Content deleted Content added
Begin description of bones and other things. |
Description done. |
||
Line 98:
| year = 2001
| pages = 96–97
| isbn = 978-0-8014-3954-4 }}</ref> The cranium of the red rail was the largest among Mascarene rails, and was compressed from top to bottom in side view. The [[premaxilla]] that comprised most of the upper bill was long (nearly 47% longer than the cranium) and narrow, and ended in a sharp point. The [[narial]] (nostril) openings were 50% of the [[Rostrum (anatomy)|rostrum]]'s length, and prominent, elongate [[foramina]] (openings) ran almost to the front edge of the narial opening. The mandibular rostrum of the lower jaw was long, with the length of the [[mandibular symphysis]] being about 79% of the cranium's length. Hume examined all available upper beaks in 2019, and while he found no differences in curvature, he thought the differences in length was most likely due to sexual dimorphism.<ref name="Hume2019"/> ▼
The [[scapula]] (shoulder blade) was wide in side view, and the [[coracoid]] was comparatively short, with a wide shaft.<ref name="Hume2019"/> The [[sternum]] and [[humerus]] (upper arm bone) were small, indicating that it had lost the power of flight. The humerus was {{convert|60|-|66|mm|abbr=on}}, and its shaft was strongly curved from top to bottom. The [[ulna]] (lower arm bone) was short and strongly arched from top to bottom. Its legs were long and slender for such a large bird, but the pelvis was
▲The cranium of the red rail was the largest among Mascarene rails, and was compressed from top to bottom in side view. The [[premaxilla]] that comprised most of the upper bill was long (nearly 47% longer than the cranium) and narrow, and ended in a sharp point. The narial openings were 50% of the [[Rostrum (anatomy)|rostrum]]'s length, and prominent, elongate [[foramina]] (openings) ran almost to the front edge of the narial opening. The mandibular rostrum of the lower jaw was long, with the length of the [[mandibular symphysis]] being about 79% of the cranium's length. Hume examined all available upper beaks in 2019, and while he found no differences in curvature, he thought the differences in length was most likely due to sexual dimorphism.<ref name="Hume2019"/>
▲The [[sternum]] and [[humerus]] were small, indicating that it had lost the power of flight. Its legs were long and slender for such a large bird, but the pelvis was compact and stout.<ref name="Newton & Gadow"/> The pelvis was {{convert|60|mm|abbr=on}} in length, the femur was {{convert|69|-|71|mm|abbr=on}}, the tibia was {{convert|98|-|115|mm|abbr=on}}, the [[tarsometatarsus]] was {{convert|79|mm|abbr=on}}, and the humerus was {{convert|60|-|66|mm|abbr=on}}.<ref name="Newton & Gadow"/> It differed from the Rodrigues rail, its closest relative, in having a proportionately shorter humerus, a narrower and longer skull, and having shorter and higher nostrils. They differed considerably in plumage, based on early descriptions.<ref name="OlsonB"/> The red rail was also larger, with somewhat smaller wings, but their leg proportions were similar.<ref name="Günther& Newton"/> The [[pelvis]] and [[sacrum]] was also similar.<ref name="Newton & Gadow"/> The Dutch ornithologist Marc Herremans suggested in 1989 that the red and Rodrigues rails were [[neotenic]], with juvenile features such as weak pectoral apparatuses and downy plumage.<ref>{{cite conference |last1=Herremans |first1=M. |title=Trends in the evolution of insular land birds, exemplified by the Comoros, Seychelles and Mascarenes. |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311907872 |conference=Proceedings International Symposium on Vertebrate Biogeography and Systematics in the Tropics | pages = 249–260 | location = Bonn}}</ref><ref name="Livezey2003">{{cite journal |last1=Livezey |first1=B. C. |title=Evolution of flightlessness in rails (Gruiformes: Rallidae): phylogenetic, ecomorphological, and ontogenetic perspectives |journal=Ornithological Monographs |date=2003 |issue=53 |pages=iii–654 |doi=10.2307/40168337 |jstor=40168337}}</ref>
===Contemporary descriptions===
[[File:Gelderland1601-1603 Aphanapteryx bonasia.jpg|thumb|upright|alt=drawing of red rail|1601 sketches of a killed or stunned specimen, attributted to Joris Laerle]]
Mundy visited Mauritius in
{{Quotation|A Mauritius henne, a Fowle as bigge as our English hennes, of a yellowish Wheaten Colour, of which we only got one. It hath a long, Crooked sharpe pointed bill. Feathered all over, butte on their wings they are soe Few and smalle that they cannot with them raise themselves From the ground. There is a pretty way of taking them with a red cap, but this of ours was taken with a stick. They bee very good Meat, and are also Cloven footed, soe that they can Neyther Fly nor Swymme.<ref>{{Cite journal | last1 = Sclater | first1 = W. l.| title = The "Mauritius Hen
Another English traveller, John Marshall, described the bird as follows in 1668:
Line 148 ⟶ 146:
[[File:The Animals Entering Noah's Ark 1570s Jacopo Bassano.jpg|thumb|[[Jacopo Bassano]]'s 1570 painting ''Arca di Noè'', perhaps showing a red rail (or a bittern) in the lower right]]
The red rail depicted in the ''Gelderland'' journal appears to have been stunned or killed, and the sketch is the earliest record of the species. It is the only illustration of the species drawn on Mauritius, and according to Hume, the most accurate depiction. The image was sketched with pencil and finished in ink, but details such as a deeper beak and the shoulder of the wing are only seen in the underlying sketch.<ref name="Gelderland">{{cite journal| doi = 10.3366/anh.2003.30.1.13| last = Hume | first = J. P.| year = 2003| title = The journal of the flagship ''Gelderland'' – dodo and other birds on Mauritius 1601| journal = Archives of Natural History| volume = 30| issue = 1| pages = 13–27}}</ref><ref name="Hume2019"/> In addition, there are three rather crude black-and-white sketches, but differences in them were enough for some authors to suggest that each image depicted a distinct species, leading to the creation of several scientific names which are now synonyms.<ref name="Fuller Extinct"/> An illustration in van den Broecke's 1646 account (based on his stay on Mauritius in 1617) shows a red rail next to a dodo and a one-horned goat, but is not referenced in the text. An illustration in Herbert's 1634 account (based on his stay in 1629) shows a red rail between a broad-billed parrot and a dodo, and has been referred to as "extremely crude" by Hume. Mundy's
As suggested by Greenway, there are also depictions of what appears to be a red rail in three of the Dutch artist [[Roelant Savery]]'s paintings.<ref name =Greenway>{{cite book
Line 224 ⟶ 222:
===Extinction===
[[File:Aphanapteryx bonasia by Mundy.jpg|thumb|alt=drawing of red rail|Drawing by [[Peter Mundy]],
Many terrestrial rails are flightless, and island populations are particularly vulnerable to man-made changes; as a result, rails have suffered more extinctions than any other family of birds. All six endemic species of Mascarene rails are extinct, all caused by human activities.<ref name="Hume2019"/> In addition to hunting pressure by humans, the fact that the red rail nested on the ground made it vulnerable to pigs and other [[introduced animals]], which ate their eggs and young, probably contributing to its extinction, according to Cheke.<ref name="Cheke87">{{Cite book| last1 = Cheke | first1 = A. S. | editor1-last = Diamond| editor1-first = A. W.| doi = 10.1017/CBO9780511735769.003 | chapter = An ecological history of the Mascarene Islands, with particular reference to extinctions and introductions of land vertebrates | title = Studies of Mascarene Island Birds | url = https://archive.org/details/studiesmascarene00diam_318 | url-access = limited | pages = [https://archive.org/details/studiesmascarene00diam_318/page/n11 5]–89 | year = 1987 | isbn = 978-0-521-11331-1| location = Cambridge | publisher = Cambridge University Press }}</ref> Hume pointed out that the red rail had coexisted with introduced rats since at least the 14th century, which did not appear to have affected them (as they seem to have been relatively common in the 1680s), and they were probably able to defend their nests (''Dryolimnas'' rails have been observed killing rats, for example). They also seemed to have managed to survive alongside humans as well as introduced pigs and [[crab-eating macaques]].<ref name="Hume2019"/>
| |||