156 EDWARD L. RICE 
nizable in the different parts; in earlier stages the middle con- 
necting portion is decidedly less advanced than the distal and 
proximal ends, and, in stage 2 hardly deserves the name of 
cartilage. Because of the direction of the plane of the sections, 
no further evidence upon this point can be obtained from stage 1. 
Beginning with stage 2, the course of development is from greater 
distinctness to less, and is suggestive of primary independence 
and secondary fusion. In any case, it is practically convenient 
to retain the two terms crista parotica and processus paroticus. 
The lateral surface of the processus paroticus is described by 
Gaupp as in contact with the quadrate. In Eumeces I find the 
quadrate and the processus paroticus closely united in all observed 
stages. In the earlier embryos there is apparently perfect con- 
fluence of the two cartilage or procartilage masses; even in my 
latest stages they are still in union, although a marked histo- 
logical differentiation characterizes the line of junction. 
Versluys (’03) traces the processus paroticus (‘intercalare’) 
back to an outgrowth of the columella auris—the processus 
dorsalis. When the processus dorsalis is transformed into the 
processus paroticus, its connection with the stalk of the colu- 
mella may be retained as a band of connective tissue. This 
Versluys (’98) has described in adults of Agamidae (except 
Amphibolurus) and Phrynosoma, although it is usually lost. 
The connection is described by Gaupp in embryonic Lacerta. 
In Eumeces no connection between the processus paroticus and 
the columellar stalk, either cartilaginous or of connective tissue, 
could be observed in any stage. There is nothing in the con- 
ditions in Eumeces to suggest Versluys’s interpretation; on the 
other hand, there is, in the purely negative evidence, nothing 
hostile to his view. Gaupp (’05 b) has accepted Versluys’s inter- 
pretation, although retaining his own terminology. 
The dorsal process, as such, is present in the crocodiles (Parker, 
’83, cited and confirmed by Gaupp, ’05b, and Versluys, 703; 
Shino, 714) and Sphenodon (Versluys, ’03; Fuchs, ’09). In the 
latter it is retained in the adult; in the former Shiino notes that 
there is no connection with the crista parotica. For Lacerta 
Cords (’09) confirms the record of a processus dorsalis freed to 
