Description
From the subfossil bones, illustrations and descriptions, it is known that the Red Rail was a flightless bird, somewhat larger than a chicken. Subfossil specimens range in size, which may indicate sexual dimorphism, as is common among rails. Its exact length is unknown, but the pelvis was 60 mm (2.3 in) in length, the femur was 69–71 mm (2.7–2.8 in), the tibia was 98–115 mm (3.8–4.5), the tarsometatarsus was 79 mm (3.1 in), and the humerus was 60–66 mm (2.3–2.6 in). Its plumage was reddish brown all over, and the feathers were fluffy and hairlike; the tail was not visible in the living bird and the short wings likewise also nearly disappeared in the plumage. It had a long, slightly curved, brown bill, and some illustrations suggest it had a nape crest. It perhaps resembled a lightly built Kiwi, and it has also been likened to a Limpkin, both in appearance and behaviour. 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. 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. The Red Rail was also larger, with somewhat smaller wings, but their leg proportions were similar. The pelvis and sacrum was also similar.
Read more about this topic: Red Rail
Famous quotes containing the word description:
“God damnit, why must all those journalists be such sticklers for detail? Why, they’d hold you to an accurate description of the first time you ever made love, expecting you to remember the color of the room and the shape of the windows.”
—Lyndon Baines Johnson (1908–1973)
“It is possible—indeed possible even according to the old conception of logic—to give in advance a description of all ‘true’ logical propositions. Hence there can never be surprises in logic.”
—Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889–1951)
“Everything to which we concede existence is a posit from the standpoint of a description of the theory-building process, and simultaneously real from the standpoint of the theory that is being built. Nor let us look down on the standpoint of the theory as make-believe; for we can never do better than occupy the standpoint of some theory or other, the best we can muster at the time.”
—Willard Van Orman Quine (b. 1908)