DOCSLIB.ORG

Who Discovered the Phorusrhacidae? an Episode in the History of Avian Palaeontology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Who Discovered the Phorusrhacidae? an Episode in the History of Avian Palaeontology – 123 – Paleornithological Research 2013 Proceed. 8th Inter nat. Meeting Society of Avian Paleontology and Evolution Ursula B. Göhlich & Andreas Kroh (Eds) Who discovered the Phorusrhacidae? An episode in the history of avian palaeontology ERIC BUFFETAUT CNRS, UMR 8538, Laboratoire de Géologie de l’Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris, France; E-mail: [email protected] Abstract — Remains of giant predatory ground birds were first discovered in the Tertiary of Argentina at the end of the 1880s, within the context of a bitter competition between Florentino AMEGHINO (and his brother Carlos) and Francisco Pascasio MORENO, then director of the newly founded Museo de La Plata. The early stages in the discovery and description of the Phorusrhacidae were characterised by misidentifications, hurried publications, undue multiplication of taxa and a general climate of mutual distrust and hostility. One of the few positive points of the feud between AMEGHINO and MORENO was that it led to several palaeontological expeditions to southern Argentina, which resulted in the discovery of large quantities of important fossils. In many respects, the com- petition between the Argentinian palaeontologists parallels the well-known feud between E.D. COPE and O.C. MARSH, which took place in the United States at roughly the same time. Key words: Phorusrhacidae, History, Argentina, Ameghino, Moreno, Mercerat Introduction as well (ANGST & BUFFEtaUT 2012). Reports of phorusrhacids from Antarctica were considered At the end of the 19th century, the discovery of as unfounded by CENIZO (2012) and TAMBUSSI & giant predatory flightless birds in the Cenozoic DEGRANGE (2013). The first specimens were dis- of South America attracted much attention in covered in southern Argentina at the end of the the palaeontological community and beyond, 1880s, under rather peculiar circumstances. At and can be considered as an important episode that time, Argentine palaeontology was marked in the history of avian palaeontology. These both by remarkably successful expeditions in birds are now generally known as Phorusrhaci- various parts of the country, notably Patagonia, dae, although other names (e.g., Stereornithes) which revealed hitherto completely unknown were once used. They are mainly known from vertebrate faunas, and by an acute feud between South America, with a record ranging from the two of the leading Argentine researchers of the Palaeogene to the Pleistocene (ALVARENGA & time, Florentino AMEGHINO and Francisco Pasca- HÖFLING 2003; AGNOLIN 2009; ALVARENGA et al. sio MORENO. The discovery of the phorusrhacid 2011; TAMBUSSI & DEGRANGE 2013), and have birds is part of this wider story. Although its main also been reported from the Plio-Pleistocene of outlines have been discussed in various reviews North America (BRODKORB 1963) and the Eocene of the Phorusrhacidae (ALVARENGA & HÖFLING of Africa (MOURER-CHAUVIRÉ et al. 2011); they 2003; AGNOLIN 2009), an examination of publi- appear to be present in the Eocene of Europe cations and correspondence by the protagonists © Verlag Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, 2013 published 10 Dec. 2013 – 124 – FIGURE 1. Florentino AMEGHINO (left) and Carlos AMEGHINO (right). revealed various hitherto overlooked interesting of his interpretations were markedly idiosyncratic points which are the topic of the present paper. (for a recent biography of Florentino AMEGHINO, For easier reading, quotations of papers in Span- see CASINOS, 2012). Throughout his scientific ish or French have been translated into English career, Florentino AMEGHINO was seconded by his by the author. younger brother Carlos AMEGHINO (1865–1936), who from 1887 to 1903 conducted a total of 15 expeditions to Patagonia, in the course of which The institutional and personal background he collected a huge number of fossil vertebrate specimens which were described by his elder The palaeontological potential of southern brother. Argentina had been revealed by Charles DAR- Carlos AMEGHINO had been employed by WIN during the voyage of the Beagle, when, in MORENO at the same time as his brother, as “trav- 1833, he discovered important fossil vertebrate elling naturalist” for the Museo de La Plata. In localities in the vicinity of Bahía Blanca (DARWIN that capacity, he was sent to southern Patagonia 1839). However, although subsequent travellers in January, 1887, to collect fossils, notably from did occasionally collect fossils in Patagonia, it localities that had been found by MORENO dur- was not until the 1880s that systematic palaeon- ing some of his earlier visits to the Santa Cruz tological research began to be carried out in what area (AMEGHINO 1887). Carlos’s trip was enor- was then a remote and only partly explored part mously successful in terms of the number of of Argentina. fossils, mostly representing completely new taxa, This new development was largely a con- that he collected. By the time he came back to sequence of the establishment of the Museo de La Plata in September, 1887, however, relations La Plata, a modern scientific institution that was between his brother and MORENO had begun to launched in the then recently founded capital of deteriorate, for reasons involving both bureau- Buenos Aires province thanks to an initiative of cratic problems and a clash of personalities that Francisco Pascasio MORENO (1852–1919), an have been discussed by various authors (FER- active scientist, explorer and administrator, who NICOLA 2011; CASINOS 2012). In January 1888, had travelled extensively in Patagonia in the Florentino AMEGHINO resigned from his position 1870s. Palaeontological research at the Museo at the Museo de La Plata, and in February of the de La Plata really started in 1886, when MORENO same year, he was officially dismissed from it. hired Florentino AMEGHINO (1854–1911) as sub- In addition, access to the palaeontological collec- director and secretary of the museum. Although tions was denied him, although he had provided a largely self-taught, AMEGHINO was a brilliant pal- large part of them. aeontologist who had already made a name for From then on, and until he finally became direc- himself internationally through his work on the tor of the Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales fossil mammals of Argentina — although some in Buenos Aires in 1902, Florentino AMEGHINO SAPE Proceedings 2013 – 125 – FIGURE 2. Francisco Pascasio MORENO (left) and Alcides MERCERat (right). carried out his palaeontological researches with- 18th November, 1887 (AMEGHINO 1887). Possibly out any permanent official support, which did his relations with MORENO had already deterio- not prevent him from sending his brother Carlos rated and he wished to establish priority for the (who had left the Museo de La Plata together with new taxa as quickly as possible — in any case he him) on new collecting expeditions to Patagonia. was in the habit of publishing very preliminary Funding for them was provided by the book and descriptions at a fast rate. Among the specimens stationary shop Florentino and his brother Juan described as new taxa was an incomplete large, ran in La Plata, supplemented by the occasional edentulous lower jaw, which AMEGHINO placed sale of fossil collections to European institutions among the Edentata under the heading “genera (CASINOS 2012). Meanwhile, competing expedi- incertae sedis”. He called the new taxon Phorus- tions were sent from the Museo de La Plata to rhacos longissimus and stressed its considerable Patagonia by MORENO, each trying to collect size and complete lack of teeth. and describe as many new fossils as possible, In 1889, Florentino AMEGHINO published before the hated competitor could do so (a situ- a huge monograph on the fossil mammals of ation rather reminiscent of the well-known feud Argentina, partly based on material collected between E.D. COPE and O.C. MARSH in North by Carlos in Patagonia in 1887, which should America at roughly the same time). It is within have been deposited in the Museo de La Plata, this peculiar scientific framework of intense but apparently was appropriated by Florentino, competition that the discovery of the Phorusrha- and ultimately found its way into the Museo cidae took place. Argentino de Ciencias Naturales in Buenos Aires (FERNICOLA 2011). In that work, AMEGHINO (1889) described in more detail the mysterious toothless Phorusrhacos, an edentulous mammal? jaw. He emended the generic name to Phororha- cos (however, the original spelling Phorusrhacos When Carlos AMEGHINO came back from his first has priority and must be used, see BRODKORB expedition to Patagonia in September 1887, he 1963) Phorusrhacos longissimus was placed in brought with him a considerable collection of fos- a family of its own, the Phororhacosidae (later sil vertebrates, mainly from the Santa Cruz beds emended to Phorusrhacidae by BRODKORB 1963), (now known to be Miocene in age, at that time itself placed among the Edentata and considered considered as Eocene by Florentino AMEGHINO). as completely extinct. AMEGHINO noted that the In his own words, Florentino AMEGHINO worked toothless tip of the jaw must have been covered “day and night” to produce preliminary descrip- by a horny sheath, similar to the beak of birds tions of more than 120 species of fossil mammals and turtles. No illustration was provided. On the collected by his brother, which were ready by basis of the first specimen discovered by Carlos BUFFETAUT: Who discovered the Phorusrhacidae? – 126 – together by Carlos AMEGHINO from Patagonia. MORENO was fully aware of Carlos’s continuing collecting activities, and in order to gain prior- ity over his rivals, between 1888 and 1891 he published a number of brief reports on the devel- opment of the Museo de La Plata and especially the new palaeontological discoveries made by its teams of field researchers. Thus, in 1888, he published a preliminary report on the activities of the museum during the first semester of 1888. In it, he emphasized the discoveries made at Monte Hermoso, a locality on the south-eastern coast of Buenos Aires province (therefore not properly speaking in Patagonia) that had already been vis- ited by DARWIN, and more recently by Florentino AMEGHINO in 1887.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Orthocladiinae 7.1
    ORTHOCLADIINAE 7.1 SUBFAMILY ORTHOCLADIINAE 7 DIAGNOSIS: Antennae with 3-7 segments; may be strongly reduced or may be longer than head capsule. Labrum with S I variable (simple, bifid, branched, serrated, palmate or plumose); S II usually simple but may be bifid, branched, palmate or plumose; S III simple (rarely bifid); S IV normal. Labral lamellae present or absent. Mentum usually well sclerotized, with several to more than 25 teeth; ventro- mental plates absent/vestigial to very large, without striae (occasionally with ridges in Nanocladius); beard present or absent. Prementum variably developed but never with dense well developed median brush of setae. Body with anterior parapods (sometimes reduced and/or fused); with posterior parapods well developed, separate or fused, or parapods reduced or absent. Setal fringe, setal tufts or long setae sometimes present. Anal tubules normally present, may be reduced or absent/vestigial. NOTES: One of the most diverse of the chironomid subfamilies; orthoclad larvae are found in an amaz- ing variety of habitats, running the gamut from terrestrial (corn fields, dung, greenhouses, leaf litter in hardwood forests) to seeps, springs, streams, rivers, ponds and lakes in freshwater, and coastal estuarine and littoral marine areas. Most larvae are scrapers, shredders or collectors-gatherers; some taxa are preda- tors, some are parasites. Key to the genera of larval Orthocladiinae of the southeastern United States (larvae are unknown for Apometriocnemus, Chasmatonotus, Diplosmittia, Lipurometriocnemus, Plhudsonia, Saetheriella, Sublettiella and Tavastia) 1 Length of antennae at least 1/2 length of head capsule ............................................................ 2 1’ Length of antennae less than 1/2 length of head capsule ........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Endocasts: Using Predicted Brain-Structure Volumes of Extinct Birds to Assess Neuroanatomical and Behavioral Inferences
    diversity Article Beyond Endocasts: Using Predicted Brain-Structure Volumes of Extinct Birds to Assess Neuroanatomical and Behavioral Inferences 1, , 2 2 Catherine M. Early * y , Ryan C. Ridgely and Lawrence M. Witmer 1 Department of Biological Sciences, Ohio University, Athens, OH 45701, USA 2 Department of Biomedical Sciences, Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, Ohio University, Athens, OH 45701, USA; [email protected] (R.C.R.); [email protected] (L.M.W.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Current Address: Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA. y Received: 1 November 2019; Accepted: 30 December 2019; Published: 17 January 2020 Abstract: The shape of the brain influences skull morphology in birds, and both traits are driven by phylogenetic and functional constraints. Studies on avian cranial and neuroanatomical evolution are strengthened by data on extinct birds, but complete, 3D-preserved vertebrate brains are not known from the fossil record, so brain endocasts often serve as proxies. Recent work on extant birds shows that the Wulst and optic lobe faithfully represent the size of their underlying brain structures, both of which are involved in avian visual pathways. The endocasts of seven extinct birds were generated from microCT scans of their skulls to add to an existing sample of endocasts of extant birds, and the surface areas of their Wulsts and optic lobes were measured. A phylogenetic prediction method based on Bayesian inference was used to calculate the volumes of the brain structures of these extinct birds based on the surface areas of their overlying endocast structures. This analysis resulted in hyperpallium volumes of five of these extinct birds and optic tectum volumes of all seven extinct birds.
    [Show full text]
  • The Asymmetry in the Great American Biotic Interchange in Mammals Is Consistent with Differential Susceptibility to Mammalian Predation
    Coversheet This is the accepted manuscript (post-print version) of the article. Contentwise, the accepted manuscript version is identical to the final published version, but there may be differences in typography and layout. How to cite this publication Please cite the final published version: Faurby, S. and Svenning, J.-C. (2016), The asymmetry in the Great American Biotic Interchange in mammals is consistent with differential susceptibility to mammalian predation. Global Ecol. Biogeogr., 25: 1443–1453. doi:10.1111/geb.12504 Publication metadata Title: The asymmetry in the Great American Biotic Interchange in mammals is consistent with differential susceptibility to mammalian predation Author(s): Faurby, S. and Svenning, J.-C. Journal: Global Ecology and Biogeography DOI/Link: https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12504 Document version: Accepted manuscript (post-print) This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: [Faurby, S. and Svenning, J.-C. (2016), The asymmetry in the Great American Biotic Interchange in mammals is consistent with differential susceptibility to mammalian predation. Global Ecol. Biogeogr., 25: 1443–1453. doi:10.1111/geb.12504], which has been published in final form at [https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12504]. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving. General Rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognize and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Vol. 11, No. 3
    BULLETIN OF THE FLORIDA STATE MUSEUM BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES Volume 11 Number 3 CATALOGUE OF FOSSIL BIRDS: Part 3 (Ralliformes, Ichthyornithiformes, Charadriiformes) Pierce Brodkorb M,4 * . /853 0 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA Gainesville 1967 Numbers of the BULLETIN OF THE FLORIDA STATE MUSEUM are pub- lished at irregular intervals. Volumes contain about 800 pages and are not nec- essarily completed in any one calendar year. WALTER AuFFENBERC, Managing Editor OLIVER L. AUSTIN, JA, Editor Consultants for this issue. ~ HILDEGARDE HOWARD ALExANDER WErMORE Communications concerning purchase or exchange of the publication and all manuscripts should be addressed to the Managing Editor of the Bulletin, Florida State Museum, Seagle Building, Gainesville, Florida. 82601 Published June 12, 1967 Price for this issue $2.20 CATALOGUE OF FOSSIL BIRDS: Part 3 ( Ralliformes, Ichthyornithiformes, Charadriiformes) PIERCE BRODKORBl SYNOPSIS: The third installment of the Catalogue of Fossil Birds treats 84 families comprising the orders Ralliformes, Ichthyornithiformes, and Charadriiformes. The species included in this section number 866, of which 215 are paleospecies and 151 are neospecies. With the addenda of 14 paleospecies, the three parts now published treat 1,236 spDcies, of which 771 are paleospecies and 465 are living or recently extinct. The nominal order- Diatrymiformes is reduced in rank to a suborder of the Ralliformes, and several generally recognized families are reduced to subfamily status. These include Geranoididae and Eogruidae (to Gruidae); Bfontornithidae
    [Show full text]
  • 71St Annual Meeting Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Paris Las Vegas Las Vegas, Nevada, USA November 2 – 5, 2011 SESSION CONCURRENT SESSION CONCURRENT
    ISSN 1937-2809 online Journal of Supplement to the November 2011 Vertebrate Paleontology Vertebrate Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Society of Vertebrate 71st Annual Meeting Paleontology Society of Vertebrate Las Vegas Paris Nevada, USA Las Vegas, November 2 – 5, 2011 Program and Abstracts Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 71st Annual Meeting Program and Abstracts COMMITTEE MEETING ROOM POSTER SESSION/ CONCURRENT CONCURRENT SESSION EXHIBITS SESSION COMMITTEE MEETING ROOMS AUCTION EVENT REGISTRATION, CONCURRENT MERCHANDISE SESSION LOUNGE, EDUCATION & OUTREACH SPEAKER READY COMMITTEE MEETING POSTER SESSION ROOM ROOM SOCIETY OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY ABSTRACTS OF PAPERS SEVENTY-FIRST ANNUAL MEETING PARIS LAS VEGAS HOTEL LAS VEGAS, NV, USA NOVEMBER 2–5, 2011 HOST COMMITTEE Stephen Rowland, Co-Chair; Aubrey Bonde, Co-Chair; Joshua Bonde; David Elliott; Lee Hall; Jerry Harris; Andrew Milner; Eric Roberts EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Philip Currie, President; Blaire Van Valkenburgh, Past President; Catherine Forster, Vice President; Christopher Bell, Secretary; Ted Vlamis, Treasurer; Julia Clarke, Member at Large; Kristina Curry Rogers, Member at Large; Lars Werdelin, Member at Large SYMPOSIUM CONVENORS Roger B.J. Benson, Richard J. Butler, Nadia B. Fröbisch, Hans C.E. Larsson, Mark A. Loewen, Philip D. Mannion, Jim I. Mead, Eric M. Roberts, Scott D. Sampson, Eric D. Scott, Kathleen Springer PROGRAM COMMITTEE Jonathan Bloch, Co-Chair; Anjali Goswami, Co-Chair; Jason Anderson; Paul Barrett; Brian Beatty; Kerin Claeson; Kristina Curry Rogers; Ted Daeschler; David Evans; David Fox; Nadia B. Fröbisch; Christian Kammerer; Johannes Müller; Emily Rayfield; William Sanders; Bruce Shockey; Mary Silcox; Michelle Stocker; Rebecca Terry November 2011—PROGRAM AND ABSTRACTS 1 Members and Friends of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, The Host Committee cordially welcomes you to the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology in Las Vegas.
    [Show full text]
  • Onetouch 4.0 Scanned Documents
    / Chapter 2 THE FOSSIL RECORD OF BIRDS Storrs L. Olson Department of Vertebrate Zoology National Museum of Natural History Smithsonian Institution Washington, DC. I. Introduction 80 II. Archaeopteryx 85 III. Early Cretaceous Birds 87 IV. Hesperornithiformes 89 V. Ichthyornithiformes 91 VI. Other Mesozojc Birds 92 VII. Paleognathous Birds 96 A. The Problem of the Origins of Paleognathous Birds 96 B. The Fossil Record of Paleognathous Birds 104 VIII. The "Basal" Land Bird Assemblage 107 A. Opisthocomidae 109 B. Musophagidae 109 C. Cuculidae HO D. Falconidae HI E. Sagittariidae 112 F. Accipitridae 112 G. Pandionidae 114 H. Galliformes 114 1. Family Incertae Sedis Turnicidae 119 J. Columbiformes 119 K. Psittaciforines 120 L. Family Incertae Sedis Zygodactylidae 121 IX. The "Higher" Land Bird Assemblage 122 A. Coliiformes 124 B. Coraciiformes (Including Trogonidae and Galbulae) 124 C. Strigiformes 129 D. Caprimulgiformes 132 E. Apodiformes 134 F. Family Incertae Sedis Trochilidae 135 G. Order Incertae Sedis Bucerotiformes (Including Upupae) 136 H. Piciformes 138 I. Passeriformes 139 X. The Water Bird Assemblage 141 A. Gruiformes 142 B. Family Incertae Sedis Ardeidae 165 79 Avian Biology, Vol. Vlll ISBN 0-12-249408-3 80 STORES L. OLSON C. Family Incertae Sedis Podicipedidae 168 D. Charadriiformes 169 E. Anseriformes 186 F. Ciconiiformes 188 G. Pelecaniformes 192 H. Procellariiformes 208 I. Gaviiformes 212 J. Sphenisciformes 217 XI. Conclusion 217 References 218 I. Introduction Avian paleontology has long been a poor stepsister to its mammalian counterpart, a fact that may be attributed in some measure to an insufRcien- cy of qualified workers and to the absence in birds of heterodont teeth, on which the greater proportion of the fossil record of mammals is founded.
    [Show full text]
  • Sistemática Y Filogenia De Las Aves Fororracoideas (Gruiformes, Cariamae)
    SISTEMÁTICA Y FILOGENIA DE LAS AVES FORORRACOIDEAS (GRUIFORMES, CARIAMAE) Federico Agnolín1, 2 1Laboratorio de Anatomía Comparada y Evolución de los Vertebrados, Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia”. Av. Ángel Gallardo, 470 (1405), Buenos Aires, República Argentina. fedeagnolí[email protected] 2Área Paleontología. Fundación de Historia Natural “Félix de Azara”. Departamento de Ciencias Naturales y Antropolo- gía. CEBBAD - Universidad Maimónides. Valentín Virasoro 732 (C1405BDB), Buenos Aires, República Argentina. Sistemática y Filogenia de las Aves Fororracoideas (Gruiformes, Cariamae). Federico Agnolín. Primera edición: septiembre de 2009. Fundación de Historia Natural Félix de Azara Departamento de Ciencias Naturales y Antropología CEBBAD - Instituto Superior de Investigaciones Universidad Maimónides Valentín Virasoro 732 (C1405BDB) Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, República Argentina. Teléfono: 011-4905-1100 (int. 1228). E-mail: [email protected] Página web: www.fundacionazara.org.ar Diseño: Claudia Di Leva. Agnolín, Federico Sistemática y filogenia de las aves fororracoideas : gruiformes, cariamae / Federico Agnolín ; dirigido por Adrián Giacchino. - 1a ed. - Buenos Aires : Fundación de Historia Natural Félix de Azara, 2009. 79 p. : il. ; 30x21 cm. - (Monografías Fundación Azara / Adrián Giacchino) ISBN 978-987-25346-1-5 © Fundación de Historia Natural Félix de Azara Queda hecho el depósito que marca la ley 11.723 Sistemática y Filogenia de las aves fororracoideas (Gruiformes, Cariamae) Resumen. En el presente trabajo se efectúa una revisión sistemática de las aves fororracoideas y se propone por primera vez una filogenia cladística para los Phororhacoidea y grupos relacionados. Se acuña el nuevo nombre Notogrues para el clado que incluye entre otros taxones a Psophia, Cariamidae y Phororhacoidea. Dentro de los Notogrues se observa una paulatina tendencia hacia la pérdida del vuelo y la carnivoría.
    [Show full text]
  • The Largest Fossil Rodent Andre´S Rinderknecht1 and R
    Proc. R. Soc. B doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.1645 Published online The largest fossil rodent Andre´s Rinderknecht1 and R. Ernesto Blanco2,* 1Museo Nacional de Historia Natural y Antropologı´a, Montevideo 11300, Uruguay 2Facultad de Ingenierı´a, Instituto de Fı´sica, Julio Herrera y Reissig 565, Montevideo 11300, Uruguay The discovery of an exceptionally well-preserved skull permits the description of the new South American fossil species of the rodent, Josephoartigasia monesi sp. nov. (family: Dinomyidae; Rodentia: Hystricognathi: Caviomorpha). This species with estimated body mass of nearly 1000 kg is the largest yet recorded. The skull sheds new light on the anatomy of the extinct giant rodents of the Dinomyidae, which are known mostly from isolated teeth and incomplete mandible remains. The fossil derives from San Jose´ Formation, Uruguay, usually assigned to the Pliocene–Pleistocene (4–2 Myr ago), and the proposed palaeoenviron- ment where this rodent lived was characterized as an estuarine or deltaic system with forest communities. Keywords: giant rodents; Dinomyidae; megamammals 1. INTRODUCTION 3. HOLOTYPE The order Rodentia is the most abundant group of living MNHN 921 (figures 1 and 2; Museo Nacional de Historia mammals with nearly 40% of the total number of Natural y Antropologı´a, Montevideo, Uruguay): almost mammalian species recorded (McKenna & Bell 1997; complete skull without left zygomatic arch, right incisor, Wilson & Reeder 2005). In general, rodents have left M2 and right P4-M1. body masses smaller than 1 kg with few exceptions. The largest living rodent, the carpincho or capybara 4. AGE AND LOCALITY (Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris), which lives in the Neotro- Uruguay, Departament of San Jose´, coast of Rı´odeLa pical region of South America, has a body mass of Plata, ‘Kiyu´’ beach (348440 S–568500 W).
    [Show full text]
  • Titanis Walleri: Bones of Contention
    Bull. Fla. Mus. Nat. Hist. (2005) 45(4): 201-229 201 TITANIS WALLERI: BONES OF CONTENTION Gina C. Gould1 and Irvy R. Quitmyer2 Titanis walleri, one of the largest and possibly the last surviving member of the otherwise South American Phorusrhacidae is re- considered in light of all available data. The only verified phorusrhacid recovered in North America, Titanis was believed to exhibit a forward-extending arm with a flexible claw instead of a traditional bird wing like the other members of this extinct group. Our review of the already described and undescribed Titanis material housed at the Florida Museum of Natural History suggest that Titanis: (1) was like other phorusrhacids in sporting small, ineffectual ratite-like wings; (2) was among the tallest of the known phorusrhacids; and (3) is the last known member of its lineage. Hypotheses of its range extending into the Pleistocene of Texas are challenged, and herein Titanis is presumed to have suffered the same fate of many other Pliocene migrants of the Great American Interchange: extinction prior to the Pleistocene. Key Words: Phorusrhacidae; Great American Biotic Interchange; Florida; Pliocene; Titanis INTRODUCTION men on the tarsometatarsus, these specimens were as- Titanis walleri (Brodkorb 1963), more commonly known signed to the Family Phorusrhacidae (Brodkorb 1963) as the North American ‘Terror Bird’, is one of the larg- and named after both a Titan Goddess from Greek my- est known phorusrhacids, an extinct group of flightless thology and Benjamin Waller, the discoverer of the fos- carnivorous birds from the Tertiary of South America, sils (Zimmer 1997). Since then, isolated Titanis mate- and most likely, the last known member of its lineage rial has been recovered from three other localities in (Brodkorb 1967; Tonni 1980; Marshall 1994; Alvarenga Florida (Table 1; Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Testing the Hypothesis of an Impoverished Predator Guild in The
    Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 554 (2020) 109805 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/palaeo Testing the hypothesis of an impoverished predator guild in the Early Miocene ecosystems of Patagonia: An analysis of meat availability and T competition intensity among carnivores ⁎ Guillermo Rodríguez-Gómeza, , Guillermo H. Cassinib,c,d, Paul Palmqvista, M. Susana Bargoe,f, Néstor Toledod,e, Jesús A. Martín-Gonzálezg, Nahuel A. Muñoze, Richard F. Kayh, Sergio F. Vizcaínod,e a Departamento de Ecología y Geología, University of Malaga, Campus de Teatinos, 29071 Malaga, Spain b División Mastozoología, Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia”, Av. Ángel Gallardo 470, C1405DJR, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina c Departamento de Ciencias Básicas, Universidad Nacional de Luján, Ruta 5 y Av. Constitución s/n, Luján 6700, Buenos Aires, Argentina d Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Argentina e División Paleontología Vertebrados, Museo de La Plata, Unidades de Investigación Anexo Museo, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo, Av. 60 y 122, 1900 La Plata, Argentina f Comisión de Investigaciones Científicas (CIC) provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina g Departamento de Matemáticas y Computación, University of Burgos, Plaza Misael Bañuelos s/n, 09001 Burgos, Spain h Department of Evolutionary Anthropology and Division of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Duke University, Durham, United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Terror Birds “Phorusrhacidae”
    Terror Birds “Phorusrhacidae” TAXONOMY AND PHYLOGENY ORIGINS OF FLIGHTLESSNESS IN BIRDS ADAPTATIONS ● Named in Diet and Hunting: (3) 1887 by The graphic to the left compares the skulls of Florentino Origin: (5) three species of terror birds including Ameghino, A theory commonly accepted by scientist is that all Andalgalornis steulleti, Haliaeetus albicilla and after the first birds that cannot fly today descended from birds that Cariama cristata. Each skull is placed under member of could fly. Some scientist argue that the birds that can different load cases. the group no longer fly lost that ability because there wasn’t any discovered, evolutionary advantage to flying in their environment. If Andalgalornis steulleti hunted small prey: Phorusrhacos Relation to Phorusrhacidae: (9) ● Less precision necessary ● Upon naming, Phorusrhacidae evolved to be menacing predators ● Easier to kill no precedent despite not having the ability to fly. Part of what made ● More safe to consume for a large them such a formidable predator is their small wings. If Andalgalornis steulleti hunted large prey: carnivorous bird had existed in South America (6) The size of the wings of Phorusrhacidae allowed for ● More precision ● SIlhouettes in the above diagram indicate body size, them to make quick maneuvers while moving at top ● Avoiding high lateral loads and dark silhouettes indicate a body mass over 70kg. speeds. This ultimately enabled them to out maneuver ● Used attack-and-retreat strategy ● Easily identified in the tree is the divergence from their prey more often than not. ● Possible use of talons to hold down prey smaller terror birds to those that are very large, the 3 ones we are familiar with, like Phorusrhacos.
    [Show full text]
  • New Radiometric 40Ar–39Ar Dates and Faunistic Analyses Refine
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN New radiometric 40Ar–39Ar dates and faunistic analyses refne evolutionary dynamics of Neogene vertebrate assemblages in southern South America Francisco J. Prevosti1,2*, Cristo O. Romano2,3, Analía M. Forasiepi2,3, Sidney Hemming4, Ricardo Bonini2,5, Adriana M. Candela2,6, Esperanza Cerdeño2,3, M. Carolina Madozzo Jaén2,7,8, Pablo E. Ortiz2,7, François Pujos2,3, Luciano Rasia2,6, Gabriela I. Schmidt2,9, Matias Taglioretti10,11,12, Ross D. E. MacPhee13 & Ulyses F. J. Pardiñas2,14,15 The vertebrate fossil record of the Pampean Region of Argentina occupies an important place in South American vertebrate paleontology. An abundance of localities has long been the main basis for constructing the chronostratigraphical/geochronological scale for the late Neogene–Quaternary of South America, as well as for understanding major patterns of vertebrate evolution, including the Great American Biotic Interchange. However, few independently-derived dates are available for constraining this record. In this contribution, we present new 40Ar/39Ar dates on escorias (likely the product of meteoric impacts) from the Argentinean Atlantic coast and statistically-based biochronological analyses that help to calibrate Late Miocene–Pliocene Pampean faunal successions. For the type areas of the Montehermosan and Chapadmalalan Ages/Stages, our results delimit their age ranges to 4.7–3.7 Ma and ca. 3.74–3.04 Ma, respectively. Additionally, from Buenos Aires Province, dates of 5.17 Ma and 4.33 Ma were recovered for “Huayquerian” and Montehermosan faunas. This information helps to better calibrate important frst appearances of allochthonous taxa in South America, including one of the oldest records for procyonids (7.24–5.95 Ma), cricetids (6.95– 5.46 Ma), and tayassuids (> 3.74 Ma, oldest high-confdence record).
    [Show full text]