28 KANSAS UNIVERSITY QUARTERLY. 



Greatest breadth of distal articulation 30 32 35 



Ulna, extreme length 214212215 



Radius, extreme length 156 158 172 



Breadth of proximal articulation 29 31 35 



Ulna and radius, breadth of distal extremity 36 44 42 



Femur, extreme length head to inner condyle 193 195 205 



Diameter of head, fore and aft 27 20 32 



Diameter of head, transversely 32 34 35 



Breadth of condyles 46 5° 54 



Breadth of trochlea 21 24 25 



Tibia, extreme length internally 196 196 . . 



Breadth of proximal extremity 46 46 46 



Breadth distal extremity 28 35 . . 



Metacarpals, extreme length 93 90 95 



Breadth proximal articulation 31 38 38 



Breadth distal extremity 30 36 36 



Metatarsals, extreme length 100 100 102 



Breadth proximal articulation 27 32 32 



Scapula, length along posterior border 184 i 75 180 



Greater width of glenoid articulation 23 30 30 



First thoracic vertebra, length from anterior inferior 



margin of centrum to end of spinous process. . . . 146 166 . . 



Length of centrum 24 26 



Lumbar vertebra, extreme height 66 69 72 



Length of centrum 34 37 3^ 



Sacrum, length at middle 120 127 120 



Breadth at base 85 90 8^ 



Breadth of lumbar articulation . . ' 33 38 35 



Breadth of posterior extremity 30 41 32 



Breadth of coccygial articulation 18 28 17 



Innominatura, extreme length 233 220 . . 



Extent of pubic symphysis 68 . . 72 



Diameter of acetabulum 33 38 36 



Astragulus, extreme length • ■ • • 43 4° 44 44 



Calcaneum, extreme length 76 78 82 85 



Comparative measurements of the teeth will be found further on. 

 In the following description of the skulls I have used for com- 

 parison the corresponding parts of Dicotylcs torquatiis. Leidy gives 

 the chief differences of the adult skull of P. compressiis from D. 

 labiatus in his latest paper, to which the reader is referred. 



Skull of adult fexnale. 



The skull differs markedly from that of Dicotylcs torquatus in its 

 more elongate and contracted facial portion, in the broader and 

 flatter frontal region, the more prominent, much broader and stouter 

 zygomatic arches, in the smaller incisors, the stouter process for the 

 reception of the superior canines, the longer post-canine diastema, 

 the greater acclivity of the sphenoid, etc. 



