. Una storia di mammiferi fossili britannici, e uccelli . essere seento essere più stretto in proposition alla sua lunghezza, espe-cialmente alle regioni cerebrali e nasali: Le ossa nasali confluenti («) arenot solo più sottile, ma sono più attenuatedanteriorny, E quindi vindi-cate l'appropriatenessdel nome leptorhinusoriginalmente ap2)mented alla specie presente dal suo primo scopritore.* la superficie interorbitale {/) per il corno frontale è notonly meno elevato, ma è molto meno rugoso, E isseparò da uno spazio liscio di una certa estensione superficie superiore del cranio di Rhinoceros fVom che (ll) per il leptorhimis. Un nat.
911 x 2743 px | 7,7 x 23,2 cm | 3 x 9,1 inches | 300dpi
Altre informazioni:
Questa immagine potrebbe avere delle imperfezioni perché è storica o di reportage.
. A history of British fossil mammals, and birds . be seento be narrower in propor-tion to its length, espe-cially at the cerebral andnasal regions: the con-fluent nasal bones («) arenot only more slender, but are more attenuatedanteriorly, and thus vindi-cate the appropriatenessof the name leptorhinusoriginally ap2)lied to thepresent species by its firstdiscoverer.* The inter-orbital surface {/) forthe frontal horn is notonly less elevated, but ismuch less rugose, and isseparated by a smoothspace of some extent Upper surface of the skull of Rhinoceros fVom that (ll) for the leptorhimis. a nat. size. Clacton. * The French name. Rhinoceros a narims non cloisonnees, more commonlyapplied by Cuvier to this species, is now proved to be inapplicable : the moreaccurate term would be a narines demi-cloisonnees; but, as the nasal bonesnotwithstanding their partial osseous supporting wall, are actually more slenderthan those of the RIi. tichorhinus, there is no objection to the Latin nomen trivialelepiorhinus, and every reason for retaining it.. RHINOCEROS LEPTORHINUS. S69 nasal horn. We may therefore infer, from the lattercharacter, that the second horn was smaller in theleptorhine than in the tichorhine Rhinoceros, and con-nect in physiological relationship with this indicationthe non-extension of the bony supporting wall beneaththe second platform.* Another distinction is the nar-rower interspace between the curved ridges (t t) whichindicate the extent of origin of the temporal musclesupon the sides of the cranium: and this is not dueto any difference of age ; for the skull of the ticho-rhine Rhinoceros, with which I compared the Clactonspecimen, belonged to an old individual, and yetexhibited the same superior width between the tem-poral ridges as is shown in the Cuvierian figure abovereferred to. The plane of the occiput is less inclinedfrom below upwards and backwards than in the Eh.tichorhinus, and this region of the skull of the lepto-rhine species differs more strik-
