132 
those of the femur led me -to conjecture*, more slender, and the bone is relatively 
longer, not only than in Din. didiformis, but also than in any other known species of 
Dinornis, not excepting the Din. ingens, to the tarso-metatarsal bone of which the present 
tarso-metatarsal from the North Island bears the nearest resemblance in general form 
and proportions, and in the important character of the rough oval surface (ib. d) indi- 
cative of the attachment of a back-toe, one-fourth from the distal end. Little needs to 
be added to the ‘Comparative Table of Admeasurements,’ and to the figures in Plate 
XL., for the exposition of the specific characters of this bone. In the form of the 
concavity at the middle of the fore-part of the upper half of the shaft it resembles the 
tarso-metatarsus of the Din. struthoides more than that of the Din. casuarinus, in which, 
as in Din. erassus, the same surface below the rough and perforated depression is flat 
or slightly convex. 
The tarso-metatarsal bone of the Din. casuarinus (Pl. XL. fig. 3) is remarkable, not 
only for its great breadth, in proportion to its length, but also, like the femur, for the 
expansion of the distal end, and especially the production of the inner trochlear division. 
On inspecting Mr. Percy Earl’s large collection of remains of Dinornis from Waika- 
waite, it was satisfactory to find with how little difficulty the bones could be selected 
which belonged to the species which had been named :— 
Dinornis giganteus, 
mgens, 
struthoides, 
dromioides. 
Of the second of these species, of which I had before seen only the femur and tibia 
from the North Island, Mr. Earl’s collection contained the tarso-metatarsal bones, 
besides very perfect specimens of femora and tibie. 
Thus it appears that four species of Dinornis, including the three most remarkable 
for their gigantic stature, were common to both the North and South Islands. 
Mr. Earl’s collection did not contain any specimen of Dinornis didiformis or of Din. 
otidiformis ; but after selecting those bones which agreed with the previously determined 
species, there remained a considerable number of most perfect specimens of femora, 
tibize and tarso-metatarsal bones of unquestionably full-grown individuals, which differed 
as much in configuration and proportions from the previously determined species as 
these did from one another. The most abundant remains belonged to the species above 
* «The femur f 16 cannot be regarded as belonging to a young individual of the gigantic species; there 
remains then no other conclusion than that it must represent a fifth distinct species, of which there are neither 
tibize nor metatarsi in the present collection. I venture to surmise, that the tibia, and especially the tarsv- 
metatarsus of this species, will be found relatively longer and more slender than in the Din. struthoides and 
Din. didiformis; so much may be anticipated from the more slender proportions of the femur, which moreover 
resembles the femur of the Emeu in some of the characters by which it differs from the above species of Dinornis.” 
—Zoological Transactions, vol, iii. part 3, 1844, p. 252. 
