AN AUSTRALIAN SAUROPTERYGIAN — ETHERIDGE. 
27 
Amongst the numerous fragments of ribs are several that seem 
to be the proximal ends of trunk ribs (PI. vii., Figs. 5 and 6), but 
if so the terminal faces are cupped for the reception of the convex 
heads of the diapophyses already described. None are absolutely 
perfect, but the figures given will explain their appearance and 
characters almost better than words. However, the head of the 
rib is in each case expanded and terminally hollowed into an 
oval rather deep depression or cup of variable size. This appears 
to be similar to the structure described by Hector in Lieodon 
haumuriensis .* 
The proximal ends of both humeri (PI. vii., Fig. 1) are present in 
the collection, and very remarkable bones they are, allied in many 
respects to those of Mauisaurus haastii , Hector. f One is three 
inches long, the other three and a quarter inches approximately. 
They are heavy and much thickened bones, the proximal articular 
surface hemispheric, with a sharp angular periphery and a dia- 
meter of about one and three-quarter inches. The trochanterian 
process is much thickened, and protuberant, and separated from 
the articular surface by a well marked although incomplete bici- 
pital groove, overhung by sharp margins. The transverse diameter 
of the humeri is one and a half inches. The distal sloping surfaces 
of the bones are much roughened and pitted for muscular attach- 
ment. To one side of the trochanterian process in each is what 
Dr. Hector calls in Mauisaurus a bold rugose tuberosity “to 
receive the attachment of the bicipital tendon.”}; The plantar 
surfaces would appear to be somewhat concave. 
These humeri seem to possess some important points of depar- 
ture from the ordinary Plesiosaurian humerus, but are closely 
allied in form and character to those of Mauisaurus , at the same 
time showing sufficient differences of a distinguishing nature. 
For instance we see the very marked trochanterian process well 
separated from the articular surface, or head of the bone, by the 
bicipital groove, although not circumscribed by it, as such appears 
to be the case in M. hastii. We further see an equally large, 
although less hemispheric articular surface, and an equally strong 
if not stronger protuberance for the bicipital tendon, whilst the 
latter is somewhat differently placed to what it is in the New 
Zealand reptile. 
Two short, transversely elongated bones are distinguishable 
that may be one or other of the paddle-bones, possibly the “ inter- 
medium.” (PI. vi., Fig. 6). The terminal faces are roughly 
facetted. 
* Trans. N.Z. Inst., vi., 1874, p. 352. 
f Ibid , p. 347. 
J Loc. tit., p. 348. 
