Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 May 2009
Although educated Europeans have never carried the art of ‘spooring’, or tracking, to the perfection with which it is employed by the Australian and African natives, it is possible for us by applying a little common sense and certain experience of the tracks of living beasts to the fossil footprints so commonly found in terrestrial deposits laid down under arid conditions to find out many features of the animals which made them.
page 396 note 1 The Stuttgart material of Mastodonsaurus, when examined in the light of the now well-known Eryops, shows clearly that Dr. Fraas's familiar restoration of the pelvis is quite wrong; his ‘ilium’, as shown conclusively by the occurrence of a specimen lacking the pubis, and of an isolated ischium, is really the whole os innominatum, nearly identical with that of Eryops. Dr. Fraas's pubis is an ischium, and his ischium a scapula-coracoid extremely similar to that of Eryops. There is also a humerus, figured by Pleininger1 many years ago, which, except that it is rather more slender, perfectly resembles that of Eryops.
page 398 note 1 [This Text-figure, from the Guide to Friar Park, Henley-on-Thames (1914), p. 27, fig. 12, was kindly lent by Sir Frank Crisp, Bart. (The scales have been added, and are not in Professor Jaekel's outline figure.)—Ed. Geol. Mag.]
