Dermal Bones of the Skull 



95 



,,Bei diesen entsteht um die von den Stirnbeinen auswachsenden 

 Knochenzapfen (,, Stirnzapfen") eine verhornende Epidermis- 

 Schicht. Bei den Geweihträgern (Cervidae) dagegen bildet 

 sich in engstem Konnex mit dem Geschlechtsleben und unter 

 exzessiver Beteiligung der Gefässe des Koriums ein Hautknochen, 

 welcher als Stirnzapfen (,,Rosenstock") dem Os frontale auf- 

 sitzt ..." Now, the cavicornian ,, Stirnzapfen", which is precisely 

 the ,,Knüchenzapfen" sent off by the frontal bone — and which 

 is accurately designated in the explanation of Fig. 95 as ,,HZ 

 Hornzapfen, d. h. der vom Os frontale ausgehende Stirnzapfen, 

 welchem das sogenannte Os cornu (OC) wie eine Epiphyse auf- 

 sitzt" — represents, according to the absolutely reliable explanation 

 of the textfigure, only the basal ,,stump", i. e. the apophytic 

 portion of the osseous horn, whilst its much longer distal portion 

 consists of an other, epiphytic elem.ent: the os cornu, which 

 is provided with the mentioned horny epidermal investment. 



As Wiedersheim admits the existence of a genetical diffe- 

 rence between the proximal and distal portion of the osseous part 

 of the horn, it would have been suitable to clearly keep throughout 

 the description to this important distinction, paying heed to it by 

 means of an exact terminology. This unprecise use of technical 

 terms led Wiedersheim to commit, in the few lines cited 

 above, a further error, the importance of which cannot be over- 

 looked nor neglected. This grave mistake, alluded to above, con- 

 sists in his Statement that in the Cervidae ,, bildet sich . . . unter 

 exzessiver Beteihgung der Gefässe des Koriums ein Hautknochen, 

 welcher als Stirnzapfen (,,Rosenstock") dem Os frontale auf- 

 sitzt ..." The homologous Stirnzapfen" and ,, Rosenstock", i, e. 

 the basal ,,stump"^9) of the osseous cone and the pedicle of the 

 antlers arenot separate dermal bones which ,,lay upon" the frontal, 

 but theyare practically an exostotic part of the frontal itself. 

 It.is evident that W iedersheim does not m.ean the pedicle 

 (,, Rosenstock") here, but the an 1 1er (,, Stange"), hom.ologized by 

 him, in the explanation of Fig. 95, with the epiphytic os cornu. 

 This erroneous exchange of the two quoted terms (,, Stange" and 

 ,,Rosenstock")is also pro vedby the fact that the pedicle (,, Rosen- 

 stock) "has no , ,coronif orm swollen base (, ,rose") ' ' f rom which it would 

 be periodically detached and renewed, the pedicle being per- 

 sistant. Thus it is as clear as possible that it is the antler 

 (,, Stange") which is looked upon by Prof. Wiedersheim as an 

 epi phytic Hautknochen", i.e. applying our present terminology: 

 a secondary dermal bone, and not, as he wrote in the text, the 

 pedicle, what would result in being a pure non-sense. 



i. e. in the Gavicornia. 



I must point out the fact that Wiedersheim 's Interpretation (op. 

 cit. Fig. 95) of the German term „Stirnzapfen" does not correspond to 

 the English osseous „cone"; the „Stirnzapfen" are the frontal apophyses, 

 i. e. the basal„stumps" of the homs, whilst the (osseous) cone means the 

 (epiphytic) os cornu. 



7. lieft 



