OCR Text |
Show 598 DR. R, BROOM ON A SOUTH AFRICAN [May 29, Figs. 23 and 24 show two views of the tarsus as preserved. There are seen to be three large bones in the proximal part of the tarsus, and the tibia seems to be in connection with the inner and the fibula with the middle one. These three bones we may fairly confidently regard as tibiale, intermedium, and fibulare. On the outer side of the foot is a large curved bone which is manifestly the 5th metatarsal. This is supported by a large tarsale which we may regard as the 4th. The other tarsal elements are small. If these determinations are correct, then it would appear that the foot has been folded on the leg and the sides crushed together. Making allowance for the crushing the foot may be restored as in fig. 25. The tibiale is an irregularly oval-shaped bone and is the smallest of the elements of the proximal row. The intermedium is a large rectangular bone. On its under or posterior surface there is a large groove. The fibulare forms a well-marked heel process. There is no centrale displayed, but it is probable that one existed though it may have been cartilaginous. Of the distal tarsal bones the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd are of small size, each supporting a single metatarsal. The 4th tarsale is about as large as the tibiale and supports both the 4th and 5th metatarsals. The 1st metatarsal is rather short and stout. The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th are all imperfect at their distal ends, but the 2nd is considerably longer than the 1st, and the 3rd and 4th much longer than the 2nd. It is not certain whether the 3rd or 4th is the longer, but the little evidence available points to the 4th being the longest of the metatarsals. Affinities of Howesia. The only animals with which it seems necessary to compare Howesia are Sphenodon, the Gnathodonts Hyper odapeclon, Steno-nietopon, and Rhynchosaurus, the Phytosaurs, and the Protero-saurians such as Palceohatteria. The jugal, postorbital, and post frontal bones bear considerable resemblance to the corresponding bones in Sphenodon, but almost quite as much to those of the much more primitive Diaptosaurians, the Pelycosaurs, and of Palceohatteria. There is also considerable resemblance to the facial bones of Rhynchosaurus. In the other Gnathodonts the resemblances are obscured by the specialisations. The frontals and parietals are more like those of Rhynchosaurus and even of Stenometopon than of Sphenodon, and the resemblance is increased by the fact of the parietal foramen being practically absent in Howesia. The maxillary and dentary dentition is unlike that of any other reptile hitherto known except Hyperodapedon; and though this latter genus is extremely specialised, the mode of implantation of the teeth in the bone is so essentially similar to that in Howesia, as to suggest a relationship between the genera. The palate is more primitive than in either Sphenodon or Hyperodapedon, and resembles more that of the Pelycosaurs. It also bears some resemblance to the palate of the Rhynchocephaloid reptile, Proterosuchus. The shoulder-girdle differs from the earlier types in having no precoiacoid. In many respects the girdle resembles that of |