. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College. Zoology. Fossil Pelobatid Frogs • Estes 323. Figure 26. Pelves in left lateral view, a, tepfobrach/um hasselti, MCZ 22626, X 3; b, M. monticola nasuta, MCZ 22640, X ; c, Pelobates cultripes, UMMZ S-2631, X 3; d, Macrope/obafes osborni, AM 6252, X Dashed line indicates restoration. it is related to the latter genus, it also re- sembles pelobatines in many features. Examination of the various species of Eopelobates might indicate to some work- ers that several genera rather than one are included. E. hinschei and E. anthr
. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College. Zoology. Fossil Pelobatid Frogs • Estes 323. Figure 26. Pelves in left lateral view, a, tepfobrach/um hasselti, MCZ 22626, X 3; b, M. monticola nasuta, MCZ 22640, X ; c, Pelobates cultripes, UMMZ S-2631, X 3; d, Macrope/obafes osborni, AM 6252, X Dashed line indicates restoration. it is related to the latter genus, it also re- sembles pelobatines in many features. Examination of the various species of Eopelobates might indicate to some work- ers that several genera rather than one are included. E. hinschei and E. anthracinus, for example, might be referred to two genera if the other species were unknown. Hecht (1963, p. 23) has already suggested that E. grandis is "probably another genus distinct from the European [E. anthra- cinus]," and that at least two types of pelobatids are present in the Geiseltal frog fauna. As far as the latter case is con- cerned, after examining the Geiseltal col- lection in 1965 and 1967, I found no reason to recognize species additional to E. hinschei, although it is possible that I over- looked another form. E. grandis is similar in body proportions to E. anthracinus, as is E. guthriei in frontoparietal shape; these three species seem to form a short-skulled lineage. E. bayeri and E. hinschei, on the other hand, are relatively long-skulled forms, at least as far as proportions of nasal and frontoparietal are concerned. These two lineages appear to be linked by the distinctive squamosal shape of E. hinschei and E. guthriei on the one hand, and of E. anthracinus and E. bayeri on the other. In addition, E. grandis, E. bayeri, and E. hinschei show similarities of the fronto- parietal border. The rather granular dermal sculpture pattern of E. grandis is super- ficially different from the open, ridged pat- tern of E. hinschei, but these intergrade through the other species. The list of similarities given at the be- ginning of this paper indicates that for
Size: 2001px × 1249px
Photo credit: © Book Worm / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookauthorharvarduniversity, bookcentury1900, booksubjectzoology
