Vörös A. szerk.: Fragmenta Mineralogica Et Palaentologica 11. 1983. (Budapest, 1983)

Measurements of the humeri of Sturnidae length width of proximal distal diaphysis width Sturnus roseus 27. 2 2. 6 8. 2 6.7 Sturnus vulgaris 26. 4-28. 2 2. 5-2. 8 8. 5-9. 2 6. 7-7.3 Oriolidae (Plate I, Fig. 11; Plate V, Fig. 5) The single European member of this family, Oriolus oriolus may be characterized by the fact that the fossa tricipitalis in the humerus is reduced, flattened, fossa pneumoanconaea deep, somewhat pneumatized, the whole bone "inflated" and relatively large [see systematical key No. 18 (17)]. Because of its size it cannot be confused with the morphologically otherwise close corresponding bones of Bombycilla or Lanius

, at most with the one of the largest members of Alaudidae (

Melanocorypha-species). As opposed to the last ones the mentioned "inflated" habitus, the more curved form of the whole bone and the more developed tuberculum ventrale are characteristic, from dorsal view overlapping the ventral edge of the crus ventrale fossae. The measurements (average) of the humerus of Oriolus oriolus

: length 30. 0 mm, proximal width 10.0 mm, distal width 8.5 mm, width of diaphysis 3.2 mm. CONCLUSIONS I do not have doubts about the fact that the analysis of the humerus of smaller Oscine Passeriformes given in this paper is based upon a single bone of the birds of a geographically very confined region (Eastern Central Europe only), and therefore it can be registered only as a first step forward in this field of knowledge. Thus, to draw farreaching evolutionary viz. systematical conclusions would be out of place here. This is the situation all the more, because, as it is known, there is in literature a great deal of discussion concerning the taxonomical value of morphological features of the humerus of Passeriformes, especially of the one of the double or single pneumatic fossa (ASHLEY 1941, DELACOUR & VAURIE 1957, MAYR 1958, WETMORE 1960, BOCK 1962, BALLMANN 1973 etc.). Therefore I have only to hint in this place some morphological features, - mentioned partly during the discussion of the analysis of the corresponding bone of various taxonomical units. The great morphological homogenity in the features of the humerus within the families Hirundinidae, Fringillidae (in the widest sense, including Emberizidae and Passeridae), Alaudidae, Motacillidae or Paridae (in stricter sense, only species of the genus Parus

), - draws one's eye. In contrast the more or less extreme heterogeneity of such large families as Sylviidae, Muscicapidae (in recent literature often in the widest sense incl. Turdidae, with by itself very different types) seems to be remarkable. Some families are in their humeri, - and osteologically in general, - very distinct: these are at first Hirundinidae, Cinclidae, Troglodytidae and Tichodromatidae viz.

, the single species of the "family: Tichodroma muraria. The last one is not only in its humerus. PLATE XI. Fig. 1. Emberiza citrinella - Fig. 2. Fringilla coelebs - Fig. 3. Passer montanus - Fig. 4. Loxia curvirostra - Fig. 5. Serinus serinus - Fig. 6. Coccothraustes coccothraustes - Fig. 7. Carduelis carduelis - Fig. 6. Emberiza citrinella - Fig. 9. Passer montanus - Fig. 10. Pyrrhula pyrrhula - Fig. 11. Loxia curvirostra - Fig. 12. Fringilla coelebs (Fig. 1-4: medial (caudal) view; Fig. 5-12; foreshortened view of medial (caudal) side of the proximal epiphysis)