FAUNA OF THE GOSAU FORMATION. 



707 



Megalosaukus pannoniensis, Seeley. 

 Tooth, PI. XXVII. figs. 21-23. 



Ornitiiomerus gracilis, Seeley. 

 Femur, PI. XXVIII. figs. 6, 7. 



Riiadinosaurus alcimus, Seeley. 



Femur, PI. XXXI. figs. 6, 7 ; humerus, figs. 8-10; claw-phalange, PL XXVII. 

 fig. 26. 



Crocodilus proavus, Seeley. 



Vertebrae, PI. XXX. figs. 6-14 ; femur, PI. XXIX. figs. 7, 8 ; fibula, PI. 

 XXVIII. figs. 10, 11 ; ulna, PL XXIX. figs. 9, 10; radius, figs. 11-13; teeth, 

 figs. 24, 25. 



Pleuropeltus Suessii, Seeley. 

 Postfrontal bone, Pi. XXVITI. figs. 8, 9 ; rib, PI. XXX. fig. 15. 



Emys Neumayri, Seeley. 



Costal plate, PL XXVII. fig. 27 ; PL XXXI. fig. 13 ; hyoplastral plate, 

 PL XXX. fig. 16. 



The species described which are not figured are Boratodon carcharidens, 

 Biinzel, Oligosaurus adelus, Seeley, Arceosaurus gracilis, Seeley, and Ornitho- 

 cheirus Bwizeli, Seeley. 



Discussion. 



Mr. Htjlke considered Prof. Seeley's paper a very valuable com- 

 munication, throwing, as it did, fresh light upon an important group 

 of fossils the true nature of which had before been but imperfectly 

 apprehended. So far as he had been able to judge from a cursory 

 inspection of the fossils, he did not doubt the accuracy of Prof. 

 Seeley's interpretations. He called attention to the anterior extre- 

 mity of the mandible of Mochlodon, which had sutural indications of 

 a praedentary ossification, such as he thought he had seen in Hypsilo- 

 -phodon ; and he mentioned the difficulty which the downward exten- 

 sion of the Dinosaurian inner trochanter appeared to him to offer 

 to the hypothesis of its homology with the human trochanter minor, 

 an extension which suggested that it might rather be homologous 

 with an outgrowth of the middle part of the linea aspera to which 

 the short head of the biceps is attached. 



Mr. Chaeleswoeth remarked on the difference between the teeth 

 in the upper and lower jaw of Mochlodon. 



Dr. Mueie pointed out that the work of Prof. Seeley showed that 

 much caution must be exercised in accepting hurried descriptions of 

 genera and species from fragments. 



Prof. Boyd Dawktns stated that his examination of the American 

 collections of Secondary Saurians proved that the so-called Megalo- 

 saurian type of teeth was exhibited by forms belonging to very 

 different genera. 



The Author agreed with Prof. Dawkins's views concerning the 

 Megalosaurian teeth, and agreed that teeth were not sufficient alone 

 for generic determinations. 



3a 2 



