468 PATAGONIAN EXPEDITIONS I PALAEONTOLOGY. 



but the proportions are different, that for the trapezoid being the largest, 

 while in the modern genus the facet for the trapezium is much the largest 

 and the contact with the magnum is -more extensive than in the fossil. 

 The nearly straight shaft is of transversely oval section ; the distal trochlea 

 is low and semicylindrical and has a low carina. Metacarpal III is much 

 longer and stouter than II ; on the radial side the proximal end is over- 

 lapped by that of II, but less extensively than in Dolichotis and the con- 

 tact with the unciform is also smaller. The shaft is straight, antero- 

 posteriorly compressed and broadening slightly toward the distal end. 

 Metacarpal IV resembles III in length and thickness ; it has but a com- 

 paratively narrow contact with the unciform, because of the manner in 

 which III extends over it. Metacarpal V, which is considerably the 

 shortest of the series, has a relatively wide proximal end, with a process 

 from the fibular side which is not present in Dolichotis; the shaft is 

 stout and somewhat curved. 



Only a few phalanges have been found and these resemble the corre- 

 sponding bones of Dolichotis on a very small scale. 



The femur (Plate LXIX, fig. 8) is considerably shorter than in Doli- 

 chotis as compared with the size of the skull, but much longer in com- 

 parison with the humerus. The head is small, very symmetrically 

 hemispherical and placed upon a very slender neck ; the pit for the round 

 ligament is very small and obscure ; the great trochanter, though large, 

 is much smaller than in the recent genus, as is also the digital fossa ; the 

 second trochanter is less prominent than in the existing type and there is 

 no trace of a third trochanter. The shaft is stout and somewhat com- 

 pressed antero-posteriorly ; the condyles are shaped very much as in 

 Dolichotis, but the rotular trochlea is narrower and more symmetrical, 

 the outer border rising as high as the inner. 



The patella is not unlike that of Dolichotis, but is narrower and espe- 

 cially thinner, with much less rugose anterior face. 



As in the fore-arm, so in the leg, the bones of Eocardia are relatively 

 far shorter than those of Dolichotis, though exceeding the ulna and radius 

 in length to a much greater degree. The tibia (Plate LXIX, fig. 9) is but 

 little longer than the femur and nearly twice as long as the radius, while 

 in the modern genus both radius and tibia are remarkably elongate. In 

 form, the tibia is much like that of Dolichotis, except for its greater slen- 

 derness and the smaller development of the cnemial crest ; the proximal 



