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

Hirundinidae (Plate I, Fig. 1; Plate III ) The humerus of this group is very characteristic and confusion with other ones is not possible [see key 2 (3)J . Fossa pneumoanconaea pneumatic, fossa tricipitalis weakly developed, processus supracondyloideus strong proximally, processus flexoris distally elongated. The differences among the three species (genera) of temperate Europe are as follows: in Hirundo rustica rather rather stout and average length figures 15.0 mm, av. width of the diaphysis 1. 9 mm. Tuberculum dorsale mediocre broadened, the impression distally from this tuberculum not very deep, processus flexoris distally elongated. In Riparia riparia bone of same size but rather slender (av. length figures 15.0 mm, av. width 1. 7 mm), tuberculum dorsale very strongly developed, the impression distally from it very scarcely developed, incisura capitis from ventral view broader than in other species. In Delichon urbica somewhat smaller dimensions (av. length figures 14.0 mm, av. width 1.7 mm), tuberculum dorsale rounded, the above-mentioned impression well developed, incisura capitis from ventral view narrow, tuberculum ventrale from the same view narrower too. Motacillidae (Plate IV ) In the taxonomical key five families are summarized by the morphological types, in which both fossae of the humerus are deep, confluent, nearly not separated by the crus dorsale fossae: Fringillidae, Motacillidae, Prunellidae, Remizidae and Aegithalidae [Key No. 8 (5)J . Among these systematical units Remizidae and Aegithalide can be excluded by their morphology (for description see at the families) and smaller dimensions (length 11-12 mm, proximal width 4.3 mm, against 17-21 mm and 5.3-7.0 mm in Motacillidae). The Prunellidae are morphologically also different (for description of features see at that family). The differences from Fringillidae are very slight and hard to define. BALLMANN (1973) gave some features, most of them should be proved by a new revision. According to these definitions the habitus of the humerus of Motacillidae is rather narrow, with weeker epiphyses, crista pectoralis ending distally in a sharp edge, processus supracondyloideus being rather obtuse. In addition to these, I would mention the more reduced wall of crus dorsale fossae (as against Fringillidae), as well as the less sharp inner contour of crus ventrale fossae too (this last feature shows exceptions!). The differences between Motacilla and Anthus are even much more subtle. The crista pectoralis seems to be in Motacilla rather short, in Anthus rather long. The most valuable feature is apparently the shape of the epicondylus ventralis from ventral view, being in Motacilla more prominent, in Anthus rather reduced. Let us now go on to the characterisation of the humeri of the wagtails and pitpits nesting in, or migrating through temperate Europe. PLATE I. Fig. 1. Delichon urbica - Fig. 2. Phylloscopus trochilus - Fig. 3. Parus major - Fig. 4. Chloris chloris - Fig. 5. Oenanthe oenanthe - Fig. 6. Sturnus vulgaris Fig. 7. Luscinia megarhynchos - Fig. 8. Turdus philomelos - Fig. 9. Cinclus cinclus Fig. 10. Calandrella brachydactyla - Fig. 11. Oriolus oriolus - Fig. 12. Troglodytes troglodytes - Fig. 13. Certhia brachydactyla (Fig. 1-2. medial view; Fig. 3-13. foreshortened view of medial side of the proximal epiphysis)