Restoration of Coryphodon / by O.C. Marsh.

  • Marsh, Othniel Charles, 1831-1899.
Date:
1893
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Restoration of Coryphodon / by O.C. Marsh. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    6/12 (page 324)
    Two recent papers by Mr Charles Earle, on the Coryvho- dontidcB, are of interest.* He treats of the teeth of this group, especially of their variations and homologies, and gives figures of some of the most characteristic forms. He also discusses at length the various American species named, and decides that the large number of species which have been founded by Prof. Cope should be greatly reduced; and that in many cases his species are to be considered merely varieties, and that often these varieties are merely individual variations in the same species due to age and sex. In a joint paper by Prof. H. F. Osborn and Dr. J. L. Wortman, which appears in the Bulletin of the American Musemn, p. 81, 1892, the former discusses this group briefly, especially some specimens recently collected in the Wind River region by Dr. Wortman, and gives two figures of the feet of Coryp/iodon. In this paper, p. 118, the family Goryphodon- tidce, established by the writer in 1876, is credited to Prof, Cope, but with no reference as authority, while the preoccupied names Pantodonta and Amhlypoda are also used in place of Goryphodontia and Ainblydactyla. In discussing the foot structure of Goryphodon (p. 121), Prof. Osborn makes some very emphatic statements, which are important if true, but he gives no facts to support them, and there is good evidence that he is in error. One statement is as follows: the positions of the fore and hind feet of Goryphodon were absolutely different, Xhe fore foot vxis digiti- grade like that of the Elephant, and the hind foot was jflanti- grade like that of the Bear. These positions are shown in his figures, which afford no evidence to support the statement, especially in regard to the hind foot. Again, in giving the characters of the feet. Prof. Osborn adds to what was already known, that the second metacarpal has a vertical ectocnnei- form facet; a statement likewise open to question. Another assertion (p. 122) nearly as strange is, that in The figure of the pes of Goryphodon given by Marsh the astragalus is represented as covering the entire icpper surface of the cuhoid.'^ A reference to the figure in question (Plate V, fig. 2) will, however, show this statement, also, to be wrong, as the calcaneum covers about half the cuboid. This fact was clearly stated in the text when the figure was first published. The unique caudal appendage described by Prof. Osborn (p. 120), and the suggestion in regard to its use, do not require special notice here. The above points will be discussed later in the present article. * Science, vol. xx, p. 7, ]8!)2 ; and Bull Araer. Mus., vol. iv, p. 149, 1892.