660 
THE WILSON JOURNAL OF ORNITHOLOGY • Vol 124. No. 4. December 2012 
considerably more finch-like than Ciridops. The 
bill of Ciridops is much weaker than in Melam- 
prosops and. in many respects, is much more like 
that of Himatione except that it is shortened. The 
nostril is much larger with an ossified nasal 
septum, and scarcely differs in size or structure 
from that o f Himatione. whereas in Melamprosops 
the nostril is smaller, rounder, and lacks a septum. 
The dorsal nasal bar in Ciridops is even thinner 
than in Himatione and quite unlike the much more 
reinforced nasal bar ot Melamprosops. In dorsal 
view, the mandible of Ciridops with its prominent 
retroarticular processes, scarcely differs from that 
of Himatione except in the shorter, wider 
symphysis, contrasting with the much wider, 
heavily reinforced and much more finch-like 
structure in Melamprosops. 
Postcranial Osteology .—No peculiarities were 
noted in the humerus or other bones of the wing 
and pectoral girdle of Ciridops. However, great 
differences in the pelvis of Ciridops from that of 
its near relatives (Fig. 4), reflect the much greater 
development of the pelvic musculature described 
heicin. The surface of the antitrochanter in 
Ciridops is unusually large mainly due to greater 
extension anteriorly. The pelvis of Ciridops is 
decidedly broader and more robust with the 
anterior iliac shield being much wider and more 
rounded and the posterior portion of the ilium 
shorter and much broader. The terminal process of 
the ilium is short and triangular in Ciridops. 
versus long and pointed in its closest relatives. 
The great medial expansion of the anterior shields 
cause the dorsal iliac crests almost to meet at the 
midline, concealing most of the anterior portion of 
the synsacrum. whereas in more typical drepani- 
dmes the dorsal crests are fairly widely separated 
with deep V-shaped grooves between them to 
accommodate the posterior termini of the dorsal 
vertebral musculature. The wider posterior sur- 
aces of the ilia in Ciridops reduce the si/e of the 
visible posterior portion of the synsacrum. which 
appears recessed and has much larger interverte- 
bral foramina. The great differences in the pelvis 
of Ciridops reflect just part of the complex of 
changes involved in the evolution of the hindlimh 
for the active moving of objects with the foot 
Fossils of exceptionally stout passerine femora 
L e , re m °?xr Z , hng Whcn first encountered on 
Kaua. and Molokai, being quite unlike the femur 
IT” 8 n H T Vaiian passerinc fcnown at the 
time (F,g. 5A, Dj. A supposition that these might 
belong to species of Ciridops was eventually 
confirmed by comparison with the femur of C. 
anna that was revealed after dissection of the 
fluid-preserved trunk specimen. It also became 
apparent that equally stout fossil tibiotarsi and 
tursometatarsi (Fig. 5B. C) were also referable to 
Ciridops (Olson ct al. 1987: James and Olson 
1991: fig. 35). The hindlimb elements of C. term 
ol Kauai are somewhat less specialized than in 
other taxa of the genus (James and Olson 1991). 
The robust tarsometatarsus reflects the larger fool 
observed by many authors from examination of 
the skin specimens. Similarly robust hindlimb 
elements occur in the unrelated species that 
appear to be possible functional analogs of 
Ciridops. 
Myology of Ciridops anna 
1 he only anatomical specimen in existence of 
( iridops anna was examined to ascertain if the 
peculiar stout lemora repeatedly encountered as 
fossils really belonged to species of Ciridops. this 
being the remnants of a trunk preserved in alcohol 
in the British Museum (Natural History). Origi¬ 
nally, the entire bird had been preserved in fluid 
but it ‘was skinned out of alcohol many years ago 
while still in the Rothschild collection and is now 
a skin Reg. no. 1939.12.9.58*' (Cowles in Bock 
1972: 61). The value of the resulting skin was 
greatly compromised because the red pigments 
rapidly faded in alcohol, but we can be grateful 
thai as much of the internal anatomy was 
preserved as remained with this fragmentary 
specimen. 
The tongue and related musculature of that 
specimen was the subject of detailed dissections 
by Bock (1972) with some modifications to the 
descriptions being added later (Bock 1978). The 
results revealed relatively little in the absence 
°f comparisons across a variety of other drepani- 
dines. Some resemblances were noted to species 
ol Loxops * (which included a minimum of three 
currently recognized genera) and to cardueline 
finches in general (Bock 1970. Richards and Bock 
1973) but without an assessment of how the hyoid 
musculature of Ciridops might differ from that of 
its presumed closer relatives such as Vestiaria or 
Himatione. 
Bock (1972: 77) considered that “little addi¬ 
tional morphological evidence can be cleaned 
110111 the alcoholic remnant of Ciridops anna , so 
that no new anatomical data will be forthcoming 
unless additional anatomical specimens are found 
which is extremely unlikely,” which put undue 
