SIWALIK BIRDS. 
3—137 
Species 1 : Pelecanus cautleyi, Davies. 
History. — This species was founded by Mr. Davies in the memoir already quoted.^ 
Ulna . — The specimen on which this species is founded consists of the distal extremity 
of a left ulna, from the Siwaliks, in the British Museum, which is represented in 
pi. XIV., figs. 11, 11a. It is somewhat smaller than the ulna of the existing Indian 
and African P. mitratus ; but agrees in the form of the trochlear articulation («), 
and of the external tendinal pit and adjacent process {h). It differs, however, in the 
greater depth and elongation of the palmar trochlear depression (c), as well as in the 
more laterally compressed form of the shaft. In the size of the depression (c) it 
differs from all the species with which it has been 
compared below with those of P. mitratus, viz .'. — 
compared. 
Its dimensions are 
P. cautleyi. 
P. mitratus. 
Transverse diameter, including radial tuberosity 
0-7 
0-85 
Ant. -post. ,, of ulna trochlear .... 
0-75 
0-95 
Transverse ,, ,, shaft 
0-45 
0-58 
Ant. -post. ,, n 
0-6 
0-65 
It is impossible to compare the Siwalik bone with P. gracilis, as the ulna of that 
species is not figured ; but it is decidedly different from the ulna of P. intermedins 
(B. M., No. 48,164), although of very nearly the same dimensions. 
Distinctness . — Although the comparisons that have been made indicate the 
distinctness of this Siwalik pelican from several species, yet the possibility of its 
identity with some of the existing species of which skeletons are not available must 
be borne in mind, and the name P. cantleyimm>t, therefore, be regarded as provisional. 
% 
Pelecanus sivalensis, Davies. 
History. — This species is named on page 26 of Mr. Davies’ memoir. 
Ulna . — This species also is founded on the distal extremity of an ulna from the 
Siwaliks in the British Museum (No. 39,745), which has not been figured. It differs 
from the corresponding bone of P. aautleyi by its inferior size, the shallowness and 
shortness of the palmar trochlear depression, and other minor points. It is of inferior 
size to the ulna of P. mitratus and P. intermedins, but agrees so closely in general 
characters that there seems no doubt of its belonging to the same genus. The 
dimensions of the specimen are as follows, viz .\ — 
Maximum transverse diameter . . . O' 52 Transverse diameter of shaft . ; . 0'4 
Ant -post, diameter of ulna trochlear . 0'6 Ant. -post. n >> i> ... 0 5 
Distinctness . — There can be no question as to the distinctness of the present form 
from P. cautleyi ; and the difference in size probably indicates specific distinctness 
from P. mitratus and P. intermedins. The specimen has not, however, been compared 
with P. gracilis, nor with most of the existing species, and its right to a distinct 
specific name must accordingly be regarded as provisional. 
1 Page 26. 
