COMMENTS BY S. W. WILLISTON 985 



Lower Jaw, — For the lower jaw I prefer Owen^s terms for the bones : 

 Deiitary, Angular, Surangular, Coronoid, Splenial, with Prearticular, 

 Postsplenial of Williston, and Pre- and Inter-coronoid. 



Appendix C. — Comments by S. W. Williston 



B. N. A. — I agree with Broom that a too close adherence to the B. IST. A. 

 will tend to retard the advance of comparative anatomy. I do urge, how- 

 ever, that wherever practicable the system should be followed, in order 

 that we may have greater uniformity. 



^^Alisphenoid/' — I have given no especial attention to the homology of 

 the mammalian sphenoid bone in the reptiles. Inasmuch as those who 

 have are more or less convinced that the so-called alisphenoid of the rep- 

 tiles is not homologous with the "greater wing of the sphenoid," I am 

 willing to adopt provisionally another name) for the element. But why 

 select "laterosphenoid" or "otosphenoid,^' when Cope long ago proposed 

 the name "postoptic'' for it? 



I liter parietal i — I can not accept the term interparietal,^ because the 

 term is misleading and false when applied to the early tetrapods. In all 

 such forms known to me, the bone is not only paired, but never inter- 

 parietal in position. To use a descriptive term that conveys an error is 

 objectionable, as was justly urged against JaekePs postnasal for ad- 

 lacrimal. 



Probtic. — The name prootic is in wide use (I have used it myself for 

 years), and nothing will be lost by retaining it. I therefore reverse my 

 vote. 



Opisthotic. — I can not say the same for opisthotic. Since we must, 

 I am sure, abandon epiotic for any reptilian or amphibian elemenf, I can 

 see no reason why Owen's original term, paroccipital, should be given up. 



Prevomer. — I shall use the term prevomer for the paired and unpaired 

 bones back of the premaxillge in the Eeptilia and Amphibia. I think, 

 however, that their homologies are not yet satisfactorily solved. 



Dermosupraoccipitals. — I have examined the dermosupraoccipitals in 

 Gavialis and see no reason to doubt their cranial nature.^ 



Interorlital septum. — I can not accept Mr. Watson's statement that 

 the' absence of an interorbital septum in the modern Amphibia is second- 

 ary. "The lengthy brain-case extending forward to the nasal region and 

 filling the whole space between the parasphenoid and the roof of the 



'* Professor WiUiston has lately adopted "interparietals" instead of dermosupraoc- 

 cipitals. — Editor. 



