1,721,042 research outputs found
FIGURE 1 in A proposed higher taxonomy of anomodont therapsids
No full textFIGURE 1. Cladogram of anomodont relationships illustrating the positions and compositions of the taxa defined herein. Tree topology based on the phylogenetic analyses of Modesto et al. (1999) and Angielczyk (2007). Stem-based taxa are indicated by an arrow and node-based taxa are indicated by an enlarged circle.Published as part of Kammerer, Christian F. & Angielczyk, Kenneth D., 2009, A proposed higher taxonomy of anomodont therapsids, pp. 1-24 in Zootaxa 2018 on page 14, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18603
Kingoriidae King 1988
No full textKingoriidae King, 1988 Definition: All taxa more closely related to Kingoria nowacki (von Huene, 1942) Cox, 1959, than Myosaurus gracilis Haughton, 1917, or Cistecephalus microrhinus Owen, 1876. Taxonomic comments: Since its initial description by Hotton (1974), the genus Kombuisia has been thought to be closely allied to Kingoria, and King's Kingoriidae included both genera. Recent phylogenetic analyses have upheld this hypothesis (Angielczyk 2007; Fröbisch 2007; Fröbisch & Reisz 2008). Revised diagnosis: Autapomorphies of Kingoriidae recognized in common by Angielczyk (2007), Fröbisch (2007), and Fröbisch & Reisz (2008) are: (1) mid-ventral plate of vomers relatively wide in ventral view; (2) mandibular fenestra present but significantly reduced.Published as part of Kammerer, Christian F. & Angielczyk, Kenneth D., 2009, A proposed higher taxonomy of anomodont therapsids, pp. 1-24 in Zootaxa 2018 on page 10, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18603
Figure 2. Permian dicynodont bone histology. A in Do extraordinarily high growth rates in Permo-Triassic dicynodonts (Therapsida, Anomodontia) explain their success before and after the end-Permian extinction?
No full textFigure 2. Permian dicynodont bone histology. A, adult Galeops humerus SAM-PK-12261a; B, early subadult Eodicynodon femur NMQR2996a; C, late subadult Eodicynodon femur NMQR3153a; D, late subadult Diictodon SAM-PK-K7725; E, subadult Endothiodon tibia SAM-PK-5605c; F, adult Endothiodon humerus SAM-PK-K6618a. Arrows indicate enlarged midcortical channels. Enlarged channels are absent in Galeops, Diictodon, and Endothiodon. However, subadult Endothiodon reveals rapid, sustained growth with an average channel area of 13%. Scale bars: B, C = 500 mm; A, D, E, F = 413 mm.Published as part of Botha-Brink, Jennifer & Angielczyk, Kenneth D., 2010, Do extraordinarily high growth rates in Permo-Triassic dicynodonts (Therapsida, Anomodontia) explain their success before and after the end-Permian extinction?, pp. 341-365 in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 160 (2) on page 344, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2009.00601.x, http://zenodo.org/record/543976
Emydopidae
No full textEmydopidae (van Hoepen, 1934) Cluver and King, 1983 <p> <i>Angielczyk (2007)</i>: (1) lateral anterior palatal ridges present; (2) upper postcanine teeth located near lateral margin of the maxilla.</p> <p> <i>Fröbisch (2007)</i>: (1) maxillary non-caniniform teeth located near lateral margin of the maxilla.</p> <p> <i>Fröbisch & Reisz (2008)</i>: (1) squared-off profile of occiput in posterior view present.</p>Published as part of <i>Kammerer, Christian F. & Angielczyk, Kenneth D., 2009, A proposed higher taxonomy of anomodont therapsids, pp. 1-24 in Zootaxa 2018</i> on page 23, DOI: <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/186035">10.5281/zenodo.186035</a>
Figure 24 in The postcranial anatomy of Whatcheeria deltae and its implications for the family Whatcheeriidae
No full textFigure 24. FMNH PR 1958 left femur of Whatcheeria. Dorsal view, specimen photo (A) and interpretive drawing (B); ventral view, specimen photo (C) and interpretive drawing (D). In all specimens, proximal is at the top and distal is at the bottom.Published as part of Otoo, Benjamin K A, Bolt, John R, Lombard, R Eric, Angielczyk, Kenneth D & Coates, Michael I, 2021, Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 193 (2) on page 700, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlaa182, http://zenodo.org/record/553081
Figure 28. Tetrapod scales from the Hiemstra Quarry. A in The postcranial anatomy of Whatcheeria deltae and its implications for the family Whatcheeriidae
No full textFigure 28. Tetrapod scales from the Hiemstra Quarry. A, FMNH PR 5014, tetrapod gastralia; B, FMNH PR 1705, tetrapod gastralia; C, interpretive drawing of scale from FMNH PR 1700.Published as part of Otoo, Benjamin K A, Bolt, John R, Lombard, R Eric, Angielczyk, Kenneth D & Coates, Michael I, 2021, Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 193 (2) on page 700, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlaa182, http://zenodo.org/record/553081
Oudenodontidae Cope 1871
No full textOudenodontidae Cope, 1871 Definition: All taxa more closely related to Oudenodon bainii Owen, 1860 a, than Rhachiocephalus magnus (Owen, 1876) Seeley, 1898, or Geikia elginensis Newton, 1893. Taxonomic comments: Recent research strongly supports a sister-group relationship between Oudenodon Owen, 1860 a, and Tropidostoma Seeley, 1889 (traditionally placed in separate family-level groups: Oudenodontinae van Hoepen, 1934, Oudenodontinae Cluver & King, 1983 [sic], and Oudenodontini King, 1988, versus Tropidostominae [sic, properly Tropidostomatinae] Cluver & King, 1983, and Tropidostomini [sic] King, 1988), to the extent that the generic distinction between these taxa has been called into question (Cluver & King 1983; Botha & Angielczyk 2007). Here, we unite these taxa and the Russian genus Australobarbarus Kurkin, 2000, (following Angielczyk & Kurkin 2003 a, 2003 b) in Oudenodontidae, based on the earliest available name for this group (Oudenodontidae Cope, 1871, validated under Article 12.2. 4 of the Code). Revised diagnosis: The analyses of Angielczyk (2007), Fröbisch (2007), and Fröbisch & Reisz (2008) identified two autapomorphies diagnostic of Oudenodontidae: (1) interpterygoid vacuity long and reaches the level of the palatal exposure of the palatines; (2) postparietal contributes to the intertemporal skull roof.Published as part of Kammerer, Christian F. & Angielczyk, Kenneth D., 2009, A proposed higher taxonomy of anomodont therapsids, pp. 1-24 in Zootaxa 2018 on page 12, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18603
Cistecephalidae Broom 1903
No full textCistecephalidae Broom, 1903 a Definition: All taxa more closely related to Cistecephalus microrhinus Owen, 1876, than Myosaurus gracilis Haughton, 1917, or Kingoria nowacki (von Huene, 1942) Cox, 1959. Taxonomic comments: The monophyly of Cistecephalidae, containing the highly specialized, fossorial dicynodonts Cistecephalus Owen, 1876, Cistecephaloides Cluver, 1974, and Kawingasaurus Cox, 1972, has never been called into question. Phylogenetic analyses including all three of these taxa (Angielczyk 2007; Fröbisch 2007; Fröbisch & Reisz 2008) strongly support this grouping. Revised diagnosis: Autapomorphies of Cistecephalidae recognized in common by Angielczyk (2007), Fröbisch (2007), and Fröbisch & Reisz (2008) are: (1) preparietal absent; (2) postparietal contributes to the intertemporal skull roof; (3) interpterygoid vacuity absent. Extensive postcranial material is not known for Cistecephaloides, but Angielczyk (2007) recognized several postcranial synapomorphies of Cistecephalus and Kawingasaurus: (1) ossified cleithrum present; (2) acromion process absent; (3) procoracoid participates in formation of glenoid; (4) insertion of M. subcoracoscapularis on humerus extended into a distinct process; (5) trochlea and capitellum distinct.Published as part of Kammerer, Christian F. & Angielczyk, Kenneth D., 2009, A proposed higher taxonomy of anomodont therapsids, pp. 1-24 in Zootaxa 2018 on page 10, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18603
Emydopidae
No full textEmydopidae (van Hoepen, 1934) Cluver & King, 1983 Definition: All taxa more closely related to Emydops arctatus (Owen, 1876) Broom, 1913 a, than Cistecephalus microrhinus Owen, 1876. Taxonomic comments: Cluver & King (1983) established the family-level taxa Emydopidae and Emydopinae to contain Emydops Broom, 1912 b, despite the fact that van Hoepen (1934) had already named this taxon as the subfamily Emydopsinae [sic]. Phylogenetic analyses of dicynodonts (e. g., Angielczyk 2007; Fröbisch 2007; Fröbisch & Reisz 2008) consistently recover Emydops as the sister-group to the other wellknown emydopoids (Myosaurus, Kingoria, and cistecephalids), so we restrict the external specifier to Cistecephalus Owen, 1876. Revised diagnosis: Two autapomorphies of Emydopidae are present in the data set of Angielczyk (2007): (1) lateral anterior palatal ridges present; (2) upper postcanine teeth located near lateral margin of the maxilla. One autapomorphy of Emydopidae is present in the data set of Fröbisch (2007): (1) maxillary non-caniniform teeth located near lateral margin of the maxilla. The addition of Emydops oweni to the data set of Fröbisch & Reisz (2008) renders the status of that character uncertain, because it could not be scored using the available specimens of E. oweni. However, one emydopid autapomorphy does exist in the data set of Fröbisch & Reisz (2008): (1) squared-off profile of occiput in posterior view present. Recent diagnoses of Emydops itself can be found in Keyser (1993; called Emydoses therein), King & Rubidge (1993), Ray (2001), and Fröbisch & Reisz (2008), with additional information in Angielczyk et al. (2005). The jaw of Emydops is the single most distinctive part of its skeleton, and is characterized by a shovel-shaped symphysis, weak posterior dentary sulci, a small number of medially located postcanine teeth, and a large, triangular lateral dentary shelf.Published as part of Kammerer, Christian F. & Angielczyk, Kenneth D., 2009, A proposed higher taxonomy of anomodont therapsids, pp. 1-24 in Zootaxa 2018 on page 8, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18603
Do extraordinarily high growth rates in Permo-Triassic dicynodonts (Therapsida, Anomodontia) explain their success before and after the end-Permian extinction?
No full textFigure 1. Stratigraphical ranges of the anomodonts used in this study. Modified from Angielczyk & Kurkin (2003) and Angielczyk & Walsh (2008). Oudenodon range updated from Botha & Angielczyk (2007). Kingoria is now referred to as Dicynodontoides following Angielczyk et al. (2009). Vertical solid bars and open bars indicate ranges and ghost lineages, respectively. Abbreviations: Chsn, Changhsingian; Ciste., Cistecephalus Assemblage Zone; Eodicyn., Eodicynodon Assemblage Zone; Ind., Induan; Lystro., Lystrosaurus; Olen., Olenekian; Prist., Pristerognathus Assemblage Zone; PTB, Permo-Triassic boundary; Tap., Tapinocephalus Assemblage Zone; Tropid. Tropidostoma Assemblage Zone; Wn, Wordian. Numbers indicate million years ago. Stratigraphical chart follows Catuneanu et al. (2005).Published as part of Botha-Brink, Jennifer & Angielczyk, Kenneth D., 2010, Do extraordinarily high growth rates in Permo-Triassic dicynodonts (Therapsida, Anomodontia) explain their success before and after the end-Permian extinction?, pp. 341-365 in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 160 (2) on page 343, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2009.00601.x, http://zenodo.org/record/543976
- …
