DOCSLIB.ORG

'Feathers' of Longisquama

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
'Feathers' of Longisquama brief communications of three, with correspondingly larger energy Palaeontology penalties2,8. Each pair of fused pentagons in a neutral fullerene cage carries an energy The ‘feathers’ of 1 penalty of 70–90 kJ mol 1 with respect to Longisquama the structure of C60 (ref. 8). Two candidate structures (isomers 6,140 and 6,275) have he elongated dorsal appendages of the the minimum three fused pentagon pairs; reptile Longisquama insignis, from the all others in the set have from 6 to 15 penta- TTriassic of Kyrgyzstan1, have recently gon fusions. been reinterpreted as the first record of We confirmed the qualitative preference feathers in a non-avian tetrapod2 — long for isomers with low numbers of fused pen- predating the feathers of the oldest known tagons using model calculations that treat bird, Archaeopteryx. Here we present evi- the cage as an empty fullerene capable of dence that the dorsal scales of Longisquama accepting electrons from a central reservoir. are not feathers, and that they are in fact At the density-functional tight binding strikingly different from avian feathers. We level of computation9, with full geometry conclude that Archaeopteryx remains the optimization of a closed-shell electron con- oldest known feathered tetrapod. figuration, the empty cage 6,140 is stabi- Longisquama is a small diapsid reptile lized by 120 kJ mol11 with respect to its with an uncertain phylogenetic position. It nearest rival, with a 12-line NMR spectrum is known from an incomplete skeleton with and the minimal three pentagon adjacen- integumentary appendages and isolated cies (isomer 6,275). As between two and six appendages. Appendage PIN (for Palaeon- excess electrons are added to the cage, to tological Institute of the Russian Academy simulate the range of likely charge transfer of Sciences) 2584/7, preserved as part and from the encapsulated cluster, isomer 6,140 counterpart, retains an infilling of fine- becomes increasingly favoured over all grained sediment and high-fidelity impres- other empty cages in the set. In view of this sions of the external left and right surfaces consistent preference, we propose a struc- of the appendage (Fig. 1). This infilling, ture for Sc3N@C68 (Fig. 2) consisting of the preserved either on one side of the speci- encapsulated Sc3N cluster in the C68 (D3) men or on the counterpart, shows that the three-fold symmetric isomer 6,140 cage. tubular configuration described for the Figure 1 Part and counterpart of an elongated dorsal scale of The encapsulated Sc3N cluster is shown proximal portion extends along the entire Longisquama insignis (PIN 2584/7). Where the sedimentary infill- with the Sc atoms on C2 axes, but from the length of the appendage, although the distal ing (black circles) is not preserved, sharp impressions of the cor- 45Sc NMR it is also possible that these repre- portion is expanded anteroposteriorly and rugated external surface of the structure are visible (white circles). sent time-averaged orientations. flattened transversely. This indicates that in Arrows point to corresponding patches of sedimentary infilling on S. Stevenson*, P. W. Fowler†, T. Heine‡, life the two external surfaces were separated part and counterpart. ab, anterior smooth band; c, corrugations; J. C. Duchamp§, G. Rice*, T. Glass*, from each other by an intervening space v, median ‘vein’. K. Harich*, E. Hajdu||, R. Bible||, H. C. Dorn* (now sediment-filled). *Department of Chemistry, Virginia Tech, There are no feather-like features on the and counterparts of feather impressions in Blacksburg, Virginia 24061, USA distal portion of the appendage. Here, two Archaeopteryx are concave and convex, e-mail: [email protected] corrugated membrane-like surfaces touch respectively. †School of Chemistry, University of Exeter, along their leading and trailing edges to form We believe that the dorsal appendages of Stocker Road, Exeter EX4 4QD, UK wide, smooth bands. The two membranes Longisquama are highly modified scales, as ‡Dipartimento di Chemica ‘G. Ciamician’, were apparently supported by a median vein- suggested previously1,3, rather than feathers. Università di Bologna, via Selmi 2, like structure extending the length of the Examination of the holotype of L. insignis Bologna I-40126, Italy appendage. This has been proposed as the (PIN 2584/4) suggests that they were §Department of Chemistry, Emory and Henry homologue of the rhachis of avian feathers2. anchored in the skin or epaxial muscles. College, Emory, Virginia 24327-0943, USA On either side of this ‘vein’, the external sur- Robert R. Reisz*, Hans-Dieter Sues† ||Searle, 4901 Searle Parkway, Skokie, faces of the appendage are corrugated. This *Department of Biology, University of Toronto in Illinois 60077, USA corrugation varies along the appendage: Mississauga, 3359 Mississauga Road, Mississauga, 1. Kroto, H. W. Nature 329, 529–531 (1987). proximally, individual rugae are relatively Ontario L5L 1C6, Canada 2. Kobayashi, K., Nagase, S., Yoshida, M. & Osawa, E. large and widely spaced, but in the distal e-mail: [email protected] J. Am. Chem. Soc. 119, 12693–12694 (1997). 3. Dorn, H. C. et al. in Fullerenes: Recent Advances in the portion they are smaller and densely packed. †Department of Palaeobiology, Royal Ontario Chemistry and Physics of Fullerenes and Related Materials (eds The densely arranged distal corrugations Museum, 100 Queen’s Park, Toronto, Kadish, K. M. & Ruoff, R. S.) 990–1002 (Electrochemical have been compared to the pinnae of avian Ontario M5S 2C6, Canada Society, Pennington, 1998). 2 e-mail: [email protected] 4. Butenschön, H. Angew. Int. Edn Engl. 36, 1695–1697 feathers , but the fossils indicate that these (1997). are formed on a membrane-like structure on 1. Sharov, A. G. Paleontol. Zhur. 1970, 127–130 (1970). 5. Krätschmer, W., Fostiropoulos, K. & Huffman, D. R. Chem. either side of the ‘vein’. 2. Jones, T. et al. Science 288, 2202–2205 (2000). Phys. Lett. 170, 167–170 (1990). The fossils were split into part and coun- 3. Feduccia, A. The Origin and Evolution of Birds (Yale Univ. Press, 6. Stevenson, S. et al. Nature 401, 55–57 (1999). New Haven, 1996). 7. Fowler, P. W. & Manoloupoulos, D. E. An Atlas of Fullerenes terpart during collecting, and most of the (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1995). appendages are now preserved as impres- 8. Albertazzi, E. et al. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 1, 2913–2919 sions of their left and right sides, without Correction (1999). the intervening sediment core. The surfaces Detection of preinvasive cancer cells 9. Seifert, G., Porezag, D. & Frauenheim, T. Int. J. Quantum Chem. 58, 185–192 (1996). of both the part and counterpart impres- V. Backman et al. sions of individual appendages are concave, Nature 406, 35–36 (2000) Supplementary information is available on Nature’s World-Wide Web site (http://www.nature.com) or as paper copy from the an indication that these structures are The name of the tenth author of this communication is London editorial office of Nature. three-dimensional. In contrast, the parts J. A. McGilligan (not T. McGillican as published). © 2000 Macmillan Magazines Ltd 428 NATURE | VOL 408 | 23 NOVEMBER 2000 | www.nature.com.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Evaluation of the Phylogenetic Relationships of the Pterosaurs Among Archosauromorph Reptiles
    Journal of Systematic Palaeontology 5 (4): 465–469 Issued 19 November 2007 doi:10.1017/S1477201907002064 Printed in the United Kingdom C The Natural History Museum An evaluation of the phylogenetic relationships of the pterosaurs among archosauromorph reptiles David W. E. Hone∗ Department of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Queens Road, Bristol, BS8 1RJ, UK Michael J. Benton Department of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Queens Road, Bristol, BS8 1RJ, UK SYNOPSIS The phylogenetic position of pterosaurs among the diapsids has long been a contentious issue. Some recent phylogenetic analyses have deepened the controversy by drawing the pterosaurs down the diapsid tree from their generally recognised position as the sister group of the dinosaur- omorphs, to lie close to the base of Archosauria or to be the sister group of the protorosaurs. Critical evaluation of the analyses that produced these results suggests that the orthodox position retains far greater support and no close link can be established between pterosaurs and protorosaurs. KEY WORDS Pterosauria, Prolacertiformes, Archosauria, Archosauromorpha, Ornithodira Contents Introduction 465 Methods and Results 466 Discussion 467 Re-analysis of Bennett (1996) 467 Re-analysis of Peters (2000) 467 Conclusions 469 Acknowledgements 469 References 469 Introduction tained). Muller¨ (2003, 2004) also suggested that the prolacer- tiforms were not a valid clade, with Trilophosaurus splitting The basal archosaurs and their phylogenetic positions relative his two prolacertiform taxa (Prolacerta and Tanystropheus). to one another within the larger clade Archosauromorpha The analysis performed by Senter (2004) also found the pro- have been a source of controversy among palaeontologists lacertiforms to be paraphyletic, although here he removed the for decades.
    [Show full text]
  • A Reexamination of Four Prolacertiforms \Tith Implications for Pterosaur Phylogenesis
    Rìvista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia Dicembre 2000 I--r4-""l*-I-."-''* 1 A REEXAMINATION OF FOUR PROLACERTIFORMS \TITH IMPLICATIONS FOR PTEROSAUR PHYLOGENESIS DAVID PETERS ReceìterJ October 23, 1999; accepted October 20, 200A Kqt uorcls: Pterosauria, Prolacertiiormes (Reprilia, Diapsida), Traditionally the answer has been rhat prerosaurs Phyìogeny, Cladisric an:ìy.is. are archosaurs (Romer 1956); the sister group of the Riassunto . Tradizionalmente gli prerosauri venir.ano considerati Dinosauria, ScleromochÌus a.nd Lagosuclcws/Maraswchus come appartenenti agli Archosaurifomes e molti specìalistì contempo_ (Benton 1985, 1990, 1999; Padian 1984; Gauthter 1984, ranei considerano gli pterosauri quali sisrer groups di Lagosuchus, 1986; Sereno 1991, 1994; Kellner 1996); or perhaps Schleromochlus e dei Dinosauria. La nuova analisi filogenerica qui pro- archosauriformes close posta merte in discussione queste affinirà jn quanto tutte le presunte to prorerosuchids and eryrhro- sinapomorfie che collegherebbero gli Pterosauria con gli Archosauri_ suchids (Bennett 1996a), chiefly because prerosaurs formes o con gli pterosaurìa, Ornìthodira mancano in realtà negli have a prominent anrorbiral fenestra and a suite of other oppure sono condivise anche da alcuni taxa di prolacertiformi. ll archosaur-like characrers almosr entirely recente riesame degli olotipi dt confined to the Cosesaurus a,Liceps, Longisquama ìnsig_ hind nis e di Sharovipteryx mìrabi/ìs suggeriscono che molti caratteri potreb- limb (Bennert 1996a). Although Benton (1982, bero venire interpretati in maniera diversa rispetto alle precedenti L984) initially indicated that the prerosauria are descrìzioni. I risultati di molteplici analisì cladistjche suggeriscono che archosauromorphs and the sister-group ro all other questi tre prolacertìformi enigmatici, uniramente a Langobardìsawrws, archosauromorphs, later work (Benton 1985, 1.990, recentemente descritto, costituirebbero i sister taxa degli prerosauri, in base ad un insieme di sinapomorfie di nuova identificazione.
    [Show full text]
  • 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
    [Show full text]
  • Reptile Family Tree - Peters 2017 1112 Taxa, 231 Characters
    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
    [Show full text]
  • Terra Nostra 2018, 1; Mte13
    IMPRINT TERRA NOSTRA – Schriften der GeoUnion Alfred-Wegener-Stiftung Publisher Verlag GeoUnion Alfred-Wegener-Stiftung c/o Universität Potsdam, Institut für Erd- und Umweltwissenschaften Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 24-25, Haus 27, 14476 Potsdam, Germany Tel.: +49 (0)331-977-5789, Fax: +49 (0)331-977-5700 E-Mail: [email protected] Editorial office Dr. Christof Ellger Schriftleitung GeoUnion Alfred-Wegener-Stiftung c/o Universität Potsdam, Institut für Erd- und Umweltwissenschaften Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 24-25, Haus 27, 14476 Potsdam, Germany Tel.: +49 (0)331-977-5789, Fax: +49 (0)331-977-5700 E-Mail: [email protected] Vol. 2018/1 13th Symposium on Mesozoic Terrestrial Ecosystems and Biota (MTE13) Heft 2018/1 Abstracts Editors Thomas Martin, Rico Schellhorn & Julia A. Schultz Herausgeber Steinmann-Institut für Geologie, Mineralogie und Paläontologie Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn Nussallee 8, 53115 Bonn, Germany Editorial staff Rico Schellhorn & Julia A. Schultz Redaktion Steinmann-Institut für Geologie, Mineralogie und Paläontologie Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn Nussallee 8, 53115 Bonn, Germany Printed by www.viaprinto.de Druck Copyright and responsibility for the scientific content of the contributions lie with the authors. Copyright und Verantwortung für den wissenschaftlichen Inhalt der Beiträge liegen bei den Autoren. ISSN 0946-8978 GeoUnion Alfred-Wegener-Stiftung – Potsdam, Juni 2018 MTE13 13th Symposium on Mesozoic Terrestrial Ecosystems and Biota Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn,
    [Show full text]
  • Origins of Avian Flight – a New Perspective
    Origins of avian flight – a new perspective Larry D. Martin Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology; Museum of Natural History and Biodiversity Research Center, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT - The discovery of a primitive bird-like dromaeosaur (Microraptor) with four functional wings vindicates Beebe’s suggestion that birds went through a tetrapteryx stage in the origin of flight. Flight originated from an arboreal glid- ing ancestor and Longisquama may be more central to understanding how this came about than previously supposed. Keywords: Dromaeosaur, Microraptor, Longisquama, birds, flight, Upper Triassic, Lower Cretaceous Les origines du vol avien – Perspectives nouvelles - La découverte d’un dromaeosaure semblable à un oiseau primitif (Microraptor) avec quatre ailes fonctionnelles justifie la suggestion de Beebe selon laquelle les oiseaux sont passés par un stade tetrapteryx dans l’origine du vol. Le vol est apparu chez un ancêtre arboricole planeur, et Longisquama est peut être plus important qu’on l’a supposé pour comprendre les modalités de cette transition. INTRODUCTION the stratigraphically older Deinonychus studied by Ostrom (1969). In this sense the fossil record did not provide an Much of the argument over flight origins revolves orderly progression from terrestrial “maniraptorians” to fly- around Archaeopteryx, the first bird to be recognized from ing birds. In fact, Archaeopteryx, a very typical bird in most the Mesozoic and still the oldest known bird. Archaeop- respects, is significantly older than any credible evidence for teryx displays a remarkable combination of avian and reptil- dromaeosaurs, the dinosaurs thought to be closest to birds. ian characters and has become the archetype of a “missing Functionally there are additional problems.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 a New Lepidosaur Clade
    A new lepidosaur clade: the Tritosauria DAVID PETERS Independent researcher, 311 Collinsville Avenue, Collinsville, Illinois 62234 U.S.A. [email protected] RH: PETERS—TRITOSAURIA 1 ABSTRACT—Several lizard-like taxa do not nest well within the Squamata or the Rhynchocephalia. Their anatomical differences separate them from established clades. In similar fashion, macrocnemids and cosesaurids share few traits with putative sisters among the prolacertiformes. Pterosaurs are not at all like traditional archosauriforms. Frustrated with this situation, workers have claimed that pterosaurs appeared without obvious antecedent in the fossil record. All these morphological ‘misfits’ have befuddled researchers seeking to shoehorn them into established clades using traditional restricted datasets. Here a large phylogenetic analysis of 413 taxa and 228 characters resolves these issues by opening up the possibilities, providing more opportunities for enigma taxa to nest more parsimoniously with similar sisters. Remarkably, all these ‘misfits’ nest together in a newly recovered and previously unrecognized clade of lepidosaurs, the Tritosauria or ‘third lizards,’ between the Rhynchocephalia and the Squamata. Tritosaurs range from small lizard-like forms to giant marine predators and volant monsters. Some tritosaurs were bipeds. Others had chameleon-like appendages. With origins in the Late Permian, the Tritosauria became extinct at the K–T boundary. Overall, the new tree topology sheds light on this clade and several other ‘dark corners’ in the family tree of the Amniota. Now pterosaurs have more than a dozen antecedents in the fossil record documenting a gradual accumulation of pterosaurian traits. INTRODUCTION The Lepidosauria was erected by Romer (1956) to include diapsids lacking archosaur characters. Later, with the advent of computer-assisted phylogenetic analyses, 2 many of Romer’s ‘lepidosaurs’ (Protorosauria/Prolacertiformes, Trilophosauria, and Rhynchosauria) were transferred to the Archosauromorpha (Benton, 1985; Gauthier, 1986).
    [Show full text]
  • Pterosaur Cladogram 259 Taxa
    Pterosaur Cladogram 260 taxa - 183 characters - Peters 2021 Huehuecuetzpalli Macrocnemus BES SC111 Macrocnemus T4822 Macrocnemus T2472 Dinocephalosaurus Jianchangnathus Amotosaurus Sordes 2585 3 Fuyuansaurus Skye Middle Jurassic pterosaur Tanystropheus MSNM BES SC1018 Pterorhynchus Tanystropheus T/2819 Changchengopterus PMOL Langobardisaurus Wukongopterus Tanytrachelos Hongshanopterus Archaeoistiodactylus Cosesaurus Kunpengopterus sinensis Kyrgyzsaurus Kunpengopterus antipollicatus Sharovipteryx Darwinopterus AMNH M8802 Longisquama Darwinopterus modularis ZMNH M 8782 Darwinopterus robustodens 41H111-0309A Bergamodactylus MPUM 6009 Darwinopterus linglongtaensis IVPP V 16049 Raeticodactylus Darwinopterus YH2000 Austriadactylus SMNS 56342 Seazzadactylus Scaphognathus crassirostris Austriadraco BSp 1994 I51 Scaphognathus SMNS 59395 Scaphognathus Maxberg sp. Austriadactylus SC332466 Preondactylus TM 13104 MCSNB 2887 Gmu10157 Caelestiventus BM NHM 42735 Dimorphodon macronyx Peteinosaurus Ex3359 BSp 1986 XV 132 Carniadactylus ELTE V 256-Pester specimen MCSNB 8950 B St 1936 I 50 (n30) Dimorphodon? weintraubi Cycnorhamphus IVPP V13758 embryo Moganopterus Mesadactylus holotype Feilongus Dendrorhynchoides curvidentatus Luopterus = D. mutoudengensis Yixianopterus SMNS 81928 flathead Mimodactylus Discodactylus NJU-57003 Haopterus Vesperopterylus JZMP embryo Anurognathus Boreopterus Sinomacrops Zhenyuanopterus CAG IG 02-81 Hamipterus PIN 2585/4 flightless anurognthid Arthurdactylus Batrachognathus SMNK PAL 3854 Daohugoupterus Ikrandraco Eudimorphodon
    [Show full text]
  • Kyrgyzsaurus Bukhanchenkoi Gen. Et Sp. Nov. – Новое Пресмыкающееся Из Триаса ЮгоЗападного Кыргызстана © 2011 Г
    ПАЛЕОНТОЛОГИЧЕСКИЙ ЖУРНАЛ, 2011, № 6, с. 42–50 УДК 568.1:551.761 KYRGYZSAURUS BUKHANCHENKOI GEN. ET SP. NOV. – НОВОЕ ПРЕСМЫКАЮЩЕЕСЯ ИЗ ТРИАСА ЮГОЗАПАДНОГО КЫРГЫЗСТАНА © 2011 г. В. Р. Алифанов, Е. Н. Курочкин Палеонтологический институт им. А.А. Борисяка РАН e%mail: [email protected]; e%mail: [email protected] Поступила в редакцию 22.12.2010 г. Принята к печати 16.03.2010 г. Из триасовых отложений (мадыгенская свита) ЮгоЗападного Кыргызстана описан архаичный представитель семейства Drepanosauridae (Archosauromorpha, Reptilia) – Kyrgyzsaurus bukhanchenkoi gen. et sp. nov. Материал представлен передней частью скелета (череп, шейные и передние грудные позвонки, ребра, элементы плечевого пояса) с отпечатками кожного покрова. Укороченные ветви нижней челюсти, многочисленные зубы, мелкие остеодермы, широкие кожные надглазничные ко зырьки и массивный горловой мешок – наиболее яркие особенности новой формы. Мадыгенская свита, имеющая озерноречной ДжайляуЧо. Более детальные обзоры палеонтоло генезис, выходит на поверхность в югозападной гических находок из отложений мадыгенской сви части Кыргызстана восточнее кишлака Мадыген ты представлены в недавних работах С. Фогта с со двумя обнажениями (местонахождениями): север авторами (Voigt et al., 2006) и Д.Е. Щербакова ным (ДжайляуЧо) и южным (Мадыген; иногда это (Shcherbakov, 2008). название так же применяется и для северного ме Ниже охарактеризовано новое триасовое пре стонахождения). Максимальная мощность ее выхо смыкающееся – Kyrgyzsaurus bukhanchenkoi gen. дов составляет более 500 м. Обильные палеофлори et sp. nov. Единственный образец этой формы был стические сборы позволяют датировать отложения обнаружен в 2006 г. во время работ Совместной Рос свиты концом среднего или началом позднего три сийскоГерманской экспедиции по исследованию аса (Добрускина, 1980; Dobruskina, 1995). В ком триасовых отложений ЮгоЗападного Кыргызста плексе мадыгенских животных преобладают насе на (2005 и 2006 гг.).
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Youngoides Romeri and the Origin of the Archosauriformes DAVID
    Youngoides romeri and the origin of the Archosauriformes DAVID PETERS Independent researcher 311 Collinsville Avenue, Collinsville, IL U.S.A. [email protected] 1 ABSTRACT—Prior workers reported that all specimens attributed to Youngopsis and Youngoides could not be distinguished from the holotype of Youngina capensis. Others considered all specimens attributed to Proterosuchus, Chasmatosaurus, and Elaphrosuchus conspecific. In both cases distinct skull shapes were attributed to taphonomic variations due to distortion pressure or allometric growth. Here a large phylogenetic analysis of the Amniota (401 taxa) tests those hypotheses. The resulting tree recovers a den of small Youngina specimens preceding the Protorosauria. Another specimen nests at the base of the Protorosauria. Six others nest between the Protorosauria and the Archosauriformes. The most derived of these bears a nascent antorbital fenestra. Two other putative Youngina specimens nest at unrelated nodes. In like fashion, the various specimens assigned to Proterosuchus are recovered in distinct clades. One leads to the Proterochampsidae, Parasuchia and Choristodera. The latter lost the antorbital fenestra. Another clade leads to all higher archosauriforms. The present analysis reveals an evolutionary sequence shedding new light on the origin and radiation of early archosauriforms. Taphonomic distortion pressure and allometry during ontogeny were less of a factor than previously assumed. The splitting of several specimens currently considered Youngina and Proterosuchus into distinct genera and species is supported here. INTRODUCTION The Archosauriformes is a widely recognized monophyletic clade that includes, by definition, the most recent common ancestor of Proterosuchidae, Erythrosuchidae, 2 Proterochampsidae, and Archosauria (Gauthier, 1986). Later studies (e.g., Sereno, 1991; Parrish, 1993; Juul, 1994; Ezcurra, 2010; Nesbitt, 2011) have universally rooted their archosauriform clades on Proterosuchidae or Proterosuchus.
    [Show full text]
  • Reptile Family Tree Peters 2021 1909 Taxa, 235 Characters
    Turinia Enoplus Chondrichtyes Jagorina Gemuendina Manta Chordata Loganellia Ginglymostoma Rhincodon Branchiostoma Tristychius Pikaia Tetronarce = Torpedo Palaeospondylus Craniata Aquilolamna Tamiobatis Myxine Sphyrna Metaspriggina Squalus Arandaspis Pristis Poraspis Rhinobatos Drepanaspis Cladoselache Pteromyzon adult Promissum Chlamydoselachus Pteromyzon hatchling Aetobatus Jamoytius Squatina Birkenia Heterodontus Euphanerops Iniopteryx Drepanolepis Helodus Callorhinchus Haikouichthys Scaporhynchus Belantsea Squaloraja Hemicyclaspis Chimaera Dunyu CMNH 9280 Mitsukurina Rhinochimaera Tanyrhinichthys Isurus Debeerius Thelodus GLAHM–V8304 Polyodon hatchling Cetorhinus Acipenser Yanosteus Oxynotus Bandringa PF8442 Pseudoscaphirhynchus Isistius Polyodon adult Daliatus Bandringa PF5686 Gnathostomata Megachasma Xenacanthus Dracopristis Akmonistion Ferromirum Strongylosteus Ozarcus Falcatus Reptile Family Tree Chondrosteus Hybodus fraasi Hybodus basanus Pucapampella Osteichthyes Orodus Peters 2021 1943 taxa, 235 characters Gregorius Harpagofututor Leptolepis Edestus Prohalecites Gymnothorax funebris Doliodus Gymnothorax afer Malacosteus Eurypharynx Amblyopsis Lepidogalaxias Typhlichthys Anableps Kryptoglanis Phractolaemus Homalacanthus Acanthodes Electrophorus Cromeria Triazeugacanthus Gymnotus Gorgasia Pholidophorus Calamopleurus Chauliodus Bonnerichthys Dactylopterus Chiasmodon Osteoglossum Sauropsis Synodus Ohmdenia Amia Trachinocephalus BRSLI M1332 Watsonulus Anoplogaster Pachycormus Parasemionotus Aenigmachanna Protosphyraena Channa Aspidorhynchus
    [Show full text]
  • Mesozoic Birds of China
    Mesozoic Birds of China by Lianhai Hou Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology Published by the Phoenix Valley Provincial Aviary of Taiwan Translated By Will Downs Bilby Research Center Northern Arizona University January, 2001 III Table of Contents Abvreviations for figures ..................................................................V Foreword by Delongjiang..................................................................X Foreword by Guangmei Zheng ..........................................................XI Foreword by Alan Feduccia............................................................XIII Foreword by Larry D. Martin..........................................................XIV Preface .....................................................................................XV Chapter 1. Synopsis of research Historical and geographic synopsis........................................................1 History of research ..........................................................................7 Chapter 2. Taxonomic descriptions...............................................................10 Sauriurae.............................................................................................11 Confuciusornithiformes Confuciusornithidae Confuciusornis Confuciusornis sanctus ........................................11 Confuciusornis chuonzhous sp. nov.........................33 Confuciusornis suniae sp. nov................................37 Jibeinia luanhera .........................................................50
    [Show full text]