Braincase Anatomy in Non-Neosauropodan Sauropodomorphs: Evolutionary and Functional Aspects

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Braincase Anatomy in Non-Neosauropodan Sauropodomorphs: Evolutionary and Functional Aspects Braincase anatomy in non-neosauropodan sauropodomorphs: evolutionary and functional aspects Dissertation der Fakultät für Geowissenschaften der Ludwig- Maximilians-Universität München zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades in den Naturwissenschaften (Dr. rer. nat.) Vorgelegt von Mario Bronzati Filho München, 15. März 2017 Erstgutachter: PD Dr. Oliver Rauhut Zweitgutachter: Prof. Dr. Max Cardoso Langer Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 26.09.2017 I Statutory declaration and statement I hereby confirm that my thesis entitled “Braincase anatomy in non-neosauropodan sauropodomorphs: evolutionary and functional aspects”, is the result of my own original work. Furthermore, I certify that this work contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in my name, in any university and, to the best of my knowledge and belief, contains no material previously published or written by another person, except where due reference has been made in the text. In addition, I certify that no part of this work will, in the future, be used in a submission in my name, for any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution without the prior approval of the Ludwig- Maximilians-University Munich. II Contents Statutory declaration and statement II Abstract of the thesis VI Acknowledgements IX Chapter 1. Introduction 1 1.1. Introduction 2 1.2. Evolution of Sauropodomorpha 10 1.3. Braincase 13 1.4. Objectives of the dissertation 15 1.5. Overview of studies presented in Chapter 02 to Chapter 07 16 1.6. References 20 Chapter 2. A unique Late Triassic dinosauromorph assemblage reveals dinosaur ancestral anatomy and diet 29 2.1. Abstract 31 2.2. Results 31 2.3. Discussion 37 2.4. Acknowledgements 41 2.5. References 41 Chapter 3. Early dinosaur brain indicates faunivorous exaptation in the early evolution of sauropodomorph herbivory 44 3.1. Abstract 45 3.2. Introduction 46 3.3. Results 48 3.4. Discussion 49 3.5. Material & Methods 55 3.6. Acknowledgements 57 III 3.7. References 58 Chapter 4. Braincase anatomy of the early sauropodomorph Saturnalia tupiniquim (Late Triassic, Brazil) 64 4.1. Abstract 65 4.2. Introduction 66 4.3. Material & Methods 68 4.4. Results 72 4.5. Discussion 109 4.6. Conclusions 122 4.7. References 123 Chapter 5. Braincase redescription of Efraasia minor (Huene, 1908) (Dinosauria, Sauropodomorpha) from the Late Triassic of Germany, with comments on the evolution of the sauropodomorph braincase 127 5.1. Abstract 128 5.2. Introduction 129 5.3. Material & Methods 131 5.4. Results 135 5.5. Discussion 184 5.6. Conclusions 218 5.7. Acknowledgements 220 5.8. References 221 Chapter 6. Rapid transformation in the braincase of sauropod dinosaurs: implications for the early evolution of gigantism 231 6.1. Abstract 232 6.2. Introduction 233 6.3. Material & Methods 235 6.4. Results 238 6.5. Discussion 245 IV 6.6. Conclusions 252 6.7. Acknowledgements 254 6.8. References 254 Chapter 7. Should the terms ‘basal taxon’ and ‘transitional taxon’ be extinguished from cladistic studies with extinct organisms? 260 7.1. Abstract 261 7.2. Plain Language Summary 262 7.3. Introduction 262 7.4. Discussion 266 7.5. Practical guidelines 279 7.6. Conclusions 280 7.7. Acknowledgements 281 7.8 References 281 Conclusions Appendix i Appendix Chapter 2 ii Appendix Chapter 3 xxvii Appendix Chapter 5 xxxvii Appendix Chapter 6 lxii V Abstract of the thesis The evolutionary history of sauropodomorphs starts in the Late Triassic, a period characterized by the extinction and radiations of distinct archosaur lineages. During the first c. 50 million years of sauropodomorph evolution, a great number of anatomical transformations are observed among non-sauropodan lineages of Sauropodomorpha, once thought as ‘typical herbivore’ and ‘conservative’. All these transformations are reflected in the morphological disparity observed among sauropodomorph dinosaurs. The earliest members of the group, from the Late Triassic (Carnian) were small animals, faunivorous and omnivorous, and with a bauplan that differs significantly from the quintessential representatives of the group, the gigantic sauropods, the biggest land animals that ever lived on Earth. This morphological disparity, alongside a rich and globally distributed fossil record, represents a very interesting case to study morphological changes within a lineage. Notwithstanding, the anatomy of sauropodomorph was the topic of many studies, mainly aiming to understand the origins of the peculiar and distinct sauropod bauplan, especially the transition from a bipedal to a quadrupedal stance, and the evolution of a fully herbivore diet. The aim of this study is an analysis of patterns of transformation of the braincase in sauropodomorph dinosaurs and their implications for our understanding concerning the phylogenetic relationships and palaeobiology of these animals. The analysis of two new fossils, the sauropodomorph dinosaur (Buriolestes schultzi) the lagerpetid (Ixalerpeton polesinensis), helps clarifying anatomical transformations of the braincase in the Dinosauromorpha lineage and the early evolution of dinosaur diets. The tooth morphology of Buriolestes indicates that it was a faunivorous animal. Thus, given its phylogenetic position as the sister group of all VI the other sauropodomorphs, and the faunivorous diet of theropods and herrerasaurids, the new data indicate that faunivory is the ancestral condition of Sauropodomorpha. The endocast of Saturnalia tupiniquim helps to understand one of the well- known traits of sauropodomorph dinosaurs, a short skull. Saturnalia has a well- developed flocculus (i.e. projecting into the space between the semi-circular canals of the inner ear), which is a feature observed in predatory dinosaurs, and absent in later sauropodomorphs, including sauropoda. Combining new information on the soft- tissues of the brain with data on skeletal anatomy and phylogeny of sauropodomorphs, it is proposed that skull reduction was firstly an adaptation to feed on small and elusive preys. As a small skull was later a ‘key’ trait for the evolution of a fully herbivorous diet (by diminishing the constraint on the neck), skull reduction in sauropodomorph can be now understood as an exaptation. The osteological descriptions of the braincases of Saturnalia tupiniquim and Efraasia minor allow tracing the evolution of braincase anatomy in Sauropodomorpha in more details. Comparisons with lagerpetids, silesaurids, and other dinosaurs showed that features once thought to be absent or less widespread in dinosaurs, such as the semilunar depression (or subotic recess) and a basioccipital and subsellar recesses, are in fact found among members of the three main lineages of Dinosaria, and also among non-dinosaurian dinosauromorphs. Furthermore, the results of a phylogenetic analysis focusing on non-neosauropodan sauropodomorphs indicate that despite the existence of characters supporting a monophyletic ‘Prosauropoda’ (i.e. a calde encompassing the non-sauropodan sauropodomorphs), constrained phylogenetic analyses indicate that the paraphyletic condition of ‘prosauropods’ in relation to Sauropoda is still a much stronger hypothesis. VII A great number of transformations in the braincase anatomy were also detected within sauropods in the phylogenetic analyses conducted for this thesis. Discrete character-taxon matrix analyses indicate a drastic transformation in the braincase of these animals in relation to their non-sauropodan relatives, with the results of a principal coordinate analysis showing that the morphospace occupation of sauropod braincases does not overlap with the morphospace of non-sauropodan sauropodomorpsh. Furthermore, analyses of rates of character evolution indicate that transformations shaping the braincase anatomy of sauropods occurred in a short period of time, during the Middle Jurassic, and can be linked to the further elongation of the neck also observed in Middle Jurassic taxa. Ultimately, these modifications in the cranio-cervical complex are likely related to a re-activation of the ‘neck and head’ cascade of gigantism, and potentially played a role in the differential survival of sauropodomorphs in the Early-Middle Jurassic. Finally, differently from what is stated in a great number of previous studies on the evolution of Sauropodomorpha, the non-sauropodan sauropodomorphs (or “prosauropod”) do not represent transitional forms between the hypothetical ancestor of Sauropodomorpha and Sauropoda. Nevertheless, sauropods and ‘prosauropods’ share part of their evolutionary history, and the data presented here emphasizes that tracing anatomical transformation in non-sauropodan lineages is crucial to understand the evolution of the gigantic sauropods. VIII Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisor Oliver Rauhut (Oli), who supported my scientific work and gave me the possibility to wrap my brain around braincases over the last three and half years of my life. I further thank my first (and still?) supervisor Max C. Langer, who gave me the possibility to study the braincase of one of the oldest dinosaurs, what a privilege. I am also especially thankful to Claudia Malabarba, Marco Brandalise de Andrade, Rainer Schoch, Daniela Schwarz, Jay Nair, and Roger Benson for the opportunity to study the braincase of ‘a lot’ of sauropodomorphs. Another thanks goes to all my co-authors, Roger Benson, Jonathas Bittencourt, ‘The Ixalerpeton and Buriolestes team’, and of course Max and Oli, without whom I would not be able to get to work on the most distinct and
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]
  • Studies on Continental Late Triassic Tetrapod Biochronology. I. the Type Locality of Saturnalia Tupiniquim and the Faunal Succession in South Brazil
    Journal of South American Earth Sciences 19 (2005) 205–218 www.elsevier.com/locate/jsames Studies on continental Late Triassic tetrapod biochronology. I. The type locality of Saturnalia tupiniquim and the faunal succession in south Brazil Max Cardoso Langer* Departamento de Biologia, FFCLRP, Universidade de Sa˜o Paulo (USP), Av. Bandeirantes 3900, 14040-901 Ribeira˜o Preto, SP, Brazil Received 1 November 2003; accepted 1 January 2005 Abstract Late Triassic deposits of the Parana´ Basin, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, encompass a single third-order, tetrapod-bearing sedimentary sequence that includes parts of the Alemoa Member (Santa Maria Formation) and the Caturrita Formation. A rich, diverse succession of terrestrial tetrapod communities is recorded in these sediments, which can be divided into at least three faunal associations. The stem- sauropodomorph Saturnalia tupiniquim was collected in the locality known as ‘Waldsanga’ near the city of Santa Maria. In that area, the deposits of the Alemoa Member yield the ‘Alemoa local fauna,’ which typifies the first association; includes the rhynchosaur Hyperodapedon, aetosaurs, and basal dinosaurs; and is coeval with the lower fauna of the Ischigualasto Formation, Bermejo Basin, NW Argentina. The second association is recorded in deposits of both the Alemoa Member and the Caturrita Formation, characterized by the rhynchosaur ‘Scaphonyx’ sulcognathus and the cynodont Exaeretodon, and correlated with the upper fauna of the Ischigualasto Formation. Various isolated outcrops of the Caturrita Formation yield tetrapod fossils that correspond to post-Ischigualastian faunas but might not belong to a single faunal association. The record of the dicynodont Jachaleria suggests correlations with the lower part of the Los Colorados Formation, NW Argentina, whereas remains of derived tritheledontid cynodonts indicate younger ages.
    [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]
  • Download the Article
    A couple of partially-feathered creatures about the The Outside Story size of a turkey pop out of a stand of ferns. By the water you spot a flock of bigger animals, lean and predatory, catching fish. And then an even bigger pair of animals, each longer than a car, with ostentatious crests on their heads, stalk out of the heat haze. The fish-catchers dart aside, but the new pair have just come to drink. We can only speculate what a walk through Jurassic New England would be like, but the fossil record leaves many hints. According to Matthew Inabinett, one of the Beneski Museum of Natural History’s senior docents and a student of vertebrate paleontology, dinosaur footprints found in the sedimentary rock of the Connecticut Valley reveal much about these animals and their environment. At the time, the land that we know as New England was further south, close to where Cuba is now. A system of rift basins that cradled lakes ran right through our region, from North Carolina to Nova Scotia. As reliable sources of water, with plants for the herbivores and fish for the carnivores, the lakes would have been havens of life. While most of the fossil footprints found in New England so far are in the lower Connecticut Valley, Dinosaur Tracks they provide a window into a world that extended throughout the region. According to Inabinett, the By: Rachel Marie Sargent tracks generally fall into four groupings. He explained that these names are for the tracks, not Imagine taking a walk through a part of New the dinosaurs that made them, since, “it’s very England you’ve never seen—how it was 190 million difficult, if not impossible, to match a footprint to a years ago.
    [Show full text]
  • The Origin and Early Evolution of Dinosaurs
    Biol. Rev. (2010), 85, pp. 55–110. 55 doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.2009.00094.x The origin and early evolution of dinosaurs Max C. Langer1∗,MartinD.Ezcurra2, Jonathas S. Bittencourt1 and Fernando E. Novas2,3 1Departamento de Biologia, FFCLRP, Universidade de S˜ao Paulo; Av. Bandeirantes 3900, Ribeir˜ao Preto-SP, Brazil 2Laboratorio de Anatomia Comparada y Evoluci´on de los Vertebrados, Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales ‘‘Bernardino Rivadavia’’, Avda. Angel Gallardo 470, Cdad. de Buenos Aires, Argentina 3CONICET (Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cient´ıficas y T´ecnicas); Avda. Rivadavia 1917 - Cdad. de Buenos Aires, Argentina (Received 28 November 2008; revised 09 July 2009; accepted 14 July 2009) ABSTRACT The oldest unequivocal records of Dinosauria were unearthed from Late Triassic rocks (approximately 230 Ma) accumulated over extensional rift basins in southwestern Pangea. The better known of these are Herrerasaurus ischigualastensis, Pisanosaurus mertii, Eoraptor lunensis,andPanphagia protos from the Ischigualasto Formation, Argentina, and Staurikosaurus pricei and Saturnalia tupiniquim from the Santa Maria Formation, Brazil. No uncontroversial dinosaur body fossils are known from older strata, but the Middle Triassic origin of the lineage may be inferred from both the footprint record and its sister-group relation to Ladinian basal dinosauromorphs. These include the typical Marasuchus lilloensis, more basal forms such as Lagerpeton and Dromomeron, as well as silesaurids: a possibly monophyletic group composed of Mid-Late Triassic forms that may represent immediate sister taxa to dinosaurs. The first phylogenetic definition to fit the current understanding of Dinosauria as a node-based taxon solely composed of mutually exclusive Saurischia and Ornithischia was given as ‘‘all descendants of the most recent common ancestor of birds and Triceratops’’.
    [Show full text]
  • Brains and Intelligence
    BRAINS AND INTELLIGENCE The EQ or Encephalization Quotient is a simple way of measuring an animal's intelligence. EQ is the ratio of the brain weight of the animal to the brain weight of a "typical" animal of the same body weight. Assuming that smarter animals have larger brains to body ratios than less intelligent ones, this helps determine the relative intelligence of extinct animals. In general, warm-blooded animals (like mammals) have a higher EQ than cold-blooded ones (like reptiles and fish). Birds and mammals have brains that are about 10 times bigger than those of bony fish, amphibians, and reptiles of the same body size. The Least Intelligent Dinosaurs: The primitive dinosaurs belonging to the group sauropodomorpha (which included Massospondylus, Riojasaurus, and others) were among the least intelligent of the dinosaurs, with an EQ of about 0.05 (Hopson, 1980). Smartest Dinosaurs: The Troodontids (like Troödon) were probably the smartest dinosaurs, followed by the dromaeosaurid dinosaurs (the "raptors," which included Dromeosaurus, Velociraptor, Deinonychus, and others) had the highest EQ among the dinosaurs, about 5.8 (Hopson, 1980). The Encephalization Quotient was developed by the psychologist Harry J. Jerison in the 1970's. J. A. Hopson (a paleontologist from the University of Chicago) did further development of the EQ concept using brain casts of many dinosaurs. Hopson found that theropods (especially Troodontids) had higher EQ's than plant-eating dinosaurs. The lowest EQ's belonged to sauropods, ankylosaurs, and stegosaurids. A SECOND BRAIN? It used to be thought that the large sauropods (like Brachiosaurus and Apatosaurus) and the ornithischian Stegosaurus had a second brain.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sauropodomorph Biostratigraphy of the Elliot Formation of Southern Africa: Tracking the Evolution of Sauropodomorpha Across the Triassic–Jurassic Boundary
    Editors' choice The sauropodomorph biostratigraphy of the Elliot Formation of southern Africa: Tracking the evolution of Sauropodomorpha across the Triassic–Jurassic boundary BLAIR W. MCPHEE, EMESE M. BORDY, LARA SCISCIO, and JONAH N. CHOINIERE McPhee, B.W., Bordy, E.M., Sciscio, L., and Choiniere, J.N. 2017. The sauropodomorph biostratigraphy of the Elliot Formation of southern Africa: Tracking the evolution of Sauropodomorpha across the Triassic–Jurassic boundary. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 62 (3): 441–465. The latest Triassic is notable for coinciding with the dramatic decline of many previously dominant groups, followed by the rapid radiation of Dinosauria in the Early Jurassic. Among the most common terrestrial vertebrates from this time, sauropodomorph dinosaurs provide an important insight into the changing dynamics of the biota across the Triassic–Jurassic boundary. The Elliot Formation of South Africa and Lesotho preserves the richest assemblage of sauropodomorphs known from this age, and is a key index assemblage for biostratigraphic correlations with other simi- larly-aged global terrestrial deposits. Past assessments of Elliot Formation biostratigraphy were hampered by an overly simplistic biozonation scheme which divided it into a lower “Euskelosaurus” Range Zone and an upper Massospondylus Range Zone. Here we revise the zonation of the Elliot Formation by: (i) synthesizing the last three decades’ worth of fossil discoveries, taxonomic revision, and lithostratigraphic investigation; and (ii) systematically reappraising the strati- graphic provenance of important fossil locations. We then use our revised stratigraphic information in conjunction with phylogenetic character data to assess morphological disparity between Late Triassic and Early Jurassic sauropodomorph taxa. Our results demonstrate that the Early Jurassic upper Elliot Formation is considerably more taxonomically and morphologically diverse than previously thought.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Caenagnathid Dinosaur from the Upper Cretaceous Wangshi
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN A new caenagnathid dinosaur from the Upper Cretaceous Wangshi Group of Shandong, China, with Received: 12 October 2017 Accepted: 7 March 2018 comments on size variation among Published: xx xx xxxx oviraptorosaurs Yilun Yu1, Kebai Wang2, Shuqing Chen2, Corwin Sullivan3,4, Shuo Wang 5,6, Peiye Wang2 & Xing Xu7 The bone-beds of the Upper Cretaceous Wangshi Group in Zhucheng, Shandong, China are rich in fossil remains of the gigantic hadrosaurid Shantungosaurus. Here we report a new oviraptorosaur, Anomalipes zhaoi gen. et sp. nov., based on a recently collected specimen comprising a partial left hindlimb from the Kugou Locality in Zhucheng. This specimen’s systematic position was assessed by three numerical cladistic analyses based on recently published theropod phylogenetic datasets, with the inclusion of several new characters. Anomalipes zhaoi difers from other known caenagnathids in having a unique combination of features: femoral head anteroposteriorly narrow and with signifcant posterior orientation; accessory trochanter low and confuent with lesser trochanter; lateral ridge present on femoral lateral surface; weak fourth trochanter present; metatarsal III with triangular proximal articular surface, prominent anterior fange near proximal end, highly asymmetrical hemicondyles, and longitudinal groove on distal articular surface; and ungual of pedal digit II with lateral collateral groove deeper and more dorsally located than medial groove. The holotype of Anomalipes zhaoi is smaller than is typical for Caenagnathidae but larger than is typical for the other major oviraptorosaurian subclade, Oviraptoridae. Size comparisons among oviraptorisaurians show that the Caenagnathidae vary much more widely in size than the Oviraptoridae. Oviraptorosauria is a clade of maniraptoran theropod dinosaurs characterized by a short, high skull, long neck and short tail.
    [Show full text]
  • Massospondylus Carinatus Owen 1854 (Dinosauria: Sauropodomorpha) from the Lower Jurassic of South Africa: Proposed Conservation of Usage by Designation of a Neotype
    Massospondylus carinatus Owen 1854 (Dinosauria: Sauropodomorpha) from the Lower Jurassic of South Africa: Proposed conservation of usage by designation of a neotype Adam M. Yates1* & Paul M. Barrett2 1Bernard Price Institute for Palaeontological Research, University of the Witwatersrand, Private Bag 3, WITS, 2050 Johannesburg, South Africa 2Department of Palaeontology, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 5BD, U.K. Received 17 February 2010. Accepted 12 November 2010 The purpose of this article is to preserve the usage of the binomen Massospondylus carinatus by designating a neotype specimen. Massospondylus is the most abundant basal sauropodomorph dinosaur from the Early Jurassic strata of southern Africa. This taxon forms the basis for an extensive palaeobiological literature and is the eponym of Massospondylidae and the nominal taxon of a biostratigraphical unit in current usage, the ‘Massospondylus Range Zone’. The syntype series of M. carinatus (five disarticulated and broken vertebrae) was destroyed during World War II, but plaster casts and illustrations of the material survive. Nonetheless, these materials cannot act as type material for this taxon under the rules of the ICZN Code. In order to avoid nomenclatural instability, we hereby designate BP/1/4934 (a skull and largely complete postcranial skeleton) as the neotype of Massospondylus carinatus. Keywords: Dinosauria, Sauropodomorpha, Massospondylidae, Massospondylus, Massospondylus carinatus, neotype, South Africa, upper Elliot Formation, Early Jurassic. INTRODUCTION same taxon, possibly even the same individual, as at least Richard Owen described and named Massospondylus some of the syntype series of Massospondylus carinatus. carinatus (1854, p. 97) with carinatus as the type species of Their initial separation from Massospondylus carinatus the genus by monotypy.
    [Show full text]
  • A Re-Evaluation of the Enigmatic Dinosauriform Caseosaurus Crosbyensis from the Late Triassic of Texas, USA and Its Implications for Early Dinosaur Evolution
    A re-evaluation of the enigmatic dinosauriform Caseosaurus crosbyensis from the Late Triassic of Texas, USA and its implications for early dinosaur evolution MATTHEW G. BARON and MEGAN E. WILLIAMS Baron, M.G. and Williams, M.E. 2018. A re-evaluation of the enigmatic dinosauriform Caseosaurus crosbyensis from the Late Triassic of Texas, USA and its implications for early dinosaur evolution. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 63 (1): 129–145. The holotype specimen of the Late Triassic dinosauriform Caseosaurus crosbyensis is redescribed and evaluated phylogenetically for the first time, providing new anatomical information and data on the earliest dinosaurs and their evolution within the dinosauromorph lineage. Historically, Caseosaurus crosbyensis has been considered to represent an early saurischian dinosaur, and often a herrerasaur. More recent work on Triassic dinosaurs has cast doubt over its supposed dinosaurian affinities and uncertainty about particular features in the holotype and only known specimen has led to the species being regarded as a dinosauriform of indeterminate position. Here, we present a new diagnosis for Caseosaurus crosbyensis and refer additional material to the taxon—a partial right ilium from Snyder Quarry. Our com- parisons and phylogenetic analyses suggest that Caseosaurus crosbyensis belongs in a clade with herrerasaurs and that this clade is the sister taxon of Dinosauria, rather than positioned within it. This result, along with other recent analyses of early dinosaurs, pulls apart what remains of the “traditional” group of dinosaurs collectively termed saurischians into a polyphyletic assemblage and implies that Dinosauria should be regarded as composed exclusively of Ornithoscelida (Ornithischia + Theropoda) and Sauropodomorpha. In addition, our analysis recovers the enigmatic European taxon Saltopus elginensis among herrerasaurs for the first time.
    [Show full text]
  • The Anatomy and Phylogenetic Relationships of Antetonitrus Ingenipes (Sauropodiformes, Dinosauria): Implications for the Origins of Sauropoda
    THE ANATOMY AND PHYLOGENETIC RELATIONSHIPS OF ANTETONITRUS INGENIPES (SAUROPODIFORMES, DINOSAURIA): IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ORIGINS OF SAUROPODA Blair McPhee A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Science, University of the Witwatersrand, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science. Johannesburg, 2013 i ii ABSTRACT A thorough description and cladistic analysis of the Antetonitrus ingenipes type material sheds further light on the stepwise acquisition of sauropodan traits just prior to the Triassic/Jurassic boundary. Although the forelimb of Antetonitrus and other closely related sauropododomorph taxa retains the plesiomorphic morphology typical of a mobile grasping structure, the changes in the weight-bearing dynamics of both the musculature and the architecture of the hindlimb document the progressive shift towards a sauropodan form of graviportal locomotion. Nonetheless, the presence of hypertrophied muscle attachment sites in Antetonitrus suggests the retention of an intermediary form of facultative bipedality. The term Sauropodiformes is adopted here and given a novel definition intended to capture those transitional sauropodomorph taxa occupying a contiguous position on the pectinate line towards Sauropoda. The early record of sauropod diversification and evolution is re- examined in light of the paraphyletic consensus that has emerged regarding the ‘Prosauropoda’ in recent years. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I would like to express sincere gratitude to Adam Yates for providing me with the opportunity to do ‘real’ palaeontology, and also for gladly sharing his considerable knowledge on sauropodomorph osteology and phylogenetics. This project would not have been possible without the continued (and continual) support (both emotionally and financially) of my parents, Alf and Glenda McPhee – Thank you.
    [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]