DOCSLIB.ORG

Reptile Family Tree - Peters 2017 1112 Taxa, 231 Characters

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Reptile Family Tree - Peters 2017 1112 taxa, 231 characters Note: This tree does not support DNA topologies over 100 Eldeceeon 1990.7.1 67 Eldeceeon holotype long phylogenetic distances. 100 91 Romeriscus Diplovertebron Certain dental traits are convergent and do not define clades. 85 67 Solenodonsaurus 100 Chroniosaurus 94 Chroniosaurus PIN3585/124 Chroniosuchus 58 94 Westlothiana Casineria 84 Brouffia 93 77 Coelostegus Cheirolepis Paleothyris Eusthenopteron 91 Hylonomus Gogonasus 78 66 Anthracodromeus 99 Osteolepis 91 Protorothyris MCZ1532 85 Protorothyris CM 8617 81 Pholidogaster Protorothyris MCZ 2149 97 Colosteus 87 80 Vaughnictis Elliotsmithia Apsisaurus Panderichthys 51 Tiktaalik 86 Aerosaurus Varanops Greererpeton 67 90 94 Varanodon 76 97 Koilops <50 Spathicephalus Varanosaurus FMNH PR 1760 Trimerorhachis 62 84 Varanosaurus BSPHM 1901 XV20 Archaeothyris 91 Dvinosaurus 89 Ophiacodon 91 Acroplous 67 <50 82 99 Batrachosuchus Haptodus 93 Gerrothorax 97 82 Secodontosaurus Neldasaurus 85 76 100 Dimetrodon 84 95 Trematosaurus 97 Sphenacodon 78 Metoposaurus Ianthodon 55 Rhineceps 85 Edaphosaurus 85 96 99 Parotosuchus 80 82 Ianthasaurus 91 Wantzosaurus Glaucosaurus Trematosaurus long rostrum Cutleria 99 Pederpes Stenocybus 95 Whatcheeria 62 94 Ossinodus IVPP V18117 Crassigyrinus 87 62 71 Kenyasaurus 100 Acanthostega 94 52 Deltaherpeton 82 Galechirus 90 MGUH-VP-8160 63 Ventastega 52 Suminia 100 Baphetes Venjukovia 65 97 83 Ichthyostega Megalocephalus Eodicynodon 80 94 60 Proterogyrinus 99 Sclerocephalus smns90055 100 Dicynodon 74 Eoherpeton Iberospondylus 95 95 Hipposaurus Eryops 98 100 Neopteroplax Biarmosuchus 98 Nigerpeton 77 Anthracosaurus 99 100 Saharastega Titanophoneus Eucritta 100 Procynosuchus 100 Thrinaxodon 99 Ariekanerpeton Prozostrodon Kotlassia 100 100 100 Probainognathus Discosauriscus 98 96 88 Chiniquodon 86 Seymouria 100 100 Castorocauda Makowskia 98 100 Haldanodon 78 Seymouria.tadpole Liaoconodon 81 Pachygenelus Therioherpeton Utegenia 97 <50 Sinoconodon 90 Balanerpeton 74 Brasilodon 92 Caerorhachis 84 Haramiyavia 98 Amphibamus <50 Platyrhinops 97 Chaliminia Megazostrodon 96 100 Riograndia 67 Dendrerpeton <50 Hadrocodium Tersomius 84 Oligokyphus 92 100 96 Brasilotherium Acheloma Heleosaurus 97 Kayentatherium Platyhistrix 86 Kuehneotherium 96 81 99 Mycterosaurus FMNH UC169 Tritylodon Stegops 78 90 Akidolestes 76 92 Dissorophus Nikkasaurus 86 97 Spinolestes Ornithorhynchus 84 85 65 Cacops 79 81 Mesenosaurus PIN 158/1 60 Jeholodens 95 Broiliellus 94 Niaftasuchus Gobiconodon 91 Juramaia 100 Ecolsonia 85 Yanoconodon 95 Cronopio Tambachia 88 Archaeovenator 97 Acristatherium 95 Repenomamus robustus 95 Georgenthalia 95 Orovenator Repenomamus giganticus 87 Didelphis Pyozia 91 Micromelerpeton Ukhaatherium 74 Doleserpeton 100 Broomia 88 94 Eomaia 91 Apateon 89 Milleropsis BPI-720 94 Agilodocodon 92 Gerobatrachus Andrias 98 Erpetonyx Arctocyon 72 85 88 Celtedens 78 Amphicyon 64 Rana Eudibamus Thylacinus 100 Aphelosaurus 61 97 Utaherpeton 100 78 Hyaenodon 62 Tuditanus 92 Petrolacosaurus 71 75 Ernanodon Araeoscelis Kirktonecta 67 61 Deltatheridium 57 100 Spinoaequalis Borhyaena Sauropleura <50 69 Ptyonius 87 Galesphyrus Didelphodon <50 <50 Batropetes Youngina BPI 3859 60 Thylacosmilus 99 85 94 73 Rhynchonkos Acerosodontosaurus 82 Oxyaena Vincelestes 99 Micraroter 72 85 Thadeosaurus 56 77 91 Euryodus primus 100 Tangasaurus Anebodon Hovasaurus Notoryctes 94 Pantylus 83 89 Dromiciops 90 Claudiosaurus Balbaroo 94 Scincosaurus 87 58 63 Batrachiderpeton Adelosaurus 71 Proargyrolagus 97 100 Keraterpeton 100 98 Atopodentatus <50 95 Thylacoleo Macropus 100 Diceratosaurus 100 Sinosaurosphargis Vombatus 60 100 Diplocaulus 72 Largocephalosaurus 57 Paedotherium Diploceraspis Omphalosaurus 82 Interatherium Acherontiscus 88 91 100 58 Maiopatagium Rileymillerus Anarosaurus 90 66 62 100 Phlegethontia CGH129 72 Vintana Diandongosaurus Groeberia 100 Phlegethontia AMNH6966 86 77 Palatodonta Pyrotherium 80 Microbrachis Lethiscus Pappochelys 85 100 98 100 Toxodon 85 100 Adelospondylus Oestocephalus <50 Palacrodon Eurygenium Adelogyrinus 99 Majiashanosaurus 69 Paraplacodus Chinlestegophis 97 Reptilia 96 99 Brachydectes Placodus inexpectatus Bystrowiella 100 72 97 99 83 Placodus gigas 98 Lysorophus Silvanerpeton 100 Eocaecilia 98 Henodus 98 Asioryctes long rostrum 80 <50 Gephyrostegeus bohemicus Dermophis 100 Placochelys Asioryctes holotype Cyamodus 60 Tulerpeton 84 Monodelphis domestica 64 Pachypleurosaurus 96 Docofossor 100 Qianxisaurus 100 Urumqia 92 91 Volaticotherium 83 Cartorhynchus Nandinia Bruktererpeton 57 Sclerocormus <50 63 92 Protictis 97 Thuringothyris MNG 7729 94 Keichousaurus Thuringothyris MNG 10183 85 Dianmeisaurus 94 Ectocion UM 8615 82 93 Vulpavus Hanosaurus 91 Lariosaurus Deltatherium 79 61 Procyon Saurorictus 59 Corosaurus 90 Talpa 99 99 89 Nothosaurus 70 Cephalerpeton Opisthodontosaurus 81 Wangosaurus Herpestes 80 98 Reiszorhinus 60 Simosaurus 75 Mustela 85 Anningsaura 64 Stylinodon 75 100 Concordia KUVP 8702a 92 Pistosaurus 96 Concordia KUVP 96/95 Yunguisaurus 70 <50 59 Psittacotherium Romeria primus 75 81 Pujilia 100 Plesiosaurus 73 57 94 Phoca Miacis 74 Romeria texana 100 Trinacromerum 88 Protocaptorhinus 99 Brachauchenius Palaeosinopa 87 Hyopsodus 66 Kronosaurus 92 Enaliarctos 86 Paracaptorhinus 63 99 Eocaptorhinus Zalophus 96 78 Panthera 99 Captorhinus 61 Psilotrachelosaurus 97 Labidosaurus 69 PIMUZ AIII 0192 Crocuta 96 SMF R 4710 94 Canis 96 Stereosternum Proteles 100 99 Brazilosaurus holotype Limnoscelis 76 Maotherium sinensis Orobates Mesosaurus Serpianosaurus 90 Tupaia 79 Tseajaia 97 87 ?Hapalodectes IVPP V5235 98 Tetraceratops 94 Concavispina 83 98 Xinpusaurus kohi 95 Macroscelides 77 95 Milleretta RC14 Xinpusaurus suni 90 Chrysochloris Milleretta RC70 87 Thalattosaurus Necrolestes 100 79 100 Endennasaurus 96 Apatemys Clarazia 90 Feeserpeton Trogosus Askeptosaurus 85 50 Australothyris 83 <50 Scutisorex 99 Eocasea 68 Anshunsaurus 73 Miodentosaurus 96 79 Limnogale Delorhynchus 100 Microgale cowani 85 Microleter 100 Eusaurosphargis juvenile 79 72 91 100 86 Potamogale 97 Acleistorhinus Eusaurosphargis holotype Eunotosaurus 100 Helveticosaurus Micropotamogale Vancleavea 59 55 Zalambdalestes 88 Oedaleops 84 Eothyris Wumengosaurus Solenodon 73 94 <50 91 Colobomycter vaughni Thaisaurus 81 Henkelotherium 81 Xinminosaurus Colobomycter pholeter 93 79 Nambaroo Datheosaurus Utatsusaurus 100 Gomphos 62 81 93 Ennatosaurus 98 87 Shastasaurus alexandrae Oryctolagus 74 Shastasaurus pacificus UCMP 9017 <50 84 Casea 98 88 Brachyerix Cotylorhynchus Eohupehsuchus brevicollis 72 Vilevolodon 99 97 Parahupehsuchus 87 Erinaceus 96 Echinops Shenshou 98 Diadectes CM25471 Hupehsuchus Ignacius Grippia 97 92 71 Silvadectes absitus MNG 8853 51 Paramys Phonodus 98 88 Mikadocephalus 98 67 92 YGMIRSPCV03108 Rattus 96 79 94 Bolosaurus Parvinatator Mus Belebey 86 Chaohusaurus 71 92 Kryptobaatar 98 Oradectes sanmiguelensis 79 Besanosaurus 97 Ptilodus 58 Diadectes UC706 Qianichthyosaurus CMNH V1412 Rugosodon Diadectes sideropelicus 64 Qianichthyosaurus IVPP V11839 98 52 71 Megaconus Procolophon 91 Phalarodon fraasi 57 65 53 72 Carpolestes 69 98 Scolaparia NSM 99 GF82.1 94 Contectopalatus 85 'Phalarodon' nordenskioeldii 57 Paulchoffatia 98 Leptopleuron Taeniolabis 99 Pentaedrusaurus Mixosaurus 66 80 57 66 Cymbospondylus petrinus Plesiadapis Hypsognathus 58 97 92 Shonisaurus sikanniensis Daubentonia Stephanospondylus 91 Guanlingsaurus GNG dq-50 52 Guanlingsaurus YGMR SPC V03107 Ptilocercus 87 Provelosaurus 63 Deltavjatia KPM232 73 Wimania Notharctus 76 86 Guizhouichthyosaurus tangae IVPP V 11853 82 Rooneyia Scutosaurus 84 'Cymbospondylus' buchseri Bradysaurus NHMW 63 79 76 92 Tarsius 95 Shonisaurus popularis Darwinius <50 Anthodon Ichthyosaurus communis 58 66 Pareiasuchus 91 Proconsul Ophthalmosaurus 55 100 Pumiliopareia 71 Leptonectes tenuirostris Homo sapiens 99 Arganaceras 75 Hauffiopteryx Palaechthon 69 76 100 Sclerosaurus BRLSI M1399 67 Youngina SAM K7710 89 Cynocephalus Odontochelys Eurhinosaurus 76 Youngina BPI 375 57 78 Chriacus Trionyx 88 95 91 Prolacerta AMNH 9502 97 Onychonycteris Ocepechelon 68 Ixalerpeton 82 Pteropus Bunostegos Czatkowiella Zhangheotherium 65 80 71 Malerisaurus 95 Metachcheiromys Elginia 82 88 Prolacerta BPI 1/471 87 100 60 Ozimek Manis Niolamia 53 84 Meiolania Protorosaurus NHMW 1943I4* Maelestes <50 84 Boreopricea 89 86 Proterochersis Jaxtasuchus 97 ?Hapalodectes IVPP V2385 Proganochelys 57 83 <50 Protorosaurus NMK S 180 Anagale 88 93 Kayentachelys 96 Protorosaurus WMsN P47361 51 74 Leptictis Mongolochelys Pamelaria 98 73 Rhynchocyon Chubutemys 77 Andrewsarchus 95 Chelonia Youngina TM 3603 Sinonyx 91 100 Youngopsis rubidgei RC90 91 Santanachelys 100 Hemicentetes 100 Youngopsis kitchingi TM1490 96 Dermochelys 74 100 Tenrec Youngoides RC91 Macrochelys temminckii 58 Leptictidium 82 Youngina AMNH 5561 74 Terrapene carolina 87 96 Indohyus 62 Youngoides UC1528 82 95 Foxemys 82 99 Pakicetus 69 Carettochelys Maiacetus Pelomedusa 89 Proterosuchus BPI 1 4016 100 Zygorhiza 95 100 Araripemys 87 100 Chasmatosaurus QR 880C.500 96 NMV P252567 Chelus 95 91 Chasmatosaurus SAM PK 11208 99 Aetiocetus Chasmatosaurus TM 201 100 Orcinus 72 Bashkyroleter 75 Proterosuchus RC96 Physeter 72 Macroleter 95 Chasmatosaurus NMQR 1484 75 Emeroleter 71 Teyujagua Onychodectes Lanthanosuchus Elaphrosuchus RC59 <50 Alcidedorbignya 89 96 Nyctiphruretus holotype 96 Ectoconus Nyctiphruretus PIN 4659/1 Pantolambda 78 93 Proterosuchus SAMPKK10603 Doswellia 81 Saurodectes 89 Barylambda Owenetta rubidgei 86 97 Youngina BPI 2871 Glyptodon 85 Elachistosuchus 92
Recommended publications
  • A New Mid-Permian Burnetiamorph Therapsid from the Main Karoo Basin of South Africa and a Phylogenetic Review of Burnetiamorpha

    A New Mid-Permian Burnetiamorph Therapsid from the Main Karoo Basin of South Africa and a Phylogenetic Review of Burnetiamorpha

    Editors' choice A new mid-Permian burnetiamorph therapsid from the Main Karoo Basin of South Africa and a phylogenetic review of Burnetiamorpha MICHAEL O. DAY, BRUCE S. RUBIDGE, and FERNANDO ABDALA Day, M.O., Rubidge, B.S., and Abdala, F. 2016. A new mid-Permian burnetiamorph therapsid from the Main Karoo Basin of South Africa and a phylogenetic review of Burnetiamorpha. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 61 (4): 701–719. Discoveries of burnetiamorph therapsids in the last decade and a half have increased their known diversity but they remain a minor constituent of middle–late Permian tetrapod faunas. In the Main Karoo Basin of South Africa, from where the clade is traditionally best known, specimens have been reported from all of the Permian biozones except the Eodicynodon and Pristerognathus assemblage zones. Although the addition of new taxa has provided more evidence for burnetiamorph synapomorphies, phylogenetic hypotheses for the clade remain incongruent with their appearances in the stratigraphic column. Here we describe a new burnetiamorph specimen (BP/1/7098) from the Pristerognathus Assemblage Zone and review the phylogeny of the Burnetiamorpha through a comprehensive comparison of known material. Phylogenetic analysis suggests that BP/1/7098 is closely related to the Russian species Niuksenitia sukhonensis. Remarkably, the supposed mid-Permian burnetiids Bullacephalus and Pachydectes are not recovered as burnetiids and in most cases are not burnetiamorphs at all, instead representing an earlier-diverging clade of biarmosuchians that are characterised by their large size, dentigerous transverse process of the pterygoid and exclusion of the jugal from the lat- eral temporal fenestra. The evolution of pachyostosis therefore appears to have occurred independently in these genera.
  • Ontogenetic Change in the Temporal Region of the Early Permian Parareptile Delorhynchus Cifellii and the Implications for Closure of the Temporal Fenestra in Amniotes

    Ontogenetic Change in the Temporal Region of the Early Permian Parareptile Delorhynchus Cifellii and the Implications for Closure of the Temporal Fenestra in Amniotes

    RESEARCH ARTICLE Ontogenetic Change in the Temporal Region of the Early Permian Parareptile Delorhynchus cifellii and the Implications for Closure of the Temporal Fenestra in Amniotes Yara Haridy*, Mark J. Macdougall, Diane Scott, Robert R. Reisz Department of Biology, University of Toronto Mississauga, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada * [email protected] a11111 Abstract A juvenile specimen of Delorhynchus cifellii, collected from the Early Permian fissure-fill deposits of Richards Spur, Oklahoma, permits the first detailed study of cranial ontogeny in this parareptile. The specimen, consisting of a partially articulated skull and mandible, exhib- OPEN ACCESS its several features that identify it as juvenile. The dermal tuberosities that ornament the dor- Citation: Haridy Y, Macdougall MJ, Scott D, Reisz sal side and lateral edges of the largest skull of D. cifellii specimens, are less prominent in RR (2016) Ontogenetic Change in the Temporal the intermediate sized holotype, and are absent in the new specimen. This indicates that the Region of the Early Permian Parareptile new specimen represents an earlier ontogenetic stage than all previously described mem- Delorhynchus cifellii and the Implications for bers of this species. In addition, the incomplete interdigitation of the sutures, most notably Closure of the Temporal Fenestra in Amniotes. PLoS ONE 11(12): e0166819. doi:10.1371/journal. along the fronto-nasal contact, plus the proportionally larger sizes of the orbit and temporal pone.0166819 fenestrae further support an early ontogenetic stage for this specimen. Comparisons Editor: Thierry Smith, Royal Belgian Institute of between this juvenile and previously described specimens reveal that the size and shape of Natural Sciences, BELGIUM the temporal fenestra in Delorhynchus appear to vary through ontogeny, due to changes in Received: July 18, 2016 the shape and size of the bordering cranial elements.

  • Reptile Family Tree

    Reptile Family Tree - Peters 2015 Distribution of Scales, Scutes, Hair and Feathers Fish scales 100 Ichthyostega Eldeceeon 1990.7.1 Pederpes 91 Eldeceeon holotype Gephyrostegus watsoni Eryops 67 Solenodonsaurus 87 Proterogyrinus 85 100 Chroniosaurus Eoherpeton 94 72 Chroniosaurus PIN3585/124 98 Seymouria Chroniosuchus Kotlassia 58 94 Westlothiana Casineria Utegenia 84 Brouffia 95 78 Amphibamus 71 93 77 Coelostegus Cacops Paleothyris Adelospondylus 91 78 82 99 Hylonomus 100 Brachydectes Protorothyris MCZ1532 Eocaecilia 95 91 Protorothyris CM 8617 77 95 Doleserpeton 98 Gerobatrachus Protorothyris MCZ 2149 Rana 86 52 Microbrachis 92 Elliotsmithia Pantylus 93 Apsisaurus 83 92 Anthracodromeus 84 85 Aerosaurus 95 85 Utaherpeton 82 Varanodon 95 Tuditanus 91 98 61 90 Eoserpeton Varanops Diplocaulus Varanosaurus FMNH PR 1760 88 100 Sauropleura Varanosaurus BSPHM 1901 XV20 78 Ptyonius 98 89 Archaeothyris Scincosaurus 77 84 Ophiacodon 95 Micraroter 79 98 Batropetes Rhynchonkos Cutleria 59 Nikkasaurus 95 54 Biarmosuchus Silvanerpeton 72 Titanophoneus Gephyrostegeus bohemicus 96 Procynosuchus 68 100 Megazostrodon Mammal 88 Homo sapiens 100 66 Stenocybus hair 91 94 IVPP V18117 69 Galechirus 69 97 62 Suminia Niaftasuchus 65 Microurania 98 Urumqia 91 Bruktererpeton 65 IVPP V 18120 85 Venjukovia 98 100 Thuringothyris MNG 7729 Thuringothyris MNG 10183 100 Eodicynodon Dicynodon 91 Cephalerpeton 54 Reiszorhinus Haptodus 62 Concordia KUVP 8702a 95 59 Ianthasaurus 87 87 Concordia KUVP 96/95 85 Edaphosaurus Romeria primus 87 Glaucosaurus Romeria texana Secodontosaurus
  • The Princeton Field Guide to Dinosaurs, Second Edition

    The Princeton Field Guide to Dinosaurs, Second Edition

    MASS ESTIMATES - DINOSAURS ETC (largely based on models) taxon k model femur length* model volume ml x specific gravity = model mass g specimen (modeled 1st):kilograms:femur(or other long bone length)usually in decameters kg = femur(or other long bone)length(usually in decameters)3 x k k = model volume in ml x specific gravity(usually for whole model) then divided/model femur(or other long bone)length3 (in most models femur in decameters is 0.5253 = 0.145) In sauropods the neck is assigned a distinct specific gravity; in dinosaurs with large feathers their mass is added separately; in dinosaurs with flight ablity the mass of the fight muscles is calculated separately as a range of possiblities SAUROPODS k femur trunk neck tail total neck x 0.6 rest x0.9 & legs & head super titanosaur femur:~55000-60000:~25:00 Argentinosaurus ~4 PVPH-1:~55000:~24.00 Futalognkosaurus ~3.5-4 MUCPv-323:~25000:19.80 (note:downsize correction since 2nd edition) Dreadnoughtus ~3.8 “ ~520 ~75 50 ~645 0.45+.513=.558 MPM-PV 1156:~26000:19.10 Giraffatitan 3.45 .525 480 75 25 580 .045+.455=.500 HMN MB.R.2181:31500(neck 2800):~20.90 “XV2”:~45000:~23.50 Brachiosaurus ~4.15 " ~590 ~75 ~25 ~700 " +.554=~.600 FMNH P25107:~35000:20.30 Europasaurus ~3.2 “ ~465 ~39 ~23 ~527 .023+.440=~.463 composite:~760:~6.20 Camarasaurus 4.0 " 542 51 55 648 .041+.537=.578 CMNH 11393:14200(neck 1000):15.25 AMNH 5761:~23000:18.00 juv 3.5 " 486 40 55 581 .024+.487=.511 CMNH 11338:640:5.67 Chuanjiesaurus ~4.1 “ ~550 ~105 ~38 ~693 .063+.530=.593 Lfch 1001:~10700:13.75 2 M.
  • HOVASAURUS BOULEI, an AQUATIC EOSUCHIAN from the UPPER PERMIAN of MADAGASCAR by P.J

    HOVASAURUS BOULEI, an AQUATIC EOSUCHIAN from the UPPER PERMIAN of MADAGASCAR by P.J

    99 Palaeont. afr., 24 (1981) HOVASAURUS BOULEI, AN AQUATIC EOSUCHIAN FROM THE UPPER PERMIAN OF MADAGASCAR by P.J. Currie Provincial Museum ofAlberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T5N OM6, Canada ABSTRACT HovasauTUs is the most specialized of four known genera of tangasaurid eosuchians, and is the most common vertebrate recovered from the Lower Sakamena Formation (Upper Per­ mian, Dzulfia n Standard Stage) of Madagascar. The tail is more than double the snout-vent length, and would have been used as a powerful swimming appendage. Ribs are pachyostotic in large animals. The pectoral girdle is low, but massively developed ventrally. The front limb would have been used for swimming and for direction control when swimming. Copious amounts of pebbles were swallowed for ballast. The hind limbs would have been efficient for terrestrial locomotion at maturity. The presence of long growth series for Ho vasaurus and the more terrestrial tan~saurid ThadeosauTUs presents a unique opportunity to study differences in growth strategies in two closely related Permian genera. At birth, the limbs were relatively much shorter in Ho vasaurus, but because of differences in growth rates, the limbs of Thadeosau­ rus are relatively shorter at maturity. It is suggested that immature specimens of Ho vasauTUs spent most of their time in the water, whereas adults spent more time on land for mating, lay­ ing eggs and/or range dispersal. Specilizations in the vertebrae and carpus indicate close re­ lationship between Youngina and the tangasaurids, but eliminate tangasaurids from consider­ ation as ancestors of other aquatic eosuchians, archosaurs or sauropterygians. CONTENTS Page ABREVIATIONS . ..... ... ......... .......... ... ......... ..... ... ..... .. .... 101 INTRODUCTION .
  • The First Possible Choristoderan Trackway from the Lower

    The First Possible Choristoderan Trackway from the Lower

    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN The frst possible choristoderan trackway from the Lower Cretaceous Daegu Formation of South Korea and its implications on choristoderan locomotion Yuong‑Nam Lee1*, Dal‑Yong Kong2 & Seung‑Ho Jung2 Here we report a new quadrupedal trackway found in the Lower Cretaceous Daegu Formation (Albian) in the vicinity of Ulsan Metropolitan City, South Korea, in 2018. A total of nine manus‑pes imprints show a strong heteropodous quadrupedal trackway (length ratio is 1:3.36). Both manus and pes tracks are pentadactyl with claw marks. The manus prints rotate distinctly outward while the pes prints are nearly parallel to the direction of travel. The functional axis in manus and pes imprints suggests that the trackmaker moved along the medial side during the stroke progressions (entaxonic), indicating weight support on the inner side of the limbs. There is an indication of webbing between the pedal digits. These new tracks are assigned to Novapes ulsanensis, n. ichnogen., n. ichnosp., which are well‑matched not only with foot skeletons and body size of Monjurosuchus but also the fossil record of choristoderes in East Asia, thereby N. ulsanensis could be made by a monjurosuchid‑like choristoderan and represent the frst possible choristoderan trackway from Asia. N. ulsanensis also suggests that semi‑aquatic choristoderans were capable of walking semi‑erect when moving on the ground with a similar locomotion pattern to that of crocodilians on land. South Korea has become globally famous for various tetrapod footprints from Cretaceous strata1, among which some clades such as frogs2, birds3 and mammals4 have been proved for their existences only with ichnological evidence.
  • University of Birmingham the Earliest Bird-Line Archosaurs and The

    University of Birmingham the Earliest Bird-Line Archosaurs and The

    University of Birmingham The earliest bird-line archosaurs and the assembly of the dinosaur body plan Nesbitt, Sterling; Butler, Richard; Ezcurra, Martin; Barrett, Paul; Stocker, Michelle; Angielczyk, Kenneth; Smith, Roger; Sidor, Christian; Niedzwiedzki, Grzegorz; Sennikov, Andrey; Charig, Alan DOI: 10.1038/nature22037 License: None: All rights reserved Document Version Peer reviewed version Citation for published version (Harvard): Nesbitt, S, Butler, R, Ezcurra, M, Barrett, P, Stocker, M, Angielczyk, K, Smith, R, Sidor, C, Niedzwiedzki, G, Sennikov, A & Charig, A 2017, 'The earliest bird-line archosaurs and the assembly of the dinosaur body plan', Nature, vol. 544, no. 7651, pp. 484-487. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature22037 Link to publication on Research at Birmingham portal Publisher Rights Statement: Checked for eligibility: 03/03/2017. General rights Unless a licence is specified above, all rights (including copyright and moral rights) in this document are retained by the authors and/or the copyright holders. The express permission of the copyright holder must be obtained for any use of this material other than for purposes permitted by law. •Users may freely distribute the URL that is used to identify this publication. •Users may download and/or print one copy of the publication from the University of Birmingham research portal for the purpose of private study or non-commercial research. •User may use extracts from the document in line with the concept of ‘fair dealing’ under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (?) •Users may not further distribute the material nor use it for the purposes of commercial gain. Where a licence is displayed above, please note the terms and conditions of the licence govern your use of this document.
  • Mesozoic Marine Reptile Palaeobiogeography in Response to Drifting Plates

    Mesozoic Marine Reptile Palaeobiogeography in Response to Drifting Plates

    ÔØ ÅÒÙ×Ö ÔØ Mesozoic marine reptile palaeobiogeography in response to drifting plates N. Bardet, J. Falconnet, V. Fischer, A. Houssaye, S. Jouve, X. Pereda Suberbiola, A. P´erez-Garc´ıa, J.-C. Rage, P. Vincent PII: S1342-937X(14)00183-X DOI: doi: 10.1016/j.gr.2014.05.005 Reference: GR 1267 To appear in: Gondwana Research Received date: 19 November 2013 Revised date: 6 May 2014 Accepted date: 14 May 2014 Please cite this article as: Bardet, N., Falconnet, J., Fischer, V., Houssaye, A., Jouve, S., Pereda Suberbiola, X., P´erez-Garc´ıa, A., Rage, J.-C., Vincent, P., Mesozoic marine reptile palaeobiogeography in response to drifting plates, Gondwana Research (2014), doi: 10.1016/j.gr.2014.05.005 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Mesozoic marine reptile palaeobiogeography in response to drifting plates To Alfred Wegener (1880-1930) Bardet N.a*, Falconnet J. a, Fischer V.b, Houssaye A.c, Jouve S.d, Pereda Suberbiola X.e, Pérez-García A.f, Rage J.-C.a and Vincent P.a,g a Sorbonne Universités CR2P, CNRS-MNHN-UPMC, Département Histoire de la Terre, Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, CP 38, 57 rue Cuvier,
  • Live Birth in an Archosauromorph Reptile

    Live Birth in an Archosauromorph Reptile

    ARTICLE Received 8 Sep 2016 | Accepted 30 Dec 2016 | Published 14 Feb 2017 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms14445 OPEN Live birth in an archosauromorph reptile Jun Liu1,2,3, Chris L. Organ4, Michael J. Benton5, Matthew C. Brandley6 & Jonathan C. Aitchison7 Live birth has evolved many times independently in vertebrates, such as mammals and diverse groups of lizards and snakes. However, live birth is unknown in the major clade Archosauromorpha, a group that first evolved some 260 million years ago and is represented today by birds and crocodilians. Here we report the discovery of a pregnant long-necked marine reptile (Dinocephalosaurus) from the Middle Triassic (B245 million years ago) of southwest China showing live birth in archosauromorphs. Our discovery pushes back evidence of reproductive biology in the clade by roughly 50 million years, and shows that there is no fundamental reason that archosauromorphs could not achieve live birth. Our phylogenetic models indicate that Dinocephalosaurus determined the sex of their offspring by sex chromosomes rather than by environmental temperature like crocodilians. Our results provide crucial evidence for genotypic sex determination facilitating land-water transitions in amniotes. 1 School of Resources and Environmental Engineering, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei 230009, China. 2 Chengdu Center, China Geological Survey, Chengdu 610081, China. 3 State Key Laboratory of Palaeobiology and Stratigraphy, Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, CAS, Nanjing 210008, China. 4 Department of Earth Sciences, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana 59717, USA. 5 School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1RJ, UK. 6 School of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia.
  • Difficulties with the Origin of Dinosaurs: a Short Comment on the Current Debate

    Difficulties with the Origin of Dinosaurs: a Short Comment on the Current Debate

    REVIEW ARTICLE Difficulties with the origin of dinosaurs: a short comment on the current debate MATTHEW G. BARON BPP University, 144 Uxbridge Road, London W12 8AA, UK E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: The origin and early evolutionary history of the dinosaurs is a topic that has recently gone through a period of renewed interest and academic debate. For 130 years, one way of classifying the various dinosaur subgroups persisted as the accepted model, with increasing levels of research in the past quarter-century also providing evidence for the hypothesis that dinosaur origination occurred in the Southern Hemisphere, particularly in South America. It is, after all, from within the Late Triassic strata of countries like Argentina and Brazil that we get some of the very best early dinosaur specimens; many of these specimens are the earliest known representatives of some of the major dinosaur subgroups, such as the theropods and sauropodomorphs. However, some recent analyses have brought about a shift in terms of what is currently accepted and what is now disputed regarding the origin of dinosaurs – the Southern Hemisphere origination hypothesis was questioned (although this was based upon observations and not with quantitative analysis techniques), as has the shape of the dinosaur tree. Responses to the new hypothesis were numerous and robust, and new analyses further supported a Southern Hemisphere point of origin. Whilst the interrelationships between the major dinosaur clades remains to be fully resolved, the current data does seem to comprehensively answer the question of where the dinosaurs first originated. However, it is arguable whether or not the current data that is being used in such palaeobiogeographical analyses is sufficient to provide a meaningful answer to the question of where specifically the dinosaur clade first appeared.
  • Final Copy 2019 10 01 Herrera

    Final Copy 2019 10 01 Herrera

    This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from Explore Bristol Research, http://research-information.bristol.ac.uk Author: Herrera Flores, Jorge Alfredo A Title: The macroevolution and macroecology of Mesozoic lepidosaurs General rights Access to the thesis is subject to the Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International Public License. A copy of this may be found at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode This license sets out your rights and the restrictions that apply to your access to the thesis so it is important you read this before proceeding. Take down policy Some pages of this thesis may have been removed for copyright restrictions prior to having it been deposited in Explore Bristol Research. However, if you have discovered material within the thesis that you consider to be unlawful e.g. breaches of copyright (either yours or that of a third party) or any other law, including but not limited to those relating to patent, trademark, confidentiality, data protection, obscenity, defamation, libel, then please contact [email protected] and include the following information in your message: •Your contact details •Bibliographic details for the item, including a URL •An outline nature of the complaint Your claim will be investigated and, where appropriate, the item in question will be removed from public view as soon as possible. This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from Explore Bristol Research, http://research-information.bristol.ac.uk Author: Herrera Flores, Jorge Alfredo A Title: The macroevolution and macroecology of Mesozoic lepidosaurs General rights Access to the thesis is subject to the Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International Public License.
  • First Amphibian Ichthyosaur Fossil Found

    First Amphibian Ichthyosaur Fossil Found

    First amphibian ichthyosaur fossil found An ancient marine reptile with seal-like flippers may have been adapted to life on the land as well as in the sea, scientists believe. The 250-million-year-old creature is the first amphibious ichthyosaur known. Its relatives were dolphin-like creatures that swam in the oceans at the time of the dinosaurs. They are thought to have had terrestrial ancestors, but previously no fossils had come to light marking the transition of ichthyosaurs from land to sea. “Now we have this fossil showing the transition,” said lead scientist Professor Ryosuke Motani, from the University of California at Davis who reported the discovery in the journal Nature. At 1.5 feet long, Cartorhynchus lenticarpus was also the smallest known ichthyosaur. Its fossil remains found in Anhui Province, China, date from the start of the Triassic period about 248 million years ago. As well as big flippers, Cartorhynchus had flexible wrists which would have been essential for movement on the ground. While most ichthyosaurs have long beak-like snouts, the new specimen possessed a short nose that may have been adapted to suction feeding. Its body also contained thicker bones than other ichthyosaurs. This supports the theory that most marine reptiles that left the land first grew heavier to help them swim through rough coastal waves. The animal lived about 4 million years after the worst mass extinction in history, shedding light on how long it took for life on Earth to recover. The Permian-Triassic extinction, known as the “Great Dying”, wiped out 96% of all species and may have been linked to global warming.