Horváth Géza (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 16. (Budapest 1918)

Fejérváry, G.J.: Contributions to a Monography on fossil Varanidae and on Megalanidae 16

rinnenförmig vertieft.* Regarding the shortness and stouter configuration of this bone, these faetures cannot be designated as forming a difference between V

. marathonensis and recent M o n i t o r s, such characters being of mere specific value, and the two markings alluded to are not a special characteristic of the named fossil form, as recent Monitors are nowise uniformly characterized by longer- or slenderer upper jaws, in this respect presenting on the contrary, a large sen'

es of various formations. Hie well marked «furrow» mentioned by WEITHOFER is nothing else than a very strongly developed e x c a v a t i o n a s a 1 i s mihi (see Pl. II, Figs

. 1 —2) beginning immediately under the proc. praefrontalid (missing in both Fig. 8. tVaranus maratlionensis WEITH. The type-remains described by Mr. WEITHOFER.— Nat. size. — a : left supraorbital, b : other skull portions imbedded in matrix (see text). — From WEITHOFER, op. oit. Tai. NIX, Figs. 8 — 9. fossils, viz. in that figured by WEITHOFER and in the Csarnóta-specimen) which is stronger developed than the corresponding element in V. griseus DAUD., with which it agrees well in shape. A «mehr oder weniger scharfe Kante», viz. the upper margin (crista n as a lis mihi) of the maxillary is naturally present also in V. marathonensis, although appearing morphologically more separated by the strongly-marked excavatio nasalis.

1 It is owing to the same misinterpretation of osteological characters that the «différence» alluded to below between V. marathonensis and the recent Moni t ors has been signalized by Mr .WEITHOFER : «Während weiter bei den recenten Varanen die Knochenwand des Maxillare in seiner hinteren Partie mit 1 It is doubtful whether th.' Pikermi-fossil was not deformed to a certain degree, the depth of the excavatio nasalis being perhaps a consequence of this deformation ; or might it have been filled up by matrix in its posterior párt, appearing thus deeper than in reality, or the figure may be somewhat exaggerated? Annales Mosel Nationalis Hungarici. XVI. 25