemiornis calcitrans, Owen J, the only difference being that the humerus (Plate LXV.) differs from that described by Professor Owen in several important characters. Besides the humerus were the right femur and tarso-metatarsus, and the metacarpal bones, the two former agreeing accurately with Professor Owen's description and plates, and the last-mentioned being a new addition to the osteology of the bird. The chief difference observed in the humerus (Plate L X V . 1, 2, 3) is its greater proportional size, being equal in length to the femur instead of one ninth less, and its having a very distinct pneumatic fossa (Plate L X V . fig. 2 a) closed by a cribriform bony septum. In addition, the tuberosity (b) representing the pectoral ridge is not so wide; and the proximal articular surface (c) is slightly broader and more convex at its middle part than in the typical bone. These characters led to its being suspected to belong to a carinate bird; but the massiveness of the bone was, I thought, sufficient to disprove this. In order to determine this point with some degree of accuracy I compared the weight with the bulk of the same bone in several species of birds, with the following results :- Weight. Bulk. 1. Cnemiornis (Earnscleugh Cave) 10 244 2. W e k a (Ocydromus), non-volant 10 210 3. Kakapo (Stringops), non-volant .... 10 187 4. Kaka (Nestor), volant 10 131 5. Hauk (Hieracidea), volant 10 126 A small portion of the shaft was also removed (Plate LXV. fig. 3), * Trans. N. Z. Inst. vol. iv. p. 110, pl. v. t Ibid. vol. v. pp. 102 & 417. j Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. v. p. 395. |