PDF (Lo-Res) - Smithsonian Institution Libraries
PDF (Lo-Res) - Smithsonian Institution Libraries
PDF (Lo-Res) - Smithsonian Institution Libraries
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
24 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO PALEOBIOLOGY<br />
TABLE 9.—Dimensions (mm) of the bones of the Reunion Rail, Dryolimnas<br />
augusti, new species, compared with recent Dryolimnas cuvieri cuvieri from<br />
Madagascar (BMNH 1897.5.10.47), and D. cuvieri aldabranus from Aldabra<br />
(BMNH s/1989.38.5, BMNH s/1993.6.2). («=number of specimens.)<br />
Measurement<br />
Coracoid<br />
midshaft width<br />
midshaft depth<br />
Humerus<br />
total length<br />
proximal width<br />
head width<br />
midshaft width<br />
midshaft depth<br />
Ulna<br />
total length<br />
proximal width<br />
proximal depth<br />
midshaft width<br />
midshaft depth<br />
Femur<br />
total length<br />
distal width<br />
distal depth<br />
midshaft width<br />
midshaft depth<br />
Tibiotarsus<br />
proximal width<br />
proximal depth<br />
distal width<br />
distal depth<br />
Tarsometatarsus<br />
total length<br />
proximal width<br />
proximal depth<br />
distal width<br />
distal depth<br />
midshaft width<br />
midshaft depth<br />
Dryolimnas<br />
augusti, n. sp. (ri)<br />
3.2(1)<br />
2.3(1)<br />
-48(1)<br />
10.0(1)<br />
3.0(1)<br />
3.3 (2)<br />
3.3 (2)<br />
-40(1)<br />
4.8(1)<br />
5.4(1)<br />
2.7(1)<br />
3.0(1)<br />
-61(1)<br />
10.1-11.3(3)<br />
9.0-9.1(2)<br />
4.5^.9 (4)<br />
4.4-5.0 (4)<br />
9.7(1)<br />
12.1(1)<br />
-7.8(1)<br />
-8.0(1)<br />
53.0-53.1 (2)<br />
8.7-8.8 (2)<br />
9.2 (2)<br />
9.5(1)<br />
7.2(1)<br />
4.3-4.4 (2)<br />
3.8-3.9 (2)<br />
Dryolimnas cuvieri<br />
cuvieri (n=\)<br />
3.1<br />
1.9<br />
47.9<br />
9.7<br />
2.8<br />
3.1<br />
2.9<br />
41.2<br />
4.7<br />
5.1<br />
2.3<br />
2.6<br />
50.5<br />
8.3<br />
7.3<br />
3.6<br />
3.6<br />
7.4<br />
10.1<br />
6.7<br />
7.0<br />
47.6<br />
7.2<br />
7.1<br />
7.2<br />
5.9<br />
3.0<br />
2.6<br />
aldabranus (M=2)<br />
2.1,2.2<br />
1.5,1.5<br />
37.7,39.0<br />
8.1,8.7<br />
2.2,2.2<br />
2.2,2.3<br />
2.1,2.2<br />
31.0,32.5<br />
3.8,4.0<br />
3.8,4.0<br />
1.6,2.1<br />
2.1,2.3<br />
42.8,44.8<br />
7.1,7.5<br />
6.6,6.6<br />
2.9,3.3<br />
3.1,3.3<br />
6.3, 6.4<br />
8.9, 9.4<br />
5.8,5.9<br />
6.0, 6.5<br />
40.2, 44.2<br />
6.1,6.5<br />
6.3, 6.4<br />
6.6, 6.6<br />
5.3, 5.4<br />
2.7,2.7<br />
2.2,2.3<br />
rower proximal and distal parts. In Aphanapteryx the hypotarsus<br />
projects more posteriorly and the external calcaneal ridge is<br />
situated closer to the external side; in the Reunion Rail this<br />
ridge is situated more medially. The Reunion Rail differs from<br />
Erythromachus by the characteristics of the humems (shaft thin<br />
and incurved), femur (more elongated and incurved), and tarsometatarsus<br />
(trochleae less splayed).<br />
In the ratio distal width x 100: total length, the Reunion Rail<br />
occupies an intermediate position between Dryolimnas cuvieri,<br />
which has less splayed trochleae, and more terrestrial rails,<br />
such as Erythromachus, Aphanapteryx, and Gallirallus, which<br />
have more splayed trochleae. This ratio varies between 14.9<br />
and 16.4 inD. cuvieri, is 17.9 in D. augusti, varies between<br />
19.2 and 21.2 in E. leguati (after the measurements given by<br />
Gunther and Newton, 1879), varies between 20.6 and 20.9 in A.<br />
bonasia (MNHN), and reaches 20.2 and 22.8 in two specimens<br />
of Gallirallus australis (MNHN).<br />
REMARKS.—The Reunion Rail is likely to correspond to a<br />
bird that was mentioned only by Dubois (1674) as Rale des<br />
Bois. It cannot correspond to the Oiseau Bleu, which must have<br />
been larger, being the same size as a solitaire, according to<br />
Dubois, or the size of a large capon, according to Feuilley<br />
(Cheke, 1987). The Reunion Rail was smaller, approximately<br />
the size of a Common Moorhen {Gallinula chloropus (Linnaeus)),<br />
with reduced wings.<br />
A fossil rail from Mauritius was recently identified as Dryolimnas<br />
cuvieri by Cowles (1987).<br />
Genus Fulica Linnaeus<br />
Palaeolimnas Forbes, 1893:544 [type by monotypy, Fulica newtonii Milne-Edwards,<br />
1867].<br />
Paludiphilus Hachisuka, 1953:154 [type by monotypy, Fulica newtonii Milne-<br />
Edwards, 1867].<br />
Fulica newtonii Milne-Edwards, 1867<br />
Newton's Coot<br />
FIGURE \li-m<br />
Fulica newtonii Milne-Edwards, 1867:203, pl. 10.<br />
Fulica newtoni.—Anonymous [=A. Newton], 1868:482.<br />
Palaeolimnas newtoni.—Forbes, 1893.<br />
Paludiphilus newtoni.—Hachisuka, 1953.<br />
MATERIAL.—Grotte des Premiers Francais: Rostrum, anterior<br />
part, 1993-44; sternum, 1993-39; incomplete pelvis, 1993-<br />
38; 2 vertebrae, 1993-46; r. tibiotarsus, 1993-40; r. tibiotarsus,<br />
1993-41; fibula, 1993-43; r. tarsometatarsus, 1993-42; 5 pedal<br />
phalanges, 1993-45.<br />
Grotte de l'Autel: Pedal phalanx 1 of digit III, 330528;<br />
pedal phalanx 2 of digit III, 330531.<br />
Marais de l'Ermitage: Fragments of pelvis, 1819; r. coracoid,<br />
1814; r. p. coracoid, 1922; I. d. ulna, 1815; 1. carpometacarpus,<br />
1921; r. d. tibiotarsus, 1816; 2 tarsometatarsi, r. and 1.,<br />
from same individual?, 1811, 1812; r. tarsometatarsus, 1920; r.<br />
p. tarsometatarsus, 1813; pedal phalanx 1 of digit II, 1817; pedal<br />
phalanx 1 of digit II, 1818; 2 pedal phalanges, 1896, 1923.<br />
REMARKS.—Remains of Fulica newtonii in MNHN from the<br />
Mare aux Songes, Mauritius, were compared with those from<br />
Reunion and were found to be identical, so both populations<br />
must have belonged to a single species. The tarsometatarsi<br />
show a great range of variation (Table 10), which probably relates<br />
to sexual dimorphism, with the males being larger than<br />
the females.<br />
Newton and Gadow (1893:292) wrote: "The sternum of F.<br />
newtoni resembles in several points that of Aphanapteryx,<br />
Erythromachus, and Ocydromus, and differs from Tribonyx,<br />
Fulica proper, and Porphyrio, first in the configuration of the<br />
whole anterior margin of the sternum, especially in the double<br />
or basally divided spina externa, which is moreover broad and<br />
flat, while in the other genera this spine is single and furnished<br />
with a ventral longitudinal sharp ridge; secondly, by the receding<br />
and broad anterior margin of the keel, which, however, is<br />
well developed, although less than in Tribonyx and Fulica atra,<br />
but the tendency towards a reduction of the keel is apparent."<br />
The sternum of Fulica newtonii from Reunion (Figure 13/) is