VII. 



The iMoas of New Zealand. 



IN a paper in vol. xxiv. of the Transactions of the Neio Zealand Institute, 

 p. 93, Mr. F. W. Hutton has discussed at great length the 

 classification of the INIoas of New Zealand. " My work," he says, 

 " is founded on the measurement of the leg-bones of individual 

 birds belonging to sixteen different species, and from these I have 

 inferred with considerable certainty the proportion of the leg-bones 

 in the other species." As to the genera, he says, " the crania of the 

 different Moas are quite sufficient to indicate the existence of several 

 genera. . . . After reducing the species to order, I find that they fall 

 into seven well-defined genera founded on the crania, but generally 

 accompanied by characters derived from the pelvis, the sternum, 

 the absence or presence of a scapulo-coracoid, and the robustness of 

 the leg-bones " [loc. cit., p. loo). 



In his paper Mr. Hutton gi\es a table in which the Ratios in the 

 Genera are obtained, as regards the long bones, by dividing the length 

 by the girth ; and for the skull by dividing " the breadth at the 

 squamosals " by " the height at the basitemporal," called ratio of 

 breadth to height, and " the length from the supra-occipitals to the 

 nasals," by " the breadth at the squamosals," to obtain his ratio of 

 length to breadth. On examining this table we find that the maxi- 

 nmm ratio of length to girth of the metatarsus in Dinornis is 3*6, and 

 the minimum 2-5 ; while the maximum and minimum ratios in 

 Tylopterjx, i.e., 3-3 and 27, both lie within the maximum and minimum 

 assigned to Dinornis. The same is the case with their tibiae and the 

 femora, so that as regards their long bones, those placed in Tylopteryx 

 could all have gone into the genus Dinornis, for there is no reason why 

 they should be assigned rather to one skull than to another. If we 

 take the ratios of the crania (assigned to a great extent, therefore, 

 arbitrarily to these limb-bones), the maxinmm and miniumm ratios 

 of breadth to height and of length to breadth in Dinornis fall com- 

 pletely within the ratios of Tylopteryx, and those of the sternum and 

 pelvis of Tylopteryx fall within the ratios of Dinornis. 



The ratios of the maxima and minima of both the metatarsus 

 and the tibia of Palapteryx (the next genus further removed than 

 Tylopteryx from Dinornis), fall also within those of the latter genus, 

 so that as regards the metatarsi and tibiae of Dinornis, Tylopteryx and 



