1922] Kellogg: Pinnipeds from Miocene and Pleistocene Deposits 39 



tally the metacarpal is gradually expanded. Near the distal end, 

 on the plantar face, there are pits for the probable attachment of 

 ligaments. 



Measurements of Metacarpal IV 



Greatest length 101. mm. 



Transverse diameter of proximal end 21.9 mm. 



Narrowest transverse diameter of shaft 17.6 mm. 



Transverse diameter of distal end 30.3 mm. 



Anteroposterior diameter at distal end 16.4 mm. 



The shape of the metacarpal shown in figures 13«, 13 b is so unusual 

 when compared with those of existing pinnipeds that it is with 

 difficulty determined is any particular metapodial. Certain features 

 suggest, however, that it is the fifth metacarpal. The facet for the 

 unciform is strongly convex and extends over upon the dorsal face 

 of the shaft. The transverse width of this facet is much greater than 

 in either the second metacarpal or the fourth metacarpal. When 

 compared with Eumetopias jubata it is at once observed that the differ- 

 ences are very marked. The radial tuberosity for articulation with 

 fourth metacarpal is very distinct. In Eumetopias the facet for the 

 unciform slopes from ulnar to radial border,' while in this specimen 

 it slopes from dorsal face to plantar face. The head of the shaft is 

 rounded. 



Measurements of Metacarpal V 



Greatest length 86. mm. 



Transverse -diameter of proximal end of shaft 33.7 mm. 



Narrowest transverse diameter of shaft 20. mm. 



Transverse diameter of shaft at distal end 30.5 mm. 



Anteroposterior diameter of shaft at distal end 21.2 mm. 



The femur possesses no characters of especial interest. It is per- 

 fect with the exception of the loss of the epiphyses, and is uncrushed. 

 In general outlines it (figs. 14a, 14&) recalls the same bone in Eume- 

 topias. The femur is short with heavy though somewhat flattened 

 shaft, the greater trochanter light, somewhat lower than the head, 

 and with the lesser trochanter internal. On the other hand the head 

 is less elevated, the lesser trochanter smaller, the trochanteric fossa 

 much deeper and with more uniform depression. The entire upper 

 end of the shaft is broader in proportion to length than in Eumetopias. 

 A digital groove is present on this femur though no trace of the same 

 can be seen in the femur of Eumetopias. Below the lesser trochanter 

 the shaft is slightly constricted though the transverse diameter is 

 greater than anteroposterior diameter. Unfortunately the lesser 



