DOCSLIB.ORG

Osteologia Pós-Craniana E Relações Filogenéticas Do Titanossauro Do Cretáceo Inferior Tapuiasaurus Macedoi Zaher Et Al

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Osteologia Pós-Craniana E Relações Filogenéticas Do Titanossauro Do Cretáceo Inferior Tapuiasaurus Macedoi Zaher Et Al Bruno Albert Navarro Osteologia pós-craniana e relações filogenéticas do titanossauro do Cretáceo Inferior Tapuiasaurus macedoi Zaher et al. 2011 Postcranial osteology and phylogenetic relationships of the Early Cretaceous titanosaur Tapuiasaurus macedoi Zaher et al. 2011 Volume 2 - Appendices, Tables and Figures São Paulo 2019 1 Summary I. Summary of figures ......................................................................................2 II. Appendices ..................................................................................................3 2.1. Institutional abbreviations .....................................................................................3 2.2. Anatomical abbreviations ......................................................................................5 III. Tables .........................................................................................................7 3.1. Global titanosaur record ........................................................................................7 3.2. Taxonomic definitions ...........................................................................................10 3.3. Fossil record of Areado Group ............................................................................14 3.4. Studied specimens .................................................................................................17 3.5. Comparison specimens .........................................................................................18 IV. Measurements ..........................................................................................20 4.1. Cervical measurements ........................................................................................20 4.2. Dorsal measurements ...........................................................................................21 4.3. Caudal measurements ..........................................................................................21 4.4. Girdle measurements ...........................................................................................21 4.5. Limbs measurements ...........................................................................................22 V. Comparisons .............................................................................................23 5.1. Comparison within complete titanosaur manus ...............................................23 5.2. Phalangeal comparison within complete sauropod pes ...................................24 5.3. Previous phylogenetic assessments of Tapuiasaurus ........................................25 VI. Phylogenetic analysis .............................................................................26 6.1. Character list .......................................................................................................26 6.1.1. Characters added to matrix .........................................................................66 6.2. Taxon scoring ......................................................................................................68 6.3. Apomorphies list .................................................................................................78 6.4. Decay index .........................................................................................................95 6.5. Resampling index ................................................................................................96 Note: All references cited in this volume is in the reference list of main text. 2 I. Summary of Figures Figure 1. ..................................................................................................................................98 Figure 2. ..................................................................................................................................99 Figure 3. ................................................................................................................................100 Figure 4. ................................................................................................................................101 Figure 5. ................................................................................................................................102 Figure 6. ................................................................................................................................103 Figure 7. ................................................................................................................................104 Figure 8. ................................................................................................................................105 Figure 9. ................................................................................................................................107 Figure 10. ................................................................................................................................108 Figure 11. ................................................................................................................................109 Figure 12. ................................................................................................................................110 Figure 13. ................................................................................................................................111 Figure 14. ................................................................................................................................112 Figure 15. ................................................................................................................................113 Figure 16. ................................................................................................................................114 Figure 17. ................................................................................................................................115 Figure 18. ................................................................................................................................116 Figure 19. ................................................................................................................................117 Figure 20. ................................................................................................................................118 Figure 21. ................................................................................................................................119 Figure 22. ................................................................................................................................121 Figure 23. ................................................................................................................................123 Figure 24. ................................................................................................................................125 Figure 25. ................................................................................................................................127 Figure 26. ................................................................................................................................129 Figure 27. ................................................................................................................................130 Figure 28. ................................................................................................................................132 3 Figure 53. ................................................................................................................................134 Figure 54. ................................................................................................................................135 Figure 55. ................................................................................................................................136 4 II. Appendices 2.1. Institutional abbreviations CPPLIP - Centro de Pesquisas Paleontológicas Llewellyn Ivor Price, Universidade Federal do Triângulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil; DGM - Departamento de Geologia e Mineralogia, Companhia de Pesquisa de Recursos Minerais, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; GP-D - Museu de Geologia, Universidade Estadual de São Paulo Júlio Mesquita Filho, São José do Rio Preto, São Paulo, Brazil; GSGM ZH - Gansu Geological Museum, Gansu Province, China; IANIGLA-PV - Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales, Mendoza, Argentina; MACN - Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales Bernadino Rivadavia, Buenos Aires, Argentina; MAU-Pv - Museo de Paleontología Argentino Urquiza, Rincón de Los Sauces, Neuquén, Argentina; MCF-PVPH - Museo Carmen Funes, Plaza Huincul, Neuquén, Argentina; MCS - Museo Regional de Cinco Saltos, Río Negro, Argentina; MCT - Museu de Ciências da Terra, Departamento Nacional de Produção Mineral, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; MPEF-PV - Museo Paleontológico Egidio Feruglio, Trelew, Chubut, Argentina; MLP - Museo de La Plata, Buenos Aires, Argentina; MN - Museu Nacional, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; MPCA - Museo Provincial Carlos Ameghino, Cipolletti, Río Negro, Argentina; MPM - Museu de Paleontologia de Marília, São Paulo, Brazil; MPMA - Museu de Paleontologia de Monte Alto, São Paulo, Brazil; MPM-PV - Museo Regional Padre Jesús Molina, Río Galegos, Santa Cruz, Argentina; MRS - Museo Rincón de los Sauces, Rincón de Los Sauces, Neuquén, Argentina; MUCPv - Museo de Paleontología, Centro Paleontológico
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Braincase, Brain and Palaeobiology of the Basal Sauropodomorph Dinosaur Thecodontosaurus Antiquus
    applyparastyle “fig//caption/p[1]” parastyle “FigCapt” Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2020, XX, 1–22. With 10 figures. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/advance-article/doi/10.1093/zoolinnean/zlaa157/6032720 by University of Bristol Library user on 14 December 2020 The braincase, brain and palaeobiology of the basal sauropodomorph dinosaur Thecodontosaurus antiquus ANTONIO BALLELL1,*, J. LOGAN KING1, JAMES M. NEENAN2, EMILY J. RAYFIELD1 and MICHAEL J. BENTON1 1School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1RJ, UK 2Oxford University Museum of Natural History, Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PW, UK Received 27 May 2020; revised 15 October 2020; accepted for publication 26 October 2020 Sauropodomorph dinosaurs underwent drastic changes in their anatomy and ecology throughout their evolution. The Late Triassic Thecodontosaurus antiquus occupies a basal position within Sauropodomorpha, being a key taxon for documenting how those morphofunctional transitions occurred. Here, we redescribe the braincase osteology and reconstruct the neuroanatomy of Thecodontosaurus, based on computed tomography data. The braincase of Thecodontosaurus shares the presence of medial basioccipital components of the basal tubera and a U-shaped basioccipital–parabasisphenoid suture with other basal sauropodomorphs and shows a distinct combination of characters: a straight outline of the braincase floor, an undivided metotic foramen, an unossified gap, large floccular fossae, basipterygoid processes perpendicular to the cultriform process in lateral view and a rhomboid foramen magnum. We reinterpret these braincase features in the light of new discoveries in dinosaur anatomy. Our endocranial reconstruction reveals important aspects of the palaeobiology of Thecodontosaurus, supporting a bipedal stance and cursorial habits, with adaptations to retain a steady head and gaze while moving.
    [Show full text]
  • The Neck Posture of Brachiosaurus Brancai
    Mitt. Mus. Nat.kd. Berl.. Geowiss. Reihe l(1998) 73-80 19.11.1998 The Neck Posture of Brachiosaurus brancai Andreas Christian' & Wolf-Dieter Heinrich With 3 Figures Abstract Compressive forces acting on the intervertebral discs along the neck of Brachiosaurus brancai from the Late Jurassic of Tendaguru are calculated for different neck postures. The distribution of compressive forces along the neck is compared to the distribution of the cross-sectional areas of the intervertebral discs. Neck postures in which the pattern of compressive forces does not match the pattern of cross-sectional areas of the intervertebral discs are rejected. The neck posture of Bra- chiosaurus brancai must have been nearly vertical. A more inclined neck posture can only occasionally have been kept. Therefore, Brachiosaurus bruncui appears to have been an extremely specialized high browser. In the same area, different sized individuals fed in different heights instead of each individual exploiting an extended vertical feeding range. Key words: Dinosauria, Brachiosaurus, reconstruction, biomechanics, functional morphology, feeding behaviour Zusammenfassnng Die Halsstellung von Brachiosaurus brancai aus dem Oberjura von Tendaguru in Ostafrika wird untersucht. Die auf die Band- scheiben wirkenden Druckkrafte entlang des Halses werden fur verschiedene Halsstellungen berechnet. Die Verteilung dieser Druclckrafte entlang des Halses wird mit der Verteilung der Querschnittsflachen der Bandscheiben verglichen. Halsstellungen, bei denen die Form der Kurve fur die Druckkrafte nicht mit der Form der Kurve fur die Querschnittsflachen ubereinstimmt, werden verworfen. Es zeigt sich, dal3 Brachiosaurus brancai seinen Hals nahezu senkrecht getragen haben muR. Eine deutlich gegen die Vertikale geneigte Halsstellung kann nur gelegentlich eingenommen worden sein.
    [Show full text]
  • Valérie Martin, Varavudh Suteethorn & Eric Buffetaut, Description of the Type and Referred Material of Phuwiangosaurus
    ORYCTOS, V ol . 2 : 39 - 91, Décembre 1999 DESCRIPTION OF THE TYPE AND REFERRED MATERIAL OF PHUWIANGOSAURUS SIRINDHORNAE MARTIN, BUFFETAUT AND SUTEETHORN, 1994, A SAUROPOD FROM THE LOWER CRETACEOUS OF THAILAND Valérie MARTIN 1, Varavudh SUTEETHORN 2 and Eric BUFFETAUT 3 1 Musée des Dinosaures, 11260 Espéraza, France 2 Geological Survey Division, Department of Mineral Resources, Rama VI Road, 10400 Bangkok, Thailand 3 CNRS (UMR 5561), 16 cour du Liégat, 75013 Paris, France Abstract : The type specimen of P. sirindhornae Martin, Buffetaut and Suteethorn, 1994 is an incomplete, partly articulated, skeleton discovered in the Phu Wiang area of northeastern Thailand). Most of the abundant sauropod material from the Sao Khua Formation (Early Cretaceous), collected on the Khorat Plateau, in northeastern Thailand, is referable to this species. Phuwiangosaurus is a middle-sized sauropod, which is clearly different from the Jurassic Chinese sauropods (Euhelopodidae). On the basis of a few jaw elements and teeth, P. sirindhornae may be considered as an early representative of the family Nemegtosauridae. Key words : Sauropoda, Osteology, Early Cretaceous, Thailand Description du type et du matériel rapporté de Phuwiangosaurus sirindhornae Martin, Buffetaut et Suteethorn, 1994, un sauropode du Crétacé inférieur de Thaïlande Résumé : Le spécimen type de Phuwiangosaurus sirindhornae est un squelette incomplet, partiellement articulé, découvert dans la région de Phu Wiang (Nord-Est de la Thaïlande). Phuwiangosaurus est un sauropode de taille moyenne (15 à 20 m de longueur) très différent des sauropodes du Jurassique chinois. La majeure partie de l’abondant matériel de sauropodes, récolté sur le Plateau de Khorat (Formation Sao Khua, Crétacé inférieur), est rap - portée à cette espèce.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • New Australian Sauropods Shed Light on Cretaceous Dinosaur Palaeobiogeography Received: 15 April 2016 Stephen F
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN New Australian sauropods shed light on Cretaceous dinosaur palaeobiogeography Received: 15 April 2016 Stephen F. Poropat1,2,*,, Philip D. Mannion3,*, Paul Upchurch4,*, Scott A. Hocknull5, Accepted: 13 September 2016 Benjamin P. Kear1,6, Martin Kundrát7,8, Travis R. Tischler2, Trish Sloan2, George H. K. Sinapius2, Published: 20 October 2016 Judy A. Elliott2 & David A. Elliott2 Australian dinosaurs have played a rare but controversial role in the debate surrounding the effect of Gondwanan break-up on Cretaceous dinosaur distribution. Major spatiotemporal gaps in the Gondwanan Cretaceous fossil record, coupled with taxon incompleteness, have hindered research on this effect, especially in Australia. Here we report on two new sauropod specimens from the early Late Cretaceous of Queensland, Australia, that have important implications for Cretaceous dinosaur palaeobiogeography. Savannasaurus elliottorum gen. et sp. nov. comprises one of the most complete Cretaceous sauropod skeletons ever found in Australia, whereas a new specimen of Diamantinasaurus matildae includes the first ever cranial remains of an Australian sauropod. The results of a new phylogenetic analysis, in which both Savannasaurus and Diamantinasaurus are recovered within Titanosauria, were used as the basis for a quantitative palaeobiogeographical analysis of macronarian sauropods. Titanosaurs achieved a worldwide distribution by at least 125 million years ago, suggesting that mid-Cretaceous Australian sauropods represent remnants of clades which were widespread during the Early Cretaceous. These lineages would have entered Australasia via dispersal from South America, presumably across Antarctica. High latitude sauropod dispersal might have been facilitated by Albian–Turonian warming that lifted a palaeoclimatic dispersal barrier between Antarctica and South America.
    [Show full text]
  • Prehistoric Australia Quiz Space
    PREHISTORIC AUSTRALIA QUIZ SPACE How much do you know about prehistoric Australia? In what era did dinosaurs live? Which living animal is the a) Palaeozoic ammonite group most closely b) Mesozoic related to? c) Cenozoic a) Jellyfish b) Starfish Which of these Australian c) Crab dinosaurs was a meat-eater? d) Squid a) Diamantinasaurus b) Minmi Which of these prehistoric animals c) Australovenator was a sea creature? a) Tyrannosaurus Which one of the following is b) Brontosaurus not a well-known Australian c) Minmi dinosaur site? d) Kronosaurus a) Broome, Western Australia b) Winton, Queensland Which of these prehistoric animals c) Bathurst, New South Wales was capable of flying? d) Dinosaur Cove, Victoria a) Minmi b) Woolungasaurus Australia was once part of c) Mythunga the great southern land d) Platypterygius called Gondwana. a) True What plants dominated Australia’s b) False forests during the Mesozoic? a) Eucalypts Which part of the b) Terrestrial grasses Australian continent did the c) Giant conifers ancient Eromanga Sea once roughly cover? What event is thought to a) Great Sandy Desert have caused the extinction b) Great Australian Bight of the dinosaurs? c) Great Artesian Basin a) A meteorite hitting Earth d) Great Barrier Reef b) An ice age c) A tsunami www.nma.gov.au/kspace PREHISTORIC AUSTRALIA SPACE QUIZ ANSWERS How much do you know about prehistoric Australia? In what era did dinosaurs live? Which living animal is the a) Palaeozoic ammonite group most closely b) Mesozoic related to? c) Cenozoic a) Jellyfish b) Starfish Which
    [Show full text]
  • A Basal Lithostrotian Titanosaur (Dinosauria: Sauropoda) with a Complete Skull: Implications for the Evolution and Paleobiology of Titanosauria
    RESEARCH ARTICLE A Basal Lithostrotian Titanosaur (Dinosauria: Sauropoda) with a Complete Skull: Implications for the Evolution and Paleobiology of Titanosauria Rubén D. F. Martínez1*, Matthew C. Lamanna2, Fernando E. Novas3, Ryan C. Ridgely4, Gabriel A. Casal1, Javier E. Martínez5, Javier R. Vita6, Lawrence M. Witmer4 1 Laboratorio de Paleovertebrados, Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia San Juan Bosco, Comodoro Rivadavia, Chubut, Argentina, 2 Section of Vertebrate Paleontology, Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America, 3 Laboratorio de Anatomía Comparada y Evolución de los Vertebrados, Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 4 Department of Biomedical Sciences, Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, United States of America, 5 Hospital Regional de Comodoro Rivadavia, Comodoro Rivadavia, Chubut, Argentina, 6 Resonancia Magnética Borelli, Comodoro Rivadavia, Chubut, Argentina * [email protected] OPEN ACCESS Citation: Martínez RDF, Lamanna MC, Novas FE, Ridgely RC, Casal GA, Martínez JE, et al. (2016) A Basal Lithostrotian Titanosaur (Dinosauria: Abstract Sauropoda) with a Complete Skull: Implications for the Evolution and Paleobiology of Titanosauria. PLoS We describe Sarmientosaurus musacchioi gen. et sp. nov., a titanosaurian sauropod dino- ONE 11(4): e0151661. doi:10.1371/journal. saur from the Upper Cretaceous (Cenomanian—Turonian) Lower Member of the Bajo Bar- pone.0151661 real Formation of southern Chubut Province in
    [Show full text]
  • Titanosauriform Teeth from the Cretaceous of Japan
    “main” — 2011/2/10 — 15:59 — page 247 — #1 Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências (2011) 83(1): 247-265 (Annals of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences) Printed version ISSN 0001-3765 / Online version ISSN 1678-2690 www.scielo.br/aabc Titanosauriform teeth from the Cretaceous of Japan HARUO SAEGUSA1 and YUKIMITSU TOMIDA2 1Museum of Nature and Human Activities, Hyogo, Yayoigaoka 6, Sanda, 669-1546, Japan 2National Museum of Nature and Science, 3-23-1 Hyakunin-cho, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 169-0073, Japan Manuscript received on October 25, 2010; accepted for publication on January 7, 2011 ABSTRACT Sauropod teeth from six localities in Japan were reexamined. Basal titanosauriforms were present in Japan during the Early Cretaceous before Aptian, and there is the possibility that the Brachiosauridae may have been included. Basal titanosauriforms with peg-like teeth were present during the “mid” Cretaceous, while the Titanosauria with peg-like teeth was present during the middle of Late Cretaceous. Recent excavations of Cretaceous sauropods in Asia showed that multiple lineages of sauropods lived throughout the Cretaceous in Asia. Japanese fossil records of sauropods are conformable with this hypothesis. Key words: Sauropod, Titanosauriforms, tooth, Cretaceous, Japan. INTRODUCTION humerus from the Upper Cretaceous Miyako Group at Moshi, Iwaizumi Town, Iwate Pref. (Hasegawa et al. Although more than twenty four dinosaur fossil local- 1991), all other localities provided fossil teeth (Tomida ities have been known in Japan (Azuma and Tomida et al. 2001, Tomida and Tsumura 2006, Saegusa et al. 1998, Kobayashi et al. 2006, Saegusa et al. 2008, Ohara 2008, Azuma and Shibata 2010).
    [Show full text]
  • Boletim Informativo Da SBP Ano 35, N° 73, 2020 · ISSN 1807-2550 PALEO 2019
    Boletim Informativo da SBP Ano 35, n° 73, 2020 · ISSN 1807-2550 PALEO 2019 RELATOS E RESUMOS SOCIEDADE BRASILEIRA DE PALEONTOLOGIA Presidente: Dr. Renato Pirani Ghilardi (UNESP/Bauru) Vice-Presidente: Dr. Rodrigo Miloni Santucci (UnB) 1ª Secretária: Dra. SoniaMaria Oliveira Agostinho da Silva (UFPE) 2º Secretário: Me. Victor Rodrigues Ribeiro (UNESP/Bauru) 1º Tesoureiro: Me. Marcos César Bissaro Júnior (USP/Ribeirão Preto) 2º Tesoureiro: Dr. Hermínio Ismael de Araújo Junior (UERJ) Diretor de Publicações: Dr. Sandro Marcelo Scheffler (UFRJ) P a l e o n t o l o g i a e m D e s t a q u e Boletim Informativo da Sociedade Brasileira de Paleontologia Ano 35, n° 73, dezembro/2020 · ISSN 1807-2550 Web: http://www.sbpbrasil.org/, Editores: Sandro Marcelo Scheffler, Maria Izabel Lima de Manes. Agradecimentos: Aos organizadores dos eventos científicos. Capa: Afloramento com pegadas de terópodas nas margens do rio Nioaque, Mato Grosso do Sul, durante trabalho de campo. Foto: Rafael Costa da Silva. 1. Paleontologia 2. Paleobiologia 3. Geociências Distribuído sob a Licença de Atribuição Creative Commons. EDITORIAL As Paleos acontecem anualmente e são encontros promovidos pela Sociedade Brasileira de Paleontologia com o objetivo de integrar estudantes, pesquisadores, profissionais e entusiastas da paleontologia. Por serem reuniões regionais, contribuem para o desenvolvimento de pesquisas através das trocas estabelecidas entre os participantes, além de unir diferentes instituições em prol da ciência. O Boletim Informativo da Sociedade Brasileira de Paleontologia traz todo ano uma compilação dos resumos apresentados nas Paleos como forma de registrar e conservar a memória desses eventos que são tão importantes para a ciência brasileira.
    [Show full text]
  • Re-Description of the Sauropod Dinosaur Amanzia (“Ornithopsis
    Schwarz et al. Swiss J Geosci (2020) 113:2 https://doi.org/10.1186/s00015-020-00355-5 Swiss Journal of Geosciences ORIGINAL PAPER Open Access Re-description of the sauropod dinosaur Amanzia (“Ornithopsis/Cetiosauriscus”) greppini n. gen. and other vertebrate remains from the Kimmeridgian (Late Jurassic) Reuchenette Formation of Moutier, Switzerland Daniela Schwarz1* , Philip D. Mannion2 , Oliver Wings3 and Christian A. Meyer4 Abstract Dinosaur remains were discovered in the 1860’s in the Kimmeridgian (Late Jurassic) Reuchenette Formation of Moutier, northwestern Switzerland. In the 1920’s, these were identifed as a new species of sauropod, Ornithopsis greppini, before being reclassifed as a species of Cetiosauriscus (C. greppini), otherwise known from the type species (C. stewarti) from the late Middle Jurassic (Callovian) of the UK. The syntype of “C. greppini” consists of skeletal elements from all body regions, and at least four individuals of diferent sizes can be distinguished. Here we fully re-describe this material, and re-evaluate its taxonomy and systematic placement. The Moutier locality also yielded a theropod tooth, and fragmen- tary cranial and vertebral remains of a crocodylomorph, also re-described here. “C.” greppini is a small-sized (not more than 10 m long) non-neosauropod eusauropod. Cetiosauriscus stewarti and “C.” greppini difer from each other in: (1) size; (2) the neural spine morphology and diapophyseal laminae of the anterior caudal vertebrae; (3) the length-to-height proportion in the middle caudal vertebrae; (4) the presence or absence of ridges and crests on the middle caudal cen- tra; and (5) the shape and proportions of the coracoid, humerus, and femur.
    [Show full text]
  • The Baurusuchidae Vs Theropoda Record in the Bauru Group (Upper Cretaceous, Brazil): a Taphonomic Perspective
    Journal of Iberian Geology https://doi.org/10.1007/s41513-018-0048-4 RESEARCH PAPER The Baurusuchidae vs Theropoda record in the Bauru Group (Upper Cretaceous, Brazil): a taphonomic perspective Kamila L. N. Bandeira1 · Arthur S. Brum1 · Rodrigo V. Pêgas1 · Giovanne M. Cidade2 · Borja Holgado1 · André Cidade1 · Rafael Gomes de Souza1 Received: 31 July 2017 / Accepted: 23 January 2018 © Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018 Abstract Purpose The Bauru Group is worldwide known due to its high diversity of archosaurs, especially that of Crocodyliformes. Recently, it has been suggested that the Crocodyliformes, especially the Baurusuchidae, were the top predators of the Bauru Group, based on their anatomical convergence with theropods and the dearth of those last ones in the fossil record of this geological group. Methods Here, we erect the hypothesis that assumption is taphonomically biased. For this purpose, we made a literature survey on all the published specimens of Theropoda, Baurusuchidae and Titanosauria from all geological units from the Bauru Group. Also, we gathered data from the available literature, and we classifed each fossil fnd under a taphonomic class proposed on this work. Results We show that those groups have diferent degrees of bone representativeness and diferent qualities of preservation pattern. Also, we suggest that baurusuchids lived close to or in the abundant food plains, which explains the good preserva- tion of their remains. Theropods and titanosaurs did not live in association with such environments and the quality of their preservation has thus been negatively afected. Conclusions We support the idea that the Baurusuchidae played an important role in the food chain of the ecological niches of the Late Cretaceous Bauru Group, but the possible biases in their fossil record relative to Theropoda do not support the conclusion that baurusuchids outcompeted theropods.
    [Show full text]
  • Fossil Focus: Dinosaurs Down Under Author(S): Stephen F
    www.palaeontologyonline.com |Page 1 Title: Fossil Focus: Dinosaurs Down Under Author(s): Stephen F. Propat *1 Volume: 5 Article: 1 Page(s): 1-11 Published Date: 01/01/2015 PermaLink: http://www.palaeontologyonline.com/articles/2015/fossil-focus-dinosaurs/ IMPORTANT Your use of the Palaeontology [online] archive indicates your acceptance of Palaeontology [online]'s Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.palaeontologyonline.com/site-information/terms-and-conditions/. COPYRIGHT Palaeontology [online] (www.palaeontologyonline.com) publishes all work, unless otherwise stated, under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0) license. This license lets others distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon the published work, even commercially, as long as they credit Palaeontology[online] for the original creation. This is the most accommodating of licenses offered by Creative Commons and is recommended for maximum dissemination of published material. Further details are available at http://www.palaeontologyonline.com/site-information/copyright/. CITATION OF ARTICLE Please cite the following published work as: Propat, Stephen F.. 2015. Fossil Focus: Dinosaurs Down Under, Palaeontology Online, Volume 5, Article 1, 1- 11. Published by: Palaeontology [online] www.palaeontologyonline.com |Page 2 Fossil Focus: Dinosaurs Down Under by Stephen F. Poropat*1,2 Introduction: Ask the average person in the street to name an Australian dinosaur, and you will be lucky if you get a correct answer. If they say crocodile, they are in the right postcode but have the wrong address. If they say emu, then they are correct, strictly speaking, but they are either lucky or being smart. If they say kangaroo, back away slowly and avoid eye contact.
    [Show full text]