Mesozoic Marine Reptiles of Russia and Other Former Soviet Republics
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Mesozoic marine reptiles of Russia and other former Soviet republics GLENN W. S'I'OKKS, hf;\XIM S. ;\RKII;\N<;EL'SKII, .AN11 VL:\I>IMIR hl. EFIhfO\' Introduction liptian). The phosphorites typically produce only fragmentary and disarticulated remains, but complete Marine reptile remains have often been fbund in the skeletons are common in the clays, shales, and marls of extensive Mesozoic epicontinental marine units of the the Volga. There is good potential for discoveries in former Soviet Union, and in particular, the Russian other quarries, but these are currently unmonitored. Platform of the European part of Russia. These fossils Llistorical localities of the Moscow Region generally include relatively common plesiosaurs, ichthyosaurs no longer exist, as these quarries have been al~andoned and mosasaurs, and rarer crocodilians and turtles. The over time. The best potential for immediate results Moscow Basin and the Ul'yanovsk, Samara, and therefore lies with the excellent cliff-face exposures Saratov regions of the Volga River Basin have lxen along the Volga. particularly productive. These areas not only contain Numerous Russian reports refer to localities in large exposures of UpperJurassic and Cretaceous sed- 'Povolzh'e' or 'Zavolzh'e'. These are Russian conven- iments, but have proved relatively accessible to tions for the Volga River Basin, Povolzh'e indicating Russian workers over the years. Sadly, there has l~een the right bank of the river (Ul'yanovsk and Saratov little in-depth sti~dyand analysis of marine reptile shore; west bank), and Zavolzh'e the left (Samara fossils in the former Soviet Union in recent years, shore; east bank). In the central Volga Basin near although a great many historical works have been Ul'yanovsk, marine reptile remains have been found in devoted to them. In this article, we review the current all ammonite zones from the Callovian to the .l\lbian. state of knowledge of these interesting fossils and The greatest concentrations, however, occur in the provide a lmis for informed future study. Middle Volgian Dovsop1~zuitc.spnndcvi, Epiziivgntites niki- The quality of most Russian marine reptile lholo- tint, and Upper Volgian Cvnsprditcs subditrs ammonite types is poor and most specimens have been recovered zones and in the Hauterivian Spertonicev~zsvevsicolov as float fiorn the Volga and Moscow River Basins, or as Zone. Uniforrn formational or 'svita' (suite) names chance occurrences in quarries and oil shale mines. have not been established generally for the Russian Almost no deliberate excavations have been under- Platform marine rocks, and the use of local ammonite taken. Currently, the most productive Russian local- zones is preferred. The Russian Volgian essentially ities for plesiosaurs and ichthyosaurs are the equals the 'rithonian. phosphorite quarries near Voskresensk in the Moscow Lower Volga sediments producing ichthyosaurs, Region, quarries near the village of Sundokovo in plesiosaurs, mosasaurs, and turtles in the Saratov and Tataria, the vicinity of Kashpir in the Samara Region lJenza Regions (Povolzh'e) are Senonian in age, typi- (UpperJurassic to Aptian), the 30 km of Volga River cally Campanian and Maastrichtian. 'l'he precincts of shoreline from the village of Kriushi to Mordovo the Serdoha River near the village of Malaya Serdoba, (Barremian to illhian), and the 24 km stretch of the Penza, have been particularly rich in fragmentary Volga from Ul'yanovsk to Undory (Kimmerid~'nail to remains of Campano-Maastrichtian age (pers. obs., G.W. STORRS t~al. M.S.A.). Jurassic and Cretaceous marine deposits con- (1 947), Meniler (1948), Novozhilov (1948a, b, 1964), taining fossil reptile remains are also found in some of and Ochev (197ha, 1977), for example, have written on the central Asian nations that were formerly republics Russian plesiosaur remains more recently. Little study of the Soviet Union, but these areas have been less has been attempted in the past 20 years. Older workers well studied. Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Azerbaijan (e.g. Bogolyubov, 191 1; Menner, 1948) sometimes are notable examples (Bazhanov, 1958; relied upon disassociated collections of bones for their Rozhdestvenskii, 1973; Nesov and Krasovskaya, 1984; type series. Where possible, holotypes in these cases Glikman etal., 1987). have been selected on the basis of page priority. Bogolyubov (1911) named numerous Russian ple- siosaur species all of which, however, are indetermi- Repository abbreviation^ nate and must be considered nomina dubia (l'able 11.1), KGU, Geology and Mineralogy Museum, Kazan State even though some of these were retained by Universit): Kazan'; MGRI, Moscow Geological Pravoslavlev (1915) (see Welles, 1962). Indeed, virtu- Prospecting Institute, Vernadskii State Geological ally all of the 'species' unique to Russia are nomina Museum, Moscow; PIN, Paleontological Institute, dubia, and not a single complete skeleton has been Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow; PMK, described. Most are based upon isolated vertebrae and Pugachev Regional Museum, Pugachev, Saratov teeth and as such are non-diagnostic below the subor- region; POKM, Penza Regional Local History dinal, or perhaps the familial level. Most, if not all, of Museum, Penza, Penza Region; SGU, Paleontology Bogolyubov's (191 1) holotypes, from the old museum Museum of the Department of Historical Geology of the Geological Cabinet of Moscow University, are and Paleontology, Saratov State University, Saratov; now housed in MGRI. Some of these types have been 'Simbirtsit', Paleontological collection of the identified (Table 11.1), but through neglect while 'Simbirtsit' Industrial Works (a free enterprise under communist authority, parts of the collection are company), All-Russian Cultural Fund, Undory, inaccessible. It is believed that a planned renovation Ul'yanovsk Region; TsGM, Central Geological project, now underway, will uncover the remaining Museum, St. Petersburg; UPM, Undory specimens. Kipriyanov's (1 882, 1883) material is pre- Palaeontological Musuem, Undory, Ul'yanovsk sumably in the museum of the Academy of Sciences, region; ZIN, Zoological Institute, Russian Academy of St. Petersburg. The whereabouts of other collections, Sciences, St. Petersburg. such as those of Eichwald and Fischer von Waldheim, are unknown at present. Ostensibly, the genera Cimoliasaurus, Colymbosaurus, Systematic survey Cryptoclidus, Elasmosaurus, Eretmosaurus, Georgiasaurus, DIAPSIDA Osborn, 1903 Leutkesaurus, Liopleurodon, Muraenosaurus, Neoplio- SAUROPTERYGIA Owen, 1860 saurus, Peloneu.rte.r, Plesiosaurus, Pliosaurus, Polycotylus, PLESIOSAURIA de Blainville, 1835 Polyptychodon, 'Rhino.raurus: Scanisaurus, Simolestes, Comments. Over two dozen plesiosaur species have Spondylosaurus, Strongylokrotaphus, and Thaumatosaurus been named, and numerous additional taxa recog- are present in Russian rocks (Welles, 1962; Persson, nized, from Russian sediments by Russian and 1963; Novozhilov, 1964). However, most generic German workers. Most of this effort was undertaken in identifications and assignments to previously known the pre-revolutionary years of the nineteenth and Western taxa have been based upon stratigraphical, early twentieth centuries (e.g. Fischer von Waldheim, rather than morphological information, with an his- 1845, 1846; Eichwald, 1865-1868; Kipriyanov, 1883; torical readiness to name new species based upon geo- Ryabinin, 1909, 1915; Bogolyubov, 191 1; Pravoslavlev, graphic occurrence. Few of these identifications can 1915, 1916). Zhuravlev (1941, 1913), Rozhdestvenskii be considered reliable. Indeed, most Western species Table 1 1.1. Compilation of plesiosauvian taxa based upon mateiial fi-om the fivmev Soviet CJnion.Holotypes indicated by vepositovy abbveviation ovspecime?~numbev, where known Taxon Holotype Material Locality Horizon Status Colymbosauvus sklerodivus Bogolyubov, 19 11 MGRI fragmentary skeleton Moscow Region Volgian Plesiosauria indet. Cryptoclidus simbivskensis Bogolyubov, 1909 hlGRI vertebrae/limb frags. Ul'yanovsk Region Callovian-Oxfordian Plesiosauria indet. Elastnosaurus amalitskii Pravoslavlev, 19 16 - vertebral series Don Region Turonian Elasmosauridae indet. Elasmosaurus antiquus Dubeikovskii & Ochev, SGU 104a/17,18, 19 cervical centra Kama River Basin Hauterivian Elasmosauridae 1967 indet. Elasmosauvus kuvskennsis Bogolyubov, 191 1 MGRI [Kipr., 18821 med. cervical centrum Kursk Region Cenomanian Plesiosauria indet. [see Welles, 19621 Elasmosaurus ovskensis Bogolyubov, 19 11 lZIGRI cervical centra Orenburg Region Senonian Elasmosauridae indet. Elasmosaarus sevdobensis Bogolyubov, 19 11 hIGRI ant. cervical centrum Penza Region Cainpanian Elasinosauridae indet. ?Elasmosauvussachalinensis Ryabinin, 19 15 - phalanx Sakhalin Island Lower Senonian Plesiosauria indet. Eretmosauvus vzasnickii hfenner, 1918 hfGR1 VI 6111 cervical centrum Vilyui River, Siberia IvIiddleJurassic Plesiosauria indet. ?Evetmosauvus,jakowlewihfenner, 1918 MGRIVI61/15 caudal centrum Vilyui River, Siberia hliddle Jurassic Plesiosauria indet. Georgiasauvus (Geovgia)penzensis (Ochev, POKlLI No. 11658 partial skull/skel. Penza Region Santonian presumed valid 1976a) Leutkesauvus [no sp.] Kipriyanov, 1883 ZIN? teeth and vertebrae Kursk Region Cenomanian ? Polypvchodon sp. Muraenosauvus elasmosauvoides Bogolyubov, MGRI cervical centrum hfoscow Region Volgian ?Elasmosauridae 1911 indet. .I?uraetzosauvus kamerzsis Dubeikovskii & SGU 104al16 [lost] cervical vertebrae Kaina River Basin Volgian ?Elasmosauridae Ochev, 1967 indet. lMurnenosauvuspuvbecki Bogolyubov,