62 AMERICAN PERMIAN VERTEBRATES 



quadrate in shape, nearly as thick as broad. The fibulare is 

 broader from side to side than longitudinally, a little narrower 

 than is shown in the figure. On the radial side three tarsal bones 

 and a part of a fourth are seen nearly in place, evidently the cen- 

 trale and the first, second, and third tarsalia. The first tarsale is a 

 very small bone ; the second is larger, larger somewhat than is shown 

 in the figure; and the centrale is also very small. On the outer 

 side a part of a small tarsale is seen closely applied to the fibulare. 

 The fourth and fifth metatarsals cover the other tarsalia, indica- 

 tions of which are seen below them. It is very evident that the 

 tarsus was small, the bones being all closely articulated with each 

 other without intervening cartilage. The five metatarsals lie in 

 natural positions, the proximal end of the fifth, only, thrust up a 

 little over that of the fourth. The first is a very short bone, its 

 width proximally equaling its length; the third is the broadest and 

 heaviest; the fourth is the longest; while the fifth is only a little 

 shorter, indicating a strong fifth toe. In articulation with the first 

 metatarsal is its first phalange; the short first phalange of the fifth 

 toe also lies closely in relation with the metatarsal, while its second 

 phalange has been thrust in between the fourth metatarsal and its 

 first phalange. A little distance beyond the three middle metatar- 

 sals are a series of three small phalanges, evidently distal ones of 

 these toes, the intervening ones hidden or missing; they lie upon 

 or rather below the distal ends of ribs, which has caused their dis- 

 placement. From these phalanges it is quite certain that the toes 

 distally were slender, with narrow ungual phalanges quite unlike 

 those of Limnoscelis and Diadectes. As I cannot place these small 

 phalanges in their respective toes, they are not indicated in the 

 restoration. Nor, of course, can it be said definitely what the 

 phalangeal formula was, though there would seem to be little 

 doubt that this genus agrees with Limnoscelis in having the primi- 

 tive one, 2, 3, 4, 5, 4. 



From the material described, I have made, after painstaking 

 study, the restoration as shown in the figure, about one-third natu- 

 ral size. The conjectural parts, shown by the uniformly ruled lines, 

 are the length of the tail, the structure of the carpus, and the 

 arrangement of the phalanges. The length of the tail I have esti- 



