A difference in terminology between U.K. and American medical personnel prompted the authors to research the proper terminology for this instrument:
We sought the earliest post-1758 uses of the terms “crocodile forceps” and “alligator forceps” using a web based literature search concentrating on medical textbooks and catalogues. We obtained representative specimens of the forceps in question (Microfrance Incorporated, Medtronic Xomed, Jacksonville, FL; n=13 models), and we compared measurements with those obtained from adult and juvenile skulls of C acutus (n=8) and A mississippiensis (n=12), from the collections of the University Museum of Zoology, Cambridge and the Natural History Museum, London. Snout width was measured between the positions of the most caudal teeth, while snout length was measured from the midpoint of the line connecting these teeth to the most rostral point on the snout. For the forceps, these measurements were made from the point of articulation at the most posterior tooth. Snout ratio was defined as snout length divided by snout width. We also counted the numbers of teeth in the upper jaws.
The
full report is in the Christmas issue of the BMJ, along with photographs of the appropriate skulls. TL:DR...
Our literature search suggests that the terms “alligator forceps” and “crocodile forceps” appeared at around the same time, but “alligator” has become the preferred term worldwide. However, our morphological comparison shows that the snout ratio and the modal tooth number of the forceps are actually closer to that of the crocodile than to the alligator... Some important differences remain, however; notably the fact that in the forceps it is the upper jaw that moves, whereas in crocodilians—despite Aristotle’s assertions to the contrary in his History of Animals—it is the lower.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق