."> I Sbufbldt, ContribtUiotxs to Avian Paleontology, [jan, 



In the case, then, of Meleagris antiqua oi Marsh, 1 am of the 

 opinion that we have not sufficient evidence before us to establish 

 the fact that anj such hud ever existed in prehistoric time; mj 

 reasons for so belie\ ing are the following: 



1 . The existing material upon which the species is based is alto- 

 gether too fragmentary to pronounce with anything like cer- 

 tainty that it ever belonged toa Meleagris. 

 rhe material is not only fragmentary, but very imperfect 

 (see Plate [II, Figs. 1 and 2). 



:>. Thefragment dors not present the "Characteristic portions" 

 of that end of the humerus in a turkey as Professor Marsh 

 stairs that it .lors. In am event, ;tn imperfect distal frag- 

 ment of tlu* humerus oi any big, gallinaceous bird Is a very 

 unsafe W to establish a new species upon, and especially :i 

 supposed-to-be extinct one. 



I It is open to serious question whether the genus Meleagris, 

 as the genus Meleagris, existed at all ;it the time the "Mio- 

 cene daj deposits oi Northern Colorado" were deposited. 



In no \\a\ olo 1 question that this fragment may hate belonged to 

 the skeleton of some lone ago extinct galline fowl, about the site 

 oi an adult existing turkey; hut that it was a true : is, 1 



\ cr\ much doubt. It is just as likely to have belonged to many 

 another Kind of gallinaceous species, or even to some entirely 

 different kind of bird in no special way related to the turkey. 



("online next to the materia] representing Mei -■ let of 

 Marsh, as described above and here figured in my Plato (Figs. 3 5), 

 a still greater uncertainty attaches to the supposition that it 

 belonged to tin- skeleton oi an extinct species of Meleag - 



As above pointed out. this is likewise an imperfect, much worn 

 fragment y^i the proximal half of a tarso-metatarsus. 1 am not 

 taking the tibia; mentioned by Marsh into consideration, for of 

 them ho says himself that they only "probably belonged to the 

 same individual" [see There is no uncertainty about it 



at all. 



Upon comparing this proximal moiety of a tarso-metatarsus oi an 

 alleged extinct species of turkej I - of Marsh with 



the corresponding part oi that hour in the skeleton oi an adult 



