. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College. Zoology. Figure 12. Skull roof of (A) Eope/obafes hinschei, MME 6692 (8a, Table 1), X ; (B) E. bayeri, CUPI ; X 4. dashed line ~ restoration; dotted line = broken bone outline. Eopelobafes bayeri Spinar 1952 As the figure shows, the late Oligocene —middle Miocene Czechoslovakian species E. bayeri has all of the characters of the genus noted above (Figs. 2, 12b). Vari- ation may exist with respect to fusion of urostyle and sacrum; in the type specimen of E. bayeri, they appear to be separate (perhaps because of poor pre
. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College. Zoology. Figure 12. Skull roof of (A) Eope/obafes hinschei, MME 6692 (8a, Table 1), X ; (B) E. bayeri, CUPI ; X 4. dashed line ~ restoration; dotted line = broken bone outline. Eopelobafes bayeri Spinar 1952 As the figure shows, the late Oligocene —middle Miocene Czechoslovakian species E. bayeri has all of the characters of the genus noted above (Figs. 2, 12b). Vari- ation may exist with respect to fusion of urostyle and sacrum; in the type specimen of E. bayeri, they appear to be separate (perhaps because of poor preservation), but in the new complete specimen are ap- parently fused. They are separate in E. bayeri tadpoles as in tadpoles generally. E. bayeri has a somewhat similar squa- mosal to E. anthracinus, but other features, such as frontoparietal shape and ratio of limb to body (Fig. 29), are different. Both species have more sculpture laterally than medially on the frontoparietal, but E. bayeri lacks the large pits seen in E. anthracinus. The two species seem quite clearly different. The Czechoslovakian material confirms the absence of a spade, and the orientation and shape of the trans- verse processes is in accord with those of the other specimens of Eopelobates, some Megophrys, and Macropelobates. Of special interest is the shape of the ethmoid, which is well shown on the new specimen of Eopelobates bayeri (cf. Figs. 2, 6). It is similar to that of E. guthriei n. sp. (see p. 312) but differs from that of E. grandis. The exact contour of the nasals is con- jectural. They have been thrust backward over the frontoparietals, and their relations to the latter in the restoration have been determined by triangulation with other skull parts and by comparison with other Eopelobates specimens (including the type of E. bayeri). On the left side of the restoration (morphological right; the speci- men is an imprint), the two parts of the. Please note that these images are extracted from sc
Size: 1290px × 1937px
Photo credit: © Book Worm / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookauthorharvarduniversity, bookcentury1900, booksubjectzoology
