594 ME, F. E. BEDDABD OX THE [DeC. 3, 



The pterygoids are slightly different in form from those of some 

 other Limicolge. In Ehynclicea (text-fig. 59, p. 591) these bones 

 are provided, as in other genera, with facets for articulation with 

 the basis cranii ; but the facet does not stand out from the rest of 

 the bone as it does iu other genera that I have examined. The 

 distal part of the bone, i. e. the end nearest to the palatine articula- 

 tion, is broader than the proximal end, and the broadening com- 

 mences with the facet and is carried on at its level. The quadrate 

 shows certain recognizable dilfereuees in the different genera of 

 Limicoline birds. In Ehynclicea the anterior condyle on the 

 mandibular articular surface is not bevelled off into a trochlea; 

 in Hcematopus, Hiniantopus, Gallinago, Scolojoax, and Vanellus 

 there is a long trochlea, most developed perhaps in Hcematopus. 

 On the other hand, Tringa agrees with Rhynchcea and so too does 

 Hydropliasianns. 



I need not enter into the varying form of the maxillo-palatines 

 in the Limicoliues, as the main differences have been pointed out by 

 Dr. Shufeldt. I may observe, however, that in the two species of 

 Tringa which I have examined the maxillo-palatines do fuse with 

 the palatines. They are undoubtedly quite separate in Ucemaiopus 

 and some other genera. The maxillo-palatines of Rhynchcea ai*e 

 peculiar on account of their small size ; the\'' are I'epresented 

 merely by a thin bar of bone on each side, which is not fused with 

 the palatine, and is, indeed, bowed in form, the concavity lying on 

 the palatine side. There is no extension of the maxillo-palatine 

 upwards to form a thin shell-like, concave lamina, such as occurs, 

 for example, in Vanellus. The shape and extent of the maxillo- 

 palatines are exactly parallel in Hydrophasianus. In the Snipe and 

 Woodcock the maxillo-palatines are equally small but fused with 

 the palatines. 



It is well known that the vomer of Limicoline birds varies iu 

 form, in breadth, and as to whether the end is cleft or not. Iu 

 Rhynchcea the antei'ior end of this bone ends iu a deeply cleft 

 extremit}''. It is not cleft in Scolopax and barely cleft in Gcdlinago. 



On the ventral aspect of the skull there is yet another ossification 

 to be noticed the homologies of which are rather doubtful. In 

 front of the vomer and resting upon the pi'emaxillae is a scutcheon- 

 shaped piece of bone of which the two lateral wings are visible 

 when the skull is viewed from above. I have not been able to see 

 this bone in such other Limicoline skulls as I have had the oppor- 

 tunity of inspecting. But it might be, I imagine, readily detached 

 and so lost in maceration. If the two lateral pieces of bone which 

 are visible on the dorsal view of the skull were extended so as to 

 join the maxillse, the structure would recall the plate of bone which 

 forms the " desmognathous " palate of the American Vultures, or 

 the apparently corresponding transverse plate of bone in the 

 Cariamidse \ In Scolopax and Gallinago this region of the skull is 

 produced downwards into a thick keel. 



^ See Beddard, "On the Anatomy of Burmeister's Canama {Chunga burmeis- 

 teri)," P. Z. S. 1898, p. 596, figs. 1, 2. The bone in question lies just bebind 

 the separation of the two halycs of" the upper jaw. 



