. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College. Zoology. Figure 28. Macropelobates osborni, AM 6252; a, plantar view of right ankle; b, lateral view of spade; X 3. I-V = metatarsals; c =: centrale 1; d == distal tarsal 1; f = fibu- lare; p ~ prehallux; pt = pretarsal; t = tibiale. individuals. In pelobatines the latter bone does not ossify, but the other bones occur in all species. In Scaphiopus (Spea) and S. (Scaphiopus) couchi the pretarsal and prehallux fuse. The tibiofibula is shorter than the femur as in all pelobatines. The length from the dorsal border of the acetabu
. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College. Zoology. Figure 28. Macropelobates osborni, AM 6252; a, plantar view of right ankle; b, lateral view of spade; X 3. I-V = metatarsals; c =: centrale 1; d == distal tarsal 1; f = fibu- lare; p ~ prehallux; pt = pretarsal; t = tibiale. individuals. In pelobatines the latter bone does not ossify, but the other bones occur in all species. In Scaphiopus (Spea) and S. (Scaphiopus) couchi the pretarsal and prehallux fuse. The tibiofibula is shorter than the femur as in all pelobatines. The length from the dorsal border of the acetabulum to the anterior tip of the ilium approximately equals that of the femur. This is greater ilial elongation than is common in pelobatines but such pro- portions do occur in large Pelobates cul- tripes. The ischial projection posteriorly is more as in Pelobates than in Eopelobates or Megophrys (Fig. 26). The sacral diapophyses are expanded to about the length of presacral vertebrae as in Pelobates. The forward inclination of the transverse processes of the posterior vertebrae is not quite so extreme as in Pelobates and is more like that of most Megophrys and Eopelobates. The urostyle is elongate, exceeding the length of the sacral diapophyses and about equalling or exceeding the length of the skull. In this feature it is in general agree- ment with that of megophryines and, to a lesser degree, Scaphiopus; it is unlike that of Pelobates, contrary to the statement of Zweifel (1956, p. 12). The flatness of the skull surface, the lesser inclination of posterior transverse processes, and the elongated urostyle are the only features that distinguish Macro- pelobates from Pelobates. These features are similar to those of Eopelobates and some Megophrys, and are probably primi- tive for the Pelobatidae. The other features of the skeleton relate Macropelobates closely to Pelobates (especially P. cul- tripes) and to the new Scaphiopus de- scribed below; this serves to clarify and exp
Size: 1002px × 2494px
Photo credit: © Book Worm / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookauthorharvarduniversity, bookcentury1900, booksubjectzoology
