SHUFELDT : OSTEOLOGY OF THE STEGANOPODES 203 



metacarpus are almost exactl}^ of a length, the difference being only a millimeter in 

 favor of the former .^^ 



Further information in regard to the osteology of the Pelecanidm will be given 

 later on in the present memoir, as well as in the explanation of plates at its close. 

 In Volume I. of the Hand-List of Birds by Dr. R. Bondler Sharpe (1899, pp. 238, 

 239), I find that he recognizes ten species of existing Pelicans, and seven fossil 

 ones. They are found in nearly all parts of the world, including Australia, Tas- 

 mania and New Guinea. It is not likely that they differ very widely in their 

 osteology, and it is probable that in its main features it is very well exemplified in 

 Pelecanus fuscus as has just been set forth above. 



Existing Pelicans have by ornithologists generally, all been restricted to the one 

 genus Pelecanus of the family Pelecanidse, where they undoubtedly belong. 



On the Skeleton of Fregata. 

 (See Plate XXIX., Figs. 45-48 ; PL XXX., Figs. 50, 51.) 

 Of all the steganopodous birds perhaps no one of them exceed Fregata aquila, in 

 point of interest, in so far as its osteology is concerned. In not a few particulars it 

 has a very remarkable skeleton, while in others it would appear to indicate that the 

 form or species is a more or less generalized one. For example, both superficially 

 and otherwise, the skidl of Fregata resembles, in not a few respects, the skull in some 

 species of Albatrosses {Diomedeidse). This not only applies to the lower jaw, where 

 the similarity is very evident, but also to a number of characters in the cranium 

 and face. The long, powerfully hooked superior mandibles are a good deal alike, 

 as are the maxillo-palatines. Fregata has a vomer that approaches that bone in the 

 Albatrosses ; its palatines are not far off, and even still less so its pterygoids and 

 quadrates. The lacrymals are upon the same plan of structure, and the entire 



'^ There are some specimens of embryos and subadults both ot Pelecanus and Cormorants in the U. S. National 

 Museum collections, and at my request Mr. Lucas has examined some of these for me, and writes the following letter 

 on the subject, for all of which it gives me pleasure to thank him. 



Dear De. Shufeldt : 



I have examined Pelecanus sp. about three or four days old and Phalacrocorax carnnculatus for supramaxillary and 



found no trace in either. Pelecanus seems to mature more rapidly than Phalacrocorax. In the young Pelican the lacry- 



mal is well developed and free, and there is no trace of the partial hinge joint at base of bill. There are traces of the 



three fused metatarsals and the calcaneum (?) is still free. In the young Cormorant the nostrils are still open, the 



lachrymal free. The occipital style is represented by ligament and were vpe all ignorant of its existence, it mght readily 



be overlooked. The hyoid is large. It would seem then that the supramaxillary does not appear until late in life and 



it may have no morphological meaning ; simply it ossifies at the time of closing of nostrils. The occipital style of P. 



carnnculatus is small in the adult. The specimen was about one third grown, and about ten days old probably. 



Sincerely yours, 



Fredekic a. Lucas. 



