Sauropods from Mongolia and the former Soviet Union

TI:KC< \ \[\I<\ \U

Introduction Subsequently, many Cretaceous localities on the terri- tory of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kirgizstan, Sauropods, a spectacular group of gigantic sauris- 'I'adzhikistan (cf Rozhdcstvenskii and Khozatskii, chians, are knoan from the F:arl>lJurassic to the end of 1067; liozhdestvenskii, 1070, 1977) and Russia the Cretaceous from all continents, except Antarctica. (Dmitriev and Rozhdestvenskii, 1968) have yielded :\n enormous numl~erof genera (ahout 00) and species sauropod remains, but most of them are represented (over 1-50) of sauropods have been named and l)!~ isolated bones. .ln exception is an undescribed, described, hut most of them are tmed on imperfect, fragmentarily prcser\.ed postcranial skeleton of a fragmentary material. Complete skulls and skclctons Jurassic sauropocl found I)y Russian palaeontologists are rare, and this makes comparisons hetween difercnt in 1066 near .l'ashkumyr town in Kirgizstan sauropod species dithcult or impossi0le. For the same (Rozhdestvenskii, 0)and housed in the reason, the number of sauropod fi~miliesvaries over I'aleontological Institute in hloscow. The most con- time. plete anci comprehensive information on dir~osnur In contrast to the long history of discovery and remains from the territory ofthe former Soviet Union, study of sauropods in Europe and North .\merica Lvith a list of localities, and some data on lithology and which started in the nineteenth century, the first docu- the age of local svitas, was recently published by mented, undoubted sauropod material from Mongolia Nesov (1995). ..\ccortiing to him, isolateti bones of as fi~undin 1922 by inernhers of the Central Asiatic Jurassic sauropods were discovered in five localities in Expedition, organized hy the :\merican hluseum of Kirgizstan and one in Uzl)ekistan, bones of Early Natural History in New IJork. 'lhe first Mongolian Cretaceous sauropods \\.ere recognized in four local- sauropod genus and species, ,.lsi~s.ruuru.rmot~;,llinr.ri.r, ities in Russia anci Late Cretaceous sauropod remains was described by Oshorn (1924). 1;rorn that time, sau- are knoan tiom six localities on the territory of ropod remains, primarily represented I)y isolated Uzbekistan, six in Kazakilstan, three in Kirgizstan, t\vo bones, have been discovered in many sites on the terri- in 'I'adzhikistan and one in Russia. In general, sauro- tory of Mongolia (cf Kalandadze and Kurzanov, 1074; pods from Mongolia and the territory of the former Gradzinski et dl., 1077; heishampel, 1900). The most Soviet Union are relatively poorly known, most of important sauropod material fro111hlongolia was dis- them are represented by incomplete and nondiagnos- covered by the Polish-hlongolian Paleontological tic hones, and there arc no mass accumulations. Expedition in I965 and by the Soviet-Mongolian Among the five Cretaceous forms listed belo\\, only Expedition in 1971 (see below). The first information three monospecific genera are represented by rela- on sauropod bones from the territory of the former tively well preserved and diagnostic material. They Soviet Union was published by .l.N. Kyahinin in the are: Opisthocoelicuu~liu Rorsuk-Bialynicka, 1077; 1930s, and the first sauropod species from Kazakhstan, ,Ycnrcgo.murus Nowinski, 197 1 , and Qlr/li.sitosnurrr.r Antnrcto.r~~urus,ju.u/luticus, was named by him in 1 9 38. Rannikov and Kurzanov, 1083. Sauropods from hlongolia tcr the fi~rn~erSoviet Union

Figure 23.1. Rcconsc~.uccionof clic skclecon of O~~il-tl,o~uclici~~~di~~~-k/~~-~y~~~kii.Redrann from Borsuk-Biaiynich (1077). Scale bar - l 111.

Institutional ahbre\~iationsare as h,llo\vs: :\htNH, (Campanian-hlaastrichtian) Nemept Fornlation of :\merican h'tuseum of Natural tlistory, New York; the locality of ;\Itan Uul I\.: (Gradxiriski et al., 1069; PIN, Paleontological Institute, Russian .Icadernj, of Gradzi~iski,1Y70), in the Ncmept Basin, Gohi Desert, Sciences, htoscow; %P.iI., Institute of Paleobiology, h'longolia. 'fhe holotype is presently housed in the Polish :\cademy of Sciences, n'arsaw. Institute of Geology, hlonpolian ;\cade~ny of Sciences, Ulaanhaatar. Rc;/i,n*l~vltt~/~rc~i~d. TO 0. ~.kal~?..~/r.skii is also assigned a Systematic survey scapl~locoracoidof a young individual (ZI';\L MgD- 'The phylogenetic relationships of sauropods are not 1/2.5c). yet stabilized or generally accepted. 1:or this reason, in De.rcltaxonomy of' sauropods proposed by hlcl~~tosh centra of the dorsal and caudal vertehrae, the opistho- (OO is utilized, and the assignment of coelous caudal vertehrae and short tail. 'The dorsal OpirtL~ocnelic./~uJiuto the fi~~n~ilyCamarasauridae, and vertel~raeare characterized by distinctly opisthocoe- L\'c~trrt~/o.r/~u~~~.rand Q~/~c~sito~/~~t~~~s to the diplodocid lous centra, comparatively low neural arches, and subf;~~nilyI)icraeosaurinae, as proposed t~yMclntosh heavy transverse processes that are directed outwards. (lOOOh), arc also accepted. -l'he neural spines do not form single elements, hut along the dorsal region of the ~ertehralcolumn they Sal~ropodomorphafiuene, 1032 arc divided into two stout elements, separated hy a ti- Sauropoda hlarsh, 1887 shaped cleft. The centra of the sacrals are coossified liamily Camarasauridae (:ope, 1887 and bear low neural spines. 'l'he transverse process of Subfanlily Opisthocoelicaudiir~;~~hlclntosh, 1000b. the last sacral (caudosacral) ~ertehrais fused \vith the Genus Opi.rtL~ncor~licn~~~li~~13orsnk-Kiatynicka, 19 77 ilium and ischiurn. The cent]-a of the perfectl!. pre- r.I.j,p(, /llrd 0111)~ktrnm~? .rpccic~. O~~i~rL~ocor~lic~~~rJil~skal~.j~irs- served caudals are strongly opisthocoelol~sin the kii Rorsl~k-Biatyuicka,1077 cranial half of the tail and none of the caudal centra Ilolo~~pf:/,P:\ I. hlgl)-T,l-l.H, an almost complete post- have pleurocoels. Caudals 16 to 27 are a~~~phiplat!lan, cranial skeleton (lacking skull and cervicals) discov- and the more distal ones arc biconvex. The cattdal ered in I065 hy the Polish-hlongolian Paleontological ceutra fiom 20 to 27 were probably coossified. The Expedition to the (;obi Ilesert (Figure 23.1). 'The caudal neural arches are I-obust.'l'he uniramous chev- specimen \vas found in the Upper Cretaceous rons are not present beyond caudal 10. 'l'he pectoral girdle is massive and the forelimbs are also relatively glenoid axis and the long axis of the scapular hlatle. stout and massive. kletacarl,als I and I1 arc almost of ?I > he opisthocoelous caudal vertel~raeand i.ery short the same length and are longer- than metacarpal Ill. tail distinguish this gcnns horn all other memhers of The pelvis is characterized hy a strong lateral flexure the Camarasauridae ant1 the structure of the limbs of of the anterior wings ofthe iliac hlade and hy a large Opi.rthocoelic/~u//i~~suggest a possil)le association ~ith contribution of the ischiurn to the acetabnlun~.The the Titanosauridae. 'fhe assignment of 0pi.rthococli- hind li~nhsare robi~st.'l'he fourth trochanter on the cau//i~~to the Camarasauridae lvaa accepted by femur is siti~atedhcloiv the middle length of the shaft. McIntosh (1 YOOa, h), hladse11 ct ill. (1')05), and Hunt et 'I'he stout, reduced pedal phalanges arc present onl17 al. (1991). '1'11~ presence of opisthococlons caudal in four digits ant1 the phalangeal formula is 2:2:2:1:0. vertehrae was the Imis for the proposal I)!, hlclntosh Such reduction of the pedal phalanges is not ol)served (1990b), of a new camarasaurid sul~l'amily - in other sauropods. 'l'hc total height of the forelimb of Opisthocoelicaudiinae fix this h'longolian genus. 0. .rk/~v?yj~.skiiis 1.87 m. The height of the hind limb is Subsequently, horvever, Upchurch (1094) removed 2.46 m, and the hu111erus:femurratio = 0.72. this genus from the Camarasauridae and placed it as Comn?c.jrt.c. 'l'he main anatoniical teatures of the sister taxon to the family l'itanosauridae within Opi.rt/~ocoeli~~~~t~~/inare shown in the reconstrr~ction the 'l'itanosauroidea'. (1:igure 23.1). 'l'he neck of' this sauropod was probal~ly rather short, as is documented by a reconstruction of Family Iliplotlocidae hlarsh, 1881 the nnchal ligament presented by Borsuk-Biaiynicka SubLilmil~,DicraeosaurinaeJanensch, 1014 (1077). 'The tail was held in a horizontal position Genus .~c~t)2egto.r~zt~~~t~,s~ow~i1jski,1971 during terrestrial locomotion, as is evidencetl by the '1,jpc am/ ojrly kknowr .sprzzcs. .2i~iilcgtow1~1-tl.ci~o~/pli~~/.r~.r structure of the caudals: there are no wedge-shaped or Nowi~iski,1971 dolvnwardly flexed centra in the tail vertebrae, and the Holo[ypc. %I';\L MgI)-119, an al~nostcomplete sLr~ll haemapophyses are firmly fused with the centra in associated with tlie lower jaw, discovered in 1065 1))' caudals 6-1 7. 'l'he presence of opisthocoelous centra the Polish-hlongolia~> Paleontological Lxpedition in in the cranial half of the tail and some characters of the Upper (:retaceous (Ca~npanian-hlaastrichtian) the pelvis, such as the strongly deepened iliac section Nemegt Formation at the Nemegt locality, (;obi of the acetabulum, the outward bend of the ilia, and Desert, Mongolia (Figure 23.2). the fused pubic symphysis suggest, according to Kefivved matcvinl. .I second, u~ldescrihedskull, proh- Borsuk-Biaiynicka (1077), that the tail in al~lyof the sanie genus, is housed in the (;eological Opirthc~coelic~~t~di~~could have served as a prop during Institute of the Mongolian .Icademy of Sciences, occasional I~ipedalposture. If this posture was really Ulaanhaatar, possible for Opi~thococ~lic/~udin,it may have bee11 con- D~.rct-i/)tion. In its general characters the skull of .I: nected with some important part of its life activity, nto~qlic~zsi~exhibits a diplodocid type of structure, most probably with feeding. with an elongate snout and rostroventrally directed 'I'he relationships of this genus are controversial. In quadrate; chisel-like teeth are present only in the the original description of Opi~thococlicntldin, the rostra1 portio11 of the jaws. l'he dental filrmula is assignment of this genus to the Camarasauridae was 1:8/11. The extel-1131nares are situated far hehind and discussed in detail. Camarasaurid features of this most prohahly posterior to the level of the caudal end genus listed by Borsuk-Biaiynicka (1977) include: of the antorbital fenestra. The exact shape and size of very low and divided spines in the dorsal vertebrae, the preort~italforamen is not knonrn, hut judging froru low spines in the sacral region, simple transverse pro- preserved parts of the margin of this foramen, it was cesses, uniramous chevrons, straight dorsal sectio~iof large and elongated. 'l'he infratemporal fi~ssaseems to the vertebral column, and the srnall angle between the be narrower than in other diplodocids. 'l'he elongation Sauropods from hlongolia 6r the former Soviet Union

Figurc 23.2. Rcconstrr~crionof rhc skull ant1 mandiblc of' Figure 23.3. Recollstr~~ctionof the skull and mandil)le ot .\;~~~~~~~U.UII[I~IIJmu~~guu(i(~nsii.Redra\vn ho~nNo\viliski (1071). QLI~ICJ~~~.SNUI'II~o1~i~i~tu1i.r.Rcd rawn from Kurzanov and Scale I,ar= 100 nlln. 13anniLov (1083). Scale Imr= 100 mm.

of the hasipterygoid processes, characteristic for dip- locality of Shar 'l'sav in ~(1~1th-easternGobi, Mongolia lodocids, is present in .Vc7/rc.gto.mlrru.r, but the basipter- (Figure 23.3). \,goid processes arc stouter, shorter and not so De.rcriptior/. In general the shape of the skull of Q rostrally directed as in some other diplodocids such as orinrta1i.r (Figure 2 3.3) is similar to that of 5: n~o~rgolictl- .+ato.r~uvus and Dil)l~ducu.s(Ber111a1) and Mclntosh, .ris, but difers in some structures. l'he snout of' 1978). 'The accessory knestra in tiont of the antorbital Qunt~.ritu.mrrru.r seems to be broader than in fenestra, characteristic ti)r some diplodocids, is not .Lt,nrr:~to.rtlrrru.r, and the squamosal is shorter and does present in L\'\c.~~cgtu.silurrrs. ,lnothcr characteristic not contact the qundratojugal. 'l'he basipter!lgoidal feature is a comj>al-atively robust and long lacrimal processes are stouter, and the parietal foramen is that is strongly broadened in its dorsal portion. 'The absent. 'l'he outstanding character of Qun~~.rito.raunr.r, lower jaw of .Lc.rncgto.rounr.r difirs from that of other according to Knrzanov and Bannikov (1983), is the diplodocids in the length of the dcntar\l, which in the presence, in the basioccipital and basisphenoid, of a hlonpolian yellus is evidently longer than the suran- canal, leading from the h!,poph!.sis to the region pular-angular portion of the n~andil>le.'The mandibu- beneath the occipital conclyle. ,lccording to hlcIntosh lar sy~nphysisin ,\'c~v~c.gtu.rirurrrsi~very weak. (IOOOI,), such a canal is absent not only in diplodocids, Out also in other sauropods. .Inother feat~~recharac- Genus Quilcsitosilunr.r Rannikov and Kurzanov, 1083 teristic for Qui~csitosirurrrsis a comparatisely large con- (in Kurzanov and Bamlikov, 1983) cavity on the caudal face of the quadrate, named by T11pe illrd 0111~1k11ox11 .rp(~cic:r.Qui~esito.muvr*.r ovieota1i.r Kurzano\. and 13anniko\ (1083) as the 'resonance' I3annikov and Kurzano\; 1083. cavity. I'he chisel-like teeth, present only in rostml Holot~pc.. PIN no. 3006/2, a partly damaged skull, with portion of the ja\vs, and the mandible are similar to well preserved snout, occipital region 2nd mandit)les, those of !Vemegto.murrr.r, but the maxillary tooth row is a.as found by tllc Soviet-hlo~~golia~~Lxpcdition in longer. 'l'he dental formula is -t:O/I 3. 1071 (7'syhin and Kurzanov, 1070) in Upper Discu.ssio~r. 'The assignment of .\'emcgtosnurus and (;rctaccous sediments of the Baruungoyot Svita at the Quaesitosaurus to the I>icraeosaurinae (Rerrnan and \lclntoah, 1078; klclntosh, IOOOa, b) is not accepted typic genus. 'l'aking into account the presence of iso- hy some specialists. Calvo (lOO4), using characters of lated hones and teeth in manyJurassic and (:rct:lceoiis the tooth structure and feecling mechanism, referred localities, we can state that sauropods \vcrc rcpre- .\>~itzt~gtosntl1~ti.sand Q~inc..rito.rt~m~wsto the ti tanosaurids, sented on this large territory, I)y representatives of' at ~vhercasUarrett and Kpchurch (1004) and Upchurch least three sauropod families. Ho~vever,according to (1004) included 110th genera in tlie Nerneptosauritlae, our present kno\vledge, the Jurassic and (;retaceous a nelv f;imily erected by Upchurch for Nrttzcgtost~mn,.r saurolx~dsfiro~n this region were not so al~c~ndantand and @iir.sitosnuni.r. 'I'he Nc~negtosai~ridaeis consid- di\.erae as contcinporaneous sa~~ropotlsSrom China ered, hy Upchurch (1004), as a sister group to the (cf: Llong, 1002). dicraeosaurid-dipl~>docitl cladc \vithin the '1)iplodo- coidea'. Recently, llowe\rer, Hunt ct #I. (1004) assigned .\c.tiic.gto.~ i1ti1~ti.r and @i~esito.ramrm.r to the i 1 y References Dicraeoaauridac. Barrcrt, IPhI. and Ul,church, I? 1994. Peetling ~necliniiisms of lltplod~c~.~.(;t~iti 10: 0.5-703. Other sauropods 13errnan, D.S. ant1 hlclntosh,j.S. 10;S. Skull and l.el:ition- The first sat1 rol,od froin Mongolia, :I.riuto.rnlli~l~ttiorigo- ships of the Upper Jiirassic s:iuropod .I/Iu~~.I~I~/I-II.s (Reprili~i,Sauriscllia). H~~ll~,riicof Ct~r.uc.~ic..\Ii~scr/itl lieiisls, \vas described by Oshorn (1024) on the Oasis of of .!'tiru~-tilIlisro~~~ 8: 5-3 5. lust two teeth (.\hlNfi 6264, the holotype and .IktlNH Borsuk-Biatynicka, hl. 1977. .4 new camarasatirid sauro- 6204, a 1)ar;ltype) from the Larly C:retaccous (jiish pod O/~i.rrhut.oc~olic~~~~di~~.rkt~izlmfc.c.k~i gen. n., sp. n. from 1:ormation (= fiiiliteep Svita of .\ptian/.Ilhian age the Upper (;rcraceous of hloiigolia. lJ~lncnrirolr~gin according to Shu\~alov(1073) and Weishampel (1090), I'olo~iic.~~3: 5-64. or Ondiirukhaa Svitli of \7;ilanginian to Late Calvo, J.O. 1004. Jan n)ec.linnics in sat~ropodtli~)os;lurs. Neoco~nianage according to Sh~~valov(1075), I~utsee Gaiii 10: 183-103. alsoJerzyltie\vicz and Russell (IOOI)), at the locality of Dmitrie\,, (;..\.and Ro~hdcsr\cnakii, .\.K. 1968. [l'lie I~onc- Oiiahiin Nuur in the northern (;ol)i, Mongolia. hearing hcies of the Upper hlehozoic lacustrine- I~ollowingkfclntosh (10001)) this slxcies is considered fluvial deposits], pp. 30-48 ill .Ilczozoisk~c i here as a IIO,>ICYI J~lhitn~n. Ktrirrocoiskic.ozcw Sibiri. Xlosco\v: Ixd;~tel'srvoNaulia. 'The first sauropod named tiom tlie former Soviet llong, Z.1992. IIi~io.rtiirn~~~~~i/i~~~~~.r~f'(;131ua. Bcijing: C liina Uli ion, ', l~~tfi~~cto.ri~ti~~~s'ji~.~fi~~tic~~.ris a 11o11ztJririild/l11z. 'l'liia Ocean Press and Berlin: Springer l'erlag. Gratlzihski, R. 1070. Setlimt.ntation of dinosatil.-bearing species was named, but not diagnosed or described, t)y Uppe1- Cretaceous del)osits of rlie Ne~negtBasin, K>,ahinin(1030) on the hasis of an isolated femur from ( ;ol~i Ilese rt. f~~ltllclc~orirologin1'ulortic.tz 2 1 : 1 47-2 19. an unknown locality in the Kyzylku~nIlesert, south , Kaiimierczak,J. and Lefeld,J. 1969. (;eograpliical and Kaz:iklistan. According to Rozhdestvenskii (1060, geological data from the Polisli-hlongolian pal~ieon- 1071) this slxcimen comes from the Turonian- tological expeditions. l-'czkzc~uritolc~g~t/fo1onic.n 19: 3 3-82. Santonian Dabrazinskap Svita. 'l'his species is treated , Kielan~a\voro\vska,L., ant1 Ala~-!.a~isk;l,-11 1077. Upper hy klclntosh (IOOOa, h) 3s an unnalned titanosaurid. Cretaceous DjadoLlitn, 1331-unGo!,ot and Nemegt hr- mations of hlongolia, including remarks on pre\,ious Discussion s~lhdi\.ision..lcttl (;cnltigici~ft~loriicn 2: 28 1-3 18. Hunt, .S.P., Lockle!,, hl.G., Lucas, S.G. and hleyer C..\. As mentioned above, the Jurassic and Cretaceous sail- 1994. The glol,al sauropod fossil record. Gain 10: ropods firom hlongolia and the former Soviet Union 261-279. are relatively rare, poorly known, and practically rep- Jerzykicaicz, 1: and Russell, D..\. 199 1. Late Xlesozoic resented by only three reasona1)ly good specimens, stratigraph\ and \ertebrates of the Gobi Basin. each assigned to a separate Late Cretaceous niono- C/'(~II(.(.IIMSh'(~(~~1,ch 12: 345-377. Sauropods from hlongolia & the for~nerSoviet Union

Kalandadze, N.N. and Kurzanov, S.hl. 1974. [The Lower 111yu i ikb pi~i~ktiL/~t~.rko~.III~LC/I~,II~~: 1x11ingrad: Cretaceous localities of terrestial vertel~rates in lzdatel'stvo Nedra. hlongi~li a,] 'l ,Sov~~ic.rr~ini.Sc;ol,/.rko-~lloiigol :~koi 1071. (Investigations of the hlongolian dinos:lurs and l'rilr~oti/olog~cI~cskoiEk.q~c~Iit.rii 1: 28 8-20 5. their role in the subdivision of the terrestrial Kurzanov, S.hl. and Bannikov, .i.l 1083. [A new sauropocl Xlesozoic.] 'I i,ii~/y ,So~~me.rnioi Soi~ctrko-.llo~igol:rkoi from the Upper Cretaceous of hlongolitl.] l'it/eoiiro/ogichvsI~oifi;k.r/~e~lit.rii 1 : 288-29 $. Pmli~o~itol~~gicI~i~.rkii%I~tini~il 2: 90-06. -1977. The stlldy of dinosaurs in risia. ,;3,,ui~1ir11 the hlatlsen,J.II., hIcIntosl1,j.S. and ISerman, I1.S. I 9c)5. Skull PuIrzeo~i/ulog~cmISoric~y o/' 11iilir120: 1017-1 19. and atlas-axis complex of the Upper Jurassic sauro- -and Khozatskii, L.I. 1067. [Late hlesozoic land Lertc- pod C~II~LI~~~ZJ~ZUI~II.~Cope (Reptilia: Sar~rischia). Hulli,tili I~ratesfrom the .isiatic part of the U.S.S.K. 1, pp. 80-02 of (:ut*iiexie,ltust~trm of- .Vii/uml Ili.rroi:)~3 1: I I 1 5. in hlartinson, G.G. (ed.): Siv/~rigt-i&)lui pdco1iro1og~n Xlclntosh, J.S. 1000a. Species determination in sauropod ilii,zozoi.rI~ik/~i p~~lc~oge~i-~co~~t~~iot~ykI~ h~iti/i~it~~r(il>~~~I~I~ otlo- dinosaurs with tentative suggestion for their zhniii ri~iiir.rkoi cI~ii.rtiSSSR. Leningrad: lzdatel'stvo classification, pp. 53-69 in Carpenter, K. and Currie, Nar~ka. 1'11. (cds.), Di~iosntir.~y.rteinutzcr.Can~t)ridge: Cambridge Rpbinin, .IN. 1039. [Some results of the studies of the University Press. tipper Cretaceous dinosaurian fauna from the vicin- 1000t). Sauropoda, pp. Z45-401 in Weishampel, D.IS., ity of the Station Sary-.igach, south Kazakhstan.] Dodson, I? and Osn~tilska,11. (eds.), 7%1cDi~io.ruunrt. Pvobkwy I'nleo~itol~igii4: 1 2i-1 35. Ucrkeley: California University Press. Shuvalov, \'.F. 1073. 1hlai11stages of the development of N esov, L.Li.I 095. [ Dilio.rriiii.s of' ,Vot-/brivi t:ni~/~.riu:iica ~lutu01, the hlesozoic structures in central hlonpolin]. 'Iirlirl~ rrssc11iL1ip.1;i~colog)' u7~il l~(ili,t,ohiog~~ogi~r1pIy.1 St 1'etet.s- Ilirtiriitri (;cologii i (;c,o/i=iki Sibii~sbogo O/~l~,le~i~~u:1.V t1u1.g: Izdatel'st~oSankt-Peterl~urgskogo Universiteta, SSSX 173: 175-1 84. 1-56 pp. -1975. Ihlcsozoic stratigraphy of central hlongolia.]. Ni'owi As ki, .I. 197 1 . .\'ci~icgtow~ii~i~silzo~ixolii,~i.ri.r n. gen., 11. sp. 'I >VLL/J.Sov~~~c.srnoi Soeersko-.llo~ipol~rkoi /'~il~~o~r/olrigi~I~cskui (Saorol~oda) from the Upper Cretaceous of t:b.rpcdit.rii 13 : 5 0- 1 1 2. hlonpolia. Puluto~toloiul'olotiicu 2 5: i 7- 8 1 . 'I'syhin, 1:l. and Kurzanov, S.M. 1979. [New data on Upper Oshorn, 11.1;. 1021. Sauropoda and .l'lieropoda of thc Cretaceous localities of vertebrates of Baishin Tsav Lower Cretaceous of Alongolin. . I~llt~t,i~.riii\IU.SCU~II region.] ILSovnic.rttiui ,So~c/.sko.lloiigol:rkoi AV'ovitrzt(~.r128: 1-7. Iblrotitc~lo~i~he~.koiF;k.q~c~lilirsii 8: 08-1 l I. Kozlidestvenskii, .i.K. 1')69. [It/ .rcrln%~of' di~io.~-nzli~sit/ r/~c tilxhurcli, 1'. 1004. Sauropod phylogeny and palacoecol- (;obi. hloscoa: Izdatel'stvo Nauku. ogy. (hiu 10: 210-260. I07O. I hlesozoic and Cenozoic terrestrial vertebrate Weishampel, l>.lS., 1990. Dinosaurian distribution, pp. complexes of Central risia and adjoining regions of 63-139 ill TT'eishampel, I>.I<., I1odsor1, P. and Irnia I'ress.