parative measurements given below. The less prominent head in Figure 9, compared with that shown in Plate VI, Fig. 1, is due to the fact that the bone is thrown inwards distally, thus bringing the head into view. The figure is drawn in true projection.
COMPARATIVE MEASUREMENTS OF FEMUR
| Parasaurolo- phus walkeri |
Saurolophus osborni |
Kritosaurus incurvimanus |
Trachodon mirabilis |
Claosaurus annectens | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Length, outer condyle to proxi- mal end |
1032 | 1150 | 1045 | 1040 | 1170 |
| Width across trochanters | 230 | 209 | |||
| Width of inner condyle | 275 | 292 | |||
| Width of outer condyle | 285 | 262 | |||
| Thickness at condyles | 180 | 210 | |||
| Width of shaft above condyles | 130 | ||||
| Thickness of shaft above con- dyles |
110 | ||||
| Girth of shaft above condyles | 110 | ||||
| Width of head, antero-postero | 185 | ||||
| Length of 4th trochanter | 290 | ||||
| Height of 4th trochanter | 100 | ||||
| Thickness across head to mid- line between trochanters |
265 |
It will be observed that the lengths of the different femora do not greatly differ. The other measurements are not very reliable, as crushing in many cases seriously affects the proportions of different parts. For instance, it is unlikely that the figures given above for the widths of the inner and outer condyles are correct. Why should the inner condyle exceed the outer in width in Kritosaurus and the opposite condition maintain in Parasaurolophus?
While the pelvic girdles of trachodonts are distinctive for the different genera, it has not yet been established that the same holds true for the bones of the hind limb, which seem
