DOCSLIB.ORG

104Ornithodiraphyl

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
104Ornithodiraphyl Millions of Years Ago 252.3 247.2 235.0 201.5 175.6 161.2 145.5 99.6 65.5 Triassic Jurassic Cretaceous Early Middle Late Early Middle Late Early Late Euparkeria Crurotarsi ? Scleromochlus ? Archosauria Pterosauria Lagerpetidae Ornithodira Marasuchus Genasauria Dinosauromorpha Silesauridae Neornithsichia Thyreophora Ornithischia Eocursor (esp. Dinosauria) et al. (2011), Yates (2007) Yates et al. (2011), Nesbitt etal.(2009), Sues (2007), Martinezet al.(2011), Irmis etal. Ezcurra (2006), EzcurraandBrusatte (2011), Phylogeny after Brusatteetal.(2010), Butleretal.(2007), Heterodontosauridae Pisanosaurus Dinosauria Ornithodira Sauropodomorpha Herrerasauria Saurischia Eodromeus Theropoda Daemonosaurus Tawa Neotheropoda Millions of Years Ago 253.0 247.2 235.0 201.5 175.6 161.2 145.5 99.6 65.5 Triassic Jurassic Cretaceous Early Middle Late Early Middle Late Early Late (2009), Norman et al. (2004), Thompson etal. (2011) (2009), Norman etal. (2004), Phylogeny afterButler etal. (2007a,b), Carpenter (2001),Galton &Upchurch (2004), Maidment etal.(2008), Mateus etal. Cerapoda Ornithopoda Eocursor Marginocephalia Neornithischia Othnielosaurus Genasauria (esp. Thyreophora) Genasauria (esp. Hexinlusaurus Stormbergia Genasauria Lesothosaurus Scutellosaurus Thyreophora Scelidosaurus Stegosauridae Stegosaurinae Dacentrurinae Stegosauria Kentrosaurus Tuojiangosaurus Huayangosauridae Gigantspinosaurus Eurypoda Tianchiasaurus Ankylosauria Nodosauridae Ankylosauridae Millions of Years Ago 253.0 247.2 235.0 201.5 175.6 161.2 145.5 99.6 65.5 Triassic Jurassic Cretaceous Euhadrosauria Early Middle Late Early Middle Late Early Late Prieto-Marquez (2008), Varricchio et al.(2007) Prieto-Marquez (2008), Varricchio McDonaldetal. (2010),Norman(2004), Normanetal.(2004), Paul(2006), Godefroit et al.(2005),Makovicky etal.(2011), Phylogeny after Boydetal.(2009), Brownetal.(2009), Butleretal.(2007),Cambiaso (2007),Evans andReisz (2007), Hadrosauridae Saurolophinae Lambeosaurinae Hadrosauria Hadrosaurus Bactrosaurus Probactrosaurus Hadrosauriformes Ouranosaurus Styracosterna Mantellisaurus Ankylopollexia Iguanodon Dryomorpha Iguanacolossus Theiophytalia Camptosaurus Dryosauridae Gondwanan Ornithopod Radiation Iguanodontia Rhabdodontidae Ornithopoda Muttaburrasaurus Tenontosaurus Thescelosauridae Ornithopoda “zephyrosaurs” Hypsilophodon “changchunsaurs” Cerapoda Marginocephalia Millions of Years Ago 253.0 247.2 235.0 201.5 175.6 161.2 145.5 99.6 65.5 Triassic Jurassic Cretaceous Early Middle Late Early Middle Late Early Late Sampson andLoewen (2010), Williamson andCarr (2002),Zhao etal.(2006) Phylogeny after Butleretal.(2007), Chinnery(2004),Longrich etal.(2010),Makovicky andNorell (2006), Ryan (2007), Ornithopoda Pachycephalosauria Pachycephalosauridae Cerapoda Stenopelix Marginocephalia Yinlong Chaoyangsauridae Ceratopsia Psittacosauridae Liaoceratops Neoceratopsia Archaeoceratops Leptoceratopsidae Bagaceratopsidae Marginocephalia Protoceratopsidae Coronosauria Zuniceratops Ceratopsoidea Centrosaurinae Ceratopsidae Chasmosaurinae Millions of Years Ago 253.0 247.2 235.0 201.5 175.6 161.2 145.5 99.6 65.5 Triassic Jurassic Cretaceous Early Middle Late Early Middle Late Early Late Torres et al. (2009), Yates (2007), Yates etal. (2009) Yates (2007), Yates etal. (2009), Torres Aquesbi (2008), Ezcurra (2010),Ezcurra and Novas (2009), Remes etal.(2009), Royo Allain and Phylogeny after Neosauropoda Turiasauria Eusauropoda Jobaria Mamenchisauridae Gravisauria Cetiosauridae Shunosaurus Sauropoda Spinophorosaurus Vulcanodontidae Isanosaurus Anchisauria Antetonitrus Melanorosauridae Sauropodomorpha Aardonyx Massopoda Anchisaurus Plateosauria Yunnanosauridae Massospondylidae Riojasauridae Plateosauridae Sauropodomorpha Plateosauravus Efraasia Pantydraco Thecodontosaurus - Saurischia Guaibasauridae Theropoda Millions of Years Ago 253.0 247.2 235.0 201.5 175.6 161.2 145.5 99.6 65.5 Triassic Jurassic Cretaceous Early Middle Late Early Middle Late Early Late Lithostrotia Sander et al.(2006), Upchurch etal. (2004) et al.(2009), Remes(2006), Phylogeny afterCalvo etal. (2007),Curry Rogers (2005),Lovelace etal. (2007),Royo-Torres Saltasauridae Eutitanosauria Nemegtosauridae Antarctosauridae Aeolosauridae Titanosauria Argyrosauridae Lognkosauria Titanosauriformes Andesaurus Tangvayosaurus Lapparentosaurus Astrodon Brachiosauridae Macronaria Europasaurus Camarasaurus Neosauropoda Bellusaurus Neosauropoda Diplodocidae Flagellicaudata Diplodocoidea Diplodocinae Apatosaurinae Dicraeosauridae Rebbachisauridae Jobaria Millions of Years Ago 253.0 247.2 235.0 201.5 175.6 161.2 145.5 99.6 65.5 Triassic Jurassic Cretaceous Early Middle Late Early Middle Late Early Late Tawa al. (2009), Smith etal.(2007, 2008),Xu etal.(2009) Holtzetal.(2004), Krauseetal.(2007), Nesbittet (2008), Clark etal.(2009),Ezcurra (2006),Ezcurraand Brusatte(2011), Allain etal.(2007),Benson et al.(2009),Benton (2008), Brusatte&Sereno (2008),Carrano& Sampson Phylogeny after Liliensternus Coelophysidae Zupaysaurus Cryolophosaurus “Elaphrosaurs” Neotheropoda Spinostropheus Dilophosaurus Deltadromeus Ceratosauridae Ceratosauria Abelisauroidea Noasauridae Abelisauridae Megalosauroidea Spinosauridae Megalosauridae Averostra Monolophosaurus Piatnitzkysaurus Neovenatoridae Neotheropoda Marshosaurus Carcharodontosauria Megaraptora Chilantaisaurus Carnosauria Tetanurae Neovenator Avetheropoda Carcharodontosauridae Allosauridae Sinraptoridae Coelurosauria Millions of Years Ago 253.0 247.2 235.0 201.5 175.6 161.2 145.5 99.6 65.5 Triassic Jurassic Cretaceous Early Middle Late Early Middle Late Early Late (2009), Naish et al. (2011), Senter(2007), Sereno etal.(2009), Zanno etal.(2009) (2009), Naishet al. (2011), Phylogeny after Benson(2008),Choiniere etal.(2010), Holtz(inpress), etal.(2004),Li (2009),Makovickyet al. Carnosauria Avetheropoda Ornitholestes Compsognathidae Tyrannosauridae Coeluridae Bistahieversor ? Appalachiosaurus Xiongguanlong Coelurosauria Raptorex Dryptosaurus ? Tyrannosauroidea Eotyrannus Dilong Stokesosaurus Tyrannoraptora Proceratosauridae Ornithomimosauria Pelecanimimus Harpymimus Beishanlong Garudimimus Ornithomimidae Eshanosaurus Falcarius Therizinosauria Maniraptoriformes Beipiaosaurus Coelurosauria Therizinosauroidea Alvarezsauridae Alvarezsaurus Alvarezsauroidea Maniraptora Patagonykus Haplocheirus Parvicursorinae Oviraptorosauria Incisivosaurus Caenagnathoidea Metornithes Caudipteryx Caenagnathidae Oviraptoridae Eumaniraptora Millions of Years Ago 253.0 247.2 235.0 201.5 175.6 161.2 145.5 99.6 65.5 Triassic Jurassic Cretaceous Early Middle Late Early Middle Late Early Late Makovicky et al. (2005), Naish et al. (2011), O’Connor et al.(2009), Xuet al.(2011) Makovicky etal. (2005), Naish et al.(2011), Phylogeny afterClarke etal. (2006), Hu et al.(2009), Livezeyand Zusi(2007), Longrich andCurrie (2009), Oviraptorosauria Troodontidae Deinonychosauria Unenlagiinae Microraptorinae Dromaeosauridae Saurornitholestinae Eudromaeosauria Deinonychus ? Velociraptorinae Eumaniraptora Dromaeosaurinae Archaeopterygidae? ? Scansoriopterygidae Jeholornis Avialae Omnivoropterygidae Confuciusornithidae Pygostylia Enantiornithes Eumaniraptora Patagopteryx Ornithothoraces Samrukia Euornithes Yanornithiformes Hesperonithes Ichthyornis Ornithurae Palaeognathae Carinatae Galloanserae Neognathae Aves Metaves Neoaves Coronaves.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Reassessment of the Phylogenetic Position of Cretaceous Sauropod Dinosaurs from Queensland, Australia
    Asociación Paleontológica Argentina. Publicación Especial 7 ISSN 0328-347X VII International Symposium on Mesozoic Terrestrial Ecosystems: 139-144.Buenos Aires, 30-6-2001 A ReasSessmenT of the phylogenetic position of CretaceoUS SaUROPOd dinosaURS from Queensland, Australia Ralph E. MOLNAR1 Abstract. The Cretaceous sauropod material from Queensland, Australia, has been regarded as pertaining to a persistently primitive sauropod lineage (e.g., Coombs and Molnar). The specimens derive from the Toolebuc and Allaru (Albian marine) and Winton (Cenomanian continental) Formations. Recent phyloge- netic analyses carried out by workers in Argentina, the USA and England permit a reassessment of this fragmentary material. As far as can be ascertained from the material, there is no indication from the char- acter states that more than a single taxon is represented. Character states diagnostic of the Titanosauriforrnes, the Titanosauria, the Somphospondyli and the Titanosauridae are present. Thus the Queensland material does not pertain to cetiosaurids but belongs to titanosaurs, extending their range in- to Australia Key words. Sauropods. Austrosaurus. Titanosaurs. Cretaceous. Paleozoogeography. IntroductioN (1998),has made it possible to reassess the phyloge- netic affinities of the Australian Cretaceous sauropod By the 1950's titanosaurs were widely recognized material and address the anomalous absence of ti- both as the latest sauropod group to diversify and as tanosaurs. This paper looks specifically at pre-eminently the sauropods of Gondwanaland.
    [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]
  • Los Restos Directos De Dinosaurios Terópodos (Excluyendo Aves) En España
    Canudo, J. I. y Ruiz-Omeñaca, J. I. 2003. Ciencias de la Tierra. Dinosaurios y otros reptiles mesozoicos de España, 26, 347-373. LOS RESTOS DIRECTOS DE DINOSAURIOS TERÓPODOS (EXCLUYENDO AVES) EN ESPAÑA CANUDO1, J. I. y RUIZ-OMEÑACA1,2 J. I. 1 Departamento de Ciencias de la Tierra (Área de Paleontología) y Museo Paleontológico. Universidad de Zaragoza. 50009 Zaragoza. [email protected] 2 Paleoymás, S. L. L. Nuestra Señora del Salz, 4, local, 50017 Zaragoza. [email protected] RESUMEN La mayoría de los restos fósiles de dinosaurios terópodos de España son dientes aislados y escasos restos postcraneales. La única excepción es el ornitomimosaurio Pelecanimimus polyodon, del Barremiense de Las Hoyas (Cuenca). Hay registro de terópodos en el Jurásico superior (Oxfordiense superior-Tithónico inferior), en el tránsito Jurásico-Cretácico (Tithónico superior- Berriasiense inferior) y en todos los pisos del Cretácico inferior, con excepción del Valanginiense. En el Cretácico superior únicamente hay restos en el Campaniense y Maastrichtiense. La mayor parte de las determinaciones son demasiado generales, lo que impide conocer algunas de las familias que posiblemente estén representadas. Se han reconocido: Neoceratosauria, Baryonychidae, Ornithomimosauria, Dromaeosauridae, además de terópodos indeterminados, y celurosaurios indeterminados (dientes pequeños sin dentículos). La mayoría de los restos son de Maniraptoriformes, siendo especialmente abundantes los dromeosáuridos. Las únicas excepciones son por el momento, el posible Ceratosauria del Jurásico superior de Asturias, los barionícidos del Hauteriviense-Barremiense de Burgos, Teruel y La Rioja, el posible carcharodontosáurido del Aptiense inferior de Morella y el posible abelisáurido del Campaniense de Laño. Además hay algunos terópodos incertae sedis, como los "paronicodóntidos" (entre los que se incluye Euronychodon), y Richardoestesia.
    [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]
  • Paleoherpetofauna Portuguesa
    Rev. Esp. Herp. (2002): 17-35 17 Paleoherpetofauna Portuguesa E.G. CRESPO Centro de Biologia Ambiental – Fac. Ciências Univ. Lisboa Resumo: Nos últimos anos a importância da paleoherpetofauna portuguesa tem sido posta em evidência sobre- tudo através do seu grupo mais mediático, os dinossauros. As recentes descobertas em Portugal de vestígios de vários dinossauros, incluindo ossos, ovos, embriões, gastrólitos e pegadas, têm merecido ampla cobertura jorna- lística e têm sido oportunamente acompanhadas por intensas campanhas de divulgação, levadas a cabo pelo Mu- seu Nacional de História Natural de Lisboa, encabeçadas pelo geólogo, Professor Galopim de Carvalho. As pro- longadas e por vezes polémicas acções de sensibilização pública e política que foi necessário empreender para se preservarem muitos dos locais onde esses vestígios foram encontrados, contribuiram também para sustentar e até aumentar o interesse por este grupo de grandes répteis. A importância da paleoherpetofauna portuguesa está porém longe de se limitar apenas aos dinossauros! Em Portugal viveram muitos outros répteis e anfíbios de que existem vestígios desde o começo do Mesozói- co –Quelónios, Crocodilos, Ictiossauros, Plesiossauros, Pterossauros, Lepidossauros, “Estegossauros” e Lis- samphia– que, embora geralmente muito menos conhecidos, têm um significado evolutivo, paleogeográfico e paleoclimático extremamente importante. Na sua descoberta e estudo estiveram envolvidos, já desde o século passado, numerosos investigadores por- tugueses e estrangeiros, dos quais se destacam, entre outros, Georges Zbyszewski, Miguel Telles Antunes, Vei- ga Ferreira, H. Sauvage, A.F. Lapparent, L. Ginsburg, R.Thulborn, P. Galton. Muitos destes estudos encontram- se todavia dispersos por uma vasta gama de publicações em que, frequentemente, as referências aos répteis e aos anfíbios ou são laterais ou são apresentadas em contextos zoológicos mais abrangentes, pelo que, como parece que tem acontecido, têm passado praticamente despercebidos à maioria daqueles que se dedicam aos estudo da nossa herpetofauna actual.
    [Show full text]
  • Xjiiie'icanj/Useum
    XJiiie'ican1ox4tatreJ/useum PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY CENTRAL PARK WEST AT 79TH STREET, NEW YORK 24, N.Y. NUMBER 2I8I JUNE 4, I964 Relationships of the Saurischian Dinosaurs BY EDWIN H. COLBERT1 INTRODUCTION The word "Dinosauria" was coined by Sir Richard Owen in 1842 as a designation for various genera and species of extinct reptiles, the fossil bones of which were then being discovered and described in Europe. For many years this term persisted as the name for one order of reptiles and thus became well intrenched within the literature of paleontology. In- deed, since this name was associated with fossil remains that are frequently of large dimensions and spectacular shape and therefore of considerable interest to the general public, it in time became Anglicized, to take its proper place as a common noun in the English language. Almost every- body in the world is today more or less familiar with dinosaurs. As long ago as 1888, H. G. Seeley recognized the fact that the dino- saurs are not contained within a single reptilian order, but rather are quite clearly members of two distinct orders, each of which can be de- fined on the basis of many osteological characters. The structure of the pelvis is particularly useful in the separation of the two dinosaurian orders, and consequently Seeley named these two major taxonomic categories the Saurischia and the Ornithischia. This astute observation by Seeley was not readily accepted, so that for many years following the publication of his original paper proposing the basic dichotomy of the dinosaurs the 1 Chairman and Curator, Department ofVertebrate Paleontology, the American Museum of Natural History.
    [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]
  • Implications for Predatory Dinosaur Macroecology and Ontogeny in Later Late Cretaceous Asiamerica
    Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences Theropod Guild Structure and the Tyrannosaurid Niche Assimilation Hypothesis: Implications for Predatory Dinosaur Macroecology and Ontogeny in later Late Cretaceous Asiamerica Journal: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences Manuscript ID cjes-2020-0174.R1 Manuscript Type: Article Date Submitted by the 04-Jan-2021 Author: Complete List of Authors: Holtz, Thomas; University of Maryland at College Park, Department of Geology; NationalDraft Museum of Natural History, Department of Geology Keyword: Dinosaur, Ontogeny, Theropod, Paleocology, Mesozoic, Tyrannosauridae Is the invited manuscript for consideration in a Special Tribute to Dale Russell Issue? : © The Author(s) or their Institution(s) Page 1 of 91 Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 1 Theropod Guild Structure and the Tyrannosaurid Niche Assimilation Hypothesis: 2 Implications for Predatory Dinosaur Macroecology and Ontogeny in later Late Cretaceous 3 Asiamerica 4 5 6 Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. 7 8 Department of Geology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 USA 9 Department of Paleobiology, National Museum of Natural History, Washington, DC 20013 USA 10 Email address: [email protected] 11 ORCID: 0000-0002-2906-4900 Draft 12 13 Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. 14 Department of Geology 15 8000 Regents Drive 16 University of Maryland 17 College Park, MD 20742 18 USA 19 Phone: 1-301-405-4084 20 Fax: 1-301-314-9661 21 Email address: [email protected] 22 23 1 © The Author(s) or their Institution(s) Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences Page 2 of 91 24 ABSTRACT 25 Well-sampled dinosaur communities from the Jurassic through the early Late Cretaceous show 26 greater taxonomic diversity among larger (>50kg) theropod taxa than communities of the 27 Campano-Maastrichtian, particularly to those of eastern/central Asia and Laramidia.
    [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]
  • Coossified Tarsometatarsi in Theropod Dinosaurs and Their Bearing on the Problem of Bird Origins
    HALSZKA OSM6LSKA COOSSIFIED TARSOMETATARSI IN THEROPOD DINOSAURS AND THEIR BEARING ON THE PROBLEM OF BIRD ORIGINS OSM6LSKA, H. : Coossified tarsometatarsi in theropod dinosaurs and their bearing on the problem of bird origins, Palaeontologia Polonica, 42, 79-95, 1981. Limb remains of two small theropod dinosaurs from the Upper Cretaceous deposits of Mongolia display fused tarsometatarsi. Presence of fusion in the tarsometatarsus in some theropods is consi­ dered as additional evidence for the theropod origin of birds. E/misaurus rarus gen. et sp. n. is described based upon a fragmentary skeleton represented by limbs. Family Elmisauridae novo is erected to include Elmisaurus, Chirostenotes GlLMORE and Ma crophalangia STERNBERG. Key words: Dinosauria, Theropoda, bird origins, Upper Cretaceous, Mongolia. Halszka Osmolska , ZakladPaleobiologii, Polska Akademia Nauk, Al. Zw irki i Wigury 93,02-089 War­ szawa, Po/and. Received: June 1979. Streszczenie. - W pracy opisano szczatki malych dinozaur6w drapieznych z osad6w gornokredo­ wych Mongolii . Stopa tych dinozaur6w wykazuje obecnosc zrosnietego tarsomet atarsusa. Zrosniecie to stanowi dodatkowy dow6d na pochodzenie ptak6w od dinozaur6w drapieznych, Opisano nowy rodzaj i gatunek dinozaura drapieznego E/misaurus rarus, kt6ry zaliczono do nowej rodziny Elmisau­ ridae . Do rodziny tej, opr6cz Elmisaurus, naleza: Chirostenotes GILMORE i Macr opha/angia STERNBERG. Praca byla finansowana przez Polska Akademie Nauk w ramach problemu rniedzyresorto­ wego MR 11-6. INTRODUCTION During the Polish-Mongolian
    [Show full text]
  • And Early Jurassic Sediments, and Patterns of the Triassic-Jurassic
    and Early Jurassic sediments, and patterns of the Triassic-Jurassic PAUL E. OLSEN AND tetrapod transition HANS-DIETER SUES Introduction parent answer was that the supposed mass extinc- The Late Triassic-Early Jurassic boundary is fre- tions in the tetrapod record were largely an artifact quently cited as one of the thirteen or so episodes of incorrect or questionable biostratigraphic corre- of major extinctions that punctuate Phanerozoic his- lations. On reexamining the problem, we have come tory (Colbert 1958; Newell 1967; Hallam 1981; Raup to realize that the kinds of patterns revealed by look- and Sepkoski 1982, 1984). These times of apparent ing at the change in taxonomic composition through decimation stand out as one class of the great events time also profoundly depend on the taxonomic levels in the history of life. and the sampling intervals examined. We address Renewed interest in the pattern of mass ex- those problems in this chapter. We have now found tinctions through time has stimulated novel and com- that there does indeed appear to be some sort of prehensive attempts to relate these patterns to other extinction event, but it cannot be examined at the terrestrial and extraterrestrial phenomena (see usual coarse levels of resolution. It requires new fine- Chapter 24). The Triassic-Jurassic boundary takes scaled documentation of specific faunal and floral on special significance in this light. First, the faunal transitions. transitions have been cited as even greater in mag- Stratigraphic correlation of geographically dis- nitude than those of the Cretaceous or the Permian junct rocks and assemblages predetermines our per- (Colbert 1958; Hallam 1981; see also Chapter 24).
    [Show full text]