1,721,059 research outputs found
Thylacoleo carnifex
No full text† Thylacoleo SPECIES SCORED: † Thylacoleo carnifex (type species). GEOLOGICAL PROVENANCE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: Multiple Pleistocene sites in South Australia. AGE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: Pleistocene. ASSIGNED AGE RANGE: 2.580 –0.012 Mya. REMARKS: † Thylacoleo carnifex was the largest (with some individuals possibly> 100 kg; Wroe et al., 1999; 2003; Richards et al., 2019), morphologically most specialized, and last surviving thylacoleonid (Gillespie, 1999; Long et al., 2002; Gillespie, 2007). It is known from abundant craniodental and postcranial material from various Pleistocene deposits around Australia (Gillespie, 2007).Published as part of Beck, Robin M. D., Voss, Robert S. & Jansa, Sharon A., 2022, Craniodental Morphology And Phylogeny Of Marsupials, pp. 1-353 in Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2022 (457) on page 331, DOI: 10.1206/0003-0090.457.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/697135
Nimbadon lavarackorum
No full text† Nimbadon SPECIES SCORED: † Nimbadon lavarackorum (type and only described species). GEOLOGICAL PROVENANCE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: AL90 Site (Riversleigh Faunal Zone C), Riversleigh World Heritage Area, Queensland, Australia. AGE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: The AL90 Site is considered to be part of Riversleigh Faunal Zone C, which is interpreted to be middle Miocene based on biostratigraphy (see above). Radiometric dates for the AL90 Site span 14.17–15.11 Mya. ASSIGNED AGE RANGE: 15.110 –14.170 Mya. REMARKS: † Nimbadon lavarackorum is represented by a remarkable series of well-preserved individuals from the AL90 Site at Riversleigh, which have been used for scoring purposes here, plus additional less-well-preserved specimens from other Riversleigh Faunal Zone C sites that were not scored (Hand et al., 1993; Black, 2008; Black et al., 2010; Black and Hand, 2010). The AL 90 specimens range in ontogenetic stage from pouch young to old adults, represent both putative males and females, and include multiple intact skulls (Hand et al., 1993; Black, 2008; Black et al., 2010; Black and Hand, 2010). † Nimbadon is currently placed within the diprotodontid subfamily †Zygomaturinae based largely on P3 morphology (Hand et al., 1993; Murray et al., 2000b; Black, 2008; Black et al., 2010; Black and Hand, 2010).Published as part of Beck, Robin M. D., Voss, Robert S. & Jansa, Sharon A., 2022, Craniodental Morphology And Phylogeny Of Marsupials, pp. 1-353 in Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2022 (457) on pages 329-330, DOI: 10.1206/0003-0090.457.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/697135
Ganawamaya gillespieae
No full text† Ganawamaya SPECIES SCORED: † Ganawamaya gillespieae. GEOLOGICAL PROVENANCE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: Quantum Leap Site (Riversleigh Faunal Zone B), Riversleigh World Heritage Area, Queensland, Australia. AGE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: Riversleigh Faunal Zone B is interpreted to be early Miocene based on biostratigraphy (see above). In the absence of radiometric dates, we have assumed the entire span of the early Miocene (Aquitanian to Burdigalian; Cohen et al., 2013 [updated]) for this terminal. ASSIGNED AGE RANGE: 23.030 –15.970 Mya. REMARKS: We scored † Ganawamaya gillespieae, the second balbarid included in our taxon sample, based on the holotype (QM F35432), an almost complete cranium and associated mandibles from the Quantum Leap Site of Riversleigh Faunal Zone B (Kear et al., 2007). One of the two paratypes of † G. gillespieae (AR 15347) is known from the older (Riversleigh Faunal Zone A) White Hunter Site, but neither this nor the other paratype (AR 12829) from the Riversleigh Faunal Zone B Wayne’s Wok Site was consulted for scoring purposes here. Kear et al. (2007) originally described this taxon as a species of † Nambaroo, but we follow Butler et al. (2018), who assigned it to † Ganawamaya. Our current understanding of the evolutionary relationships of balbarids is summarized above (see † Balbaroo).Published as part of Beck, Robin M. D., Voss, Robert S. & Jansa, Sharon A., 2022, Craniodental Morphology And Phylogeny Of Marsupials, pp. 1-353 in Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2022 (457) on page 338, DOI: 10.1206/0003-0090.457.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/697135
Silvabestius undetermined
No full text† Silvabestius SPECIES SCORED: † Silvabestius johnnilandi (type species), † S. michaelbirti. GEOLOGICAL PROVENANCE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: Hiatus South Site (Riversleigh Faunal Zone A) and VIP Site (Riversleigh Faunal Zone A or B), Riversleigh World Heritage Area, Queensland, Australia. AGE OF SPECIMENS SCORED: Riversleigh Faunal zones A and B are interpreted as late Oligocene and early Miocene respectively, based on biostratigraphy (see above). We have assigned the entire age range of the late Oligocene to early Miocene (Chattian to Burdigalian; Cohen et al., 2013 [updated]) for this taxon. ASSIGNED AGE RANGE: 27.820 –15.970 Mya. REMARKS: Two species, † Silvabestius johnnilandi and † S. michaelbirti, were described by Black and Archer (1997a) based on specimens from the VIP and Hiatus South sites. The VIP Site has been identified as part of Riversleigh Faunal Zone A, but may in fact belong to Faunal Zone B (K.H. Black, personal commun.). Both species are represented by relatively complete cranial material (e.g., the holotype of † S. jonhnnilandi is a well-preserved juvenile skull), but only dental descriptions of these specimens have been formally published to date (Black and Archer, 1997a); however, the unpublished thesis of Black (2008) includes cranial descriptions. We used this Riversleigh material of both species to score a composite † Silvabestius terminal.Published as part of Beck, Robin M. D., Voss, Robert S. & Jansa, Sharon A., 2022, Craniodental Morphology And Phylogeny Of Marsupials, pp. 1-353 in Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2022 (457) on page 330, DOI: 10.1206/0003-0090.457.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/697135
Namilamadeta undetermined
No full text† Namilamadeta SPECIES SCORED: † Namilamadeta albivenator, † N. crassirostrum, † N. superior. GEOLOGICAL PROVENANCE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: Riversleigh Faunal zones A and B, Riversleigh World Heritage Area, Queensland, Australia. AGE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: Riversleigh Faunal zones A and B are interpreted to be late Oligocene and early Miocene, respectively, based on biostratigraphy (see above). In the absence of radiometric dates, we have assumed the entire span of the late Oligocene to early Miocene (Chattian to Burdigalian; Cohen et al., 2013 [updated]) for this terminal. ASSIGNED AGE RANGE: 27.820 –15.970 Mya. REMARKS: † Namilamadeta was tentatively referred to † Wynyardiidae by Rich and Archer (1979) based on a number of cranial similarities to † Wynyardia bassiana. The type species, † N. snideri, is only known from fragmentary craniodental material from the Namba Formation at Lake Tarkarooloo (Rich and Archer, 1979), but we did not use this material for scoring purposes. Instead, we scored a composite † Namilamadeta terminal from well-preserved skulls and additional dental specimens of the three Riversleigh species recently described by Pledge (2005). For discussion of the phylogenetic affinities of † Wynyardiidae, see † Muramura above.Published as part of Beck, Robin M. D., Voss, Robert S. & Jansa, Sharon A., 2022, Craniodental Morphology And Phylogeny Of Marsupials, pp. 1-353 in Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2022 (457) on page 333, DOI: 10.1206/0003-0090.457.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/697135
Neohelos stirtoni
No full text† Neohelos SPECIES SCORED: † Neohelos stirtoni. GEOLOGICAL PROVENANCE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: Bullock Creek Local Fauna, Camfield Beds, Northern Territory, Australia. AGE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: the Bullock Creek Local Fauna is interpreted to be middle Miocene based on biostratigraphy (see † Mutpuracinus above). ASSIGNED AGE RANGE: 15.970 –11.630 Mya. REMARKS: The diprotodontid † Neohelos stirtoni is represented by multiple well-preserved individuals, including juveniles, from the Bullock Creek Local Fauna (Murray et al., 2000a, 200b). Black (2008) and Black et al. (2013) reported the presence of † N. stirtoni in a number of Riversleigh Fanal Zone C sites, but this material is considerably less complete, and only Bullock Creek specimens have been used for scoring purposes here. † Neohelos is usually considered to be a member of the diprotodontid subfamily †Zygomaturinae (e.g., Stirton et al., 1967b; Black and Mackness, 1999; Murray et al., 2000a, 2000b; Black et al., 2013). However, the traditional subdivision of † Diprotodontidae into †Zygomaturinae and †Diprotodontinae is primarily based on features of P3 morphology that now appear to be more variable than previously suspected (Murray et al., 2000b; Price, 2008; Black and Hand, 2010; Price and Sobbe, 2011; Black et al., 2013).Published as part of Beck, Robin M. D., Voss, Robert S. & Jansa, Sharon A., 2022, Craniodental Morphology And Phylogeny Of Marsupials, pp. 1-353 in Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2022 (457) on pages 328-329, DOI: 10.1206/0003-0090.457.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/697135
Microbiotherium tehuelchum Ameghino 1887
No full text† <i>Microbiotherium</i> <p> SPECIES SCORED: † <i>Microbiotherium tehuelchum.</i></p> <p>GEOLOGICAL PROVENANCE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: Santa Cruz Formation, Santa Cruz Province, Argentina.</p> <p> AGE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: The Santa Cruz Formation spans a maximum of 14–19 Mya (see account for † <i>Stilotherium</i>, above).</p> <p>ASSIGNED AGE RANGE: 19.000 –14.000 Mya.</p> <p> REMARKS: † <i>Microbiotherium tehuelchum</i> is the only fossil microbiotheriid currently known from anything other than isolated dental remains (Segall, 1969; Marshall, 1982). Of particular importance is a partial auditory region (PU 15038) that exhibits a number of distinctive cranial features that are seen only in <i>Dromiciops</i> among living marsupials (Segall, 1969). We scored our † <i>Microbiotherium</i> terminal based solely on specimens of † <i>M. tehuelchum</i> from the Santa Cruz Formation (Segall, 1969; Marshall, 1982). However, material from the?middle Miocene (Friasian SALMA) Río Frias Formation in Chile (Marshall, 1990) and the early Miocene Pinturas Formation in Argentina (Bown and Fleagle, 1994; Chornogubsky and Kramarz, 2012) has also been referred to † <i>M. tehuelchum</i>. Goin and Abello (2013) presented a phylogenetic analysis of Microbiotheriidae, including † <i>M. tehuelchum</i>, based on 20 dental characters.</p>Published as part of <i>Beck, Robin M. D., Voss, Robert S. & Jansa, Sharon A., 2022, Craniodental Morphology And Phylogeny Of Marsupials, pp. 1-353 in Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2022 (457)</i> on page 322, DOI: 10.1206/0003-0090.457.1.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/6971356">http://zenodo.org/record/6971356</a>
Hypsiprymnodon bartholomaii Ramsay 1876
No full textHypsiprymnodon SPECIES SCORED: Hypsiprymnodon † bartholomaii. GEOLOGICAL PROVENANCE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: Riversleigh Faunal Zone C, Riversleigh World Heritage Area, Queensland, Australia. AGES OF SCORED SPECIMENS: Riversleigh Faunal Zone C is interpreted to be middle Miocene based on biostratigraphy (see above). In the absence of radiometric dates, we have assumed the entire span of the middle Miocene (Langhian to Serravallian; Cohen et al., 2013 [updated]) for this terminal. ASSIGNED AGE RANGE: 15.97–11.63 Mya. REMARKS: Hypsiprymnodon † bartholomaii was described by Flannery and Archer (1987a) based on a partial cranium and two isolated molars, all from the Gag Site, which is part of Riversleigh Faunal Zone C. If this taxon is indeed referable to Hypsiprymnodon, then it indicates that the genus originated prior to the middle Miocene. However, Flannery and Archer (1987a) noted a number of striking craniodental differences between H. † bartholomaii and the Recent species H. moschatus, notably parietal-alisphenoid versus frontal-squamosal contact and presence versus absence of a distinct postglenoid process. Three further fossil Hypsiprymnodon species have recently been described from Riversleigh Faunal zones B and C sites (Bates et al., 2014), but we did not examine these for scoring purposes. Some phylogenetic analyses have found Hypsiprymnodon to be polyphyletic (Black et al., 2014c; den Boer and Kear, 2018: fig. S11), others have found it to be paraphyletic (den Boer and Kear, 2018: figs. S9–10), and still others have failed to unambiguously support its monophyly (Bates et al., 2014; Butler et al., 2016, 2018; den Boer and Kear, 2018: supplemental data), but that of Travouillon et al. (2016) placed Recent and fossil Hypsiprymnodon species in a clade that also included the propleopines, † Ekaltadeta, † Jackmahoneya, and † Propleopus.Published as part of Beck, Robin M. D., Voss, Robert S. & Jansa, Sharon A., 2022, Craniodental Morphology And Phylogeny Of Marsupials, pp. 1-353 in Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2022 (457) on pages 334-335, DOI: 10.1206/0003-0090.457.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/697135
Warendja wakefieldi Hope & Wilkinson 1982
No full text† Warendja SPECIES SCORED: † Warendja wakefieldi (type species). GEOLOGICAL PROVENANCE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: McEacherns Cave, Victoria, Australia; Comaum Forest Cave, South Australia, Australia; Wombeyan Caves, New South Wales, Australia. AGE OF SCORED SPECIMENS: The deposits containing specimens of † Warendja wakefieldi at McEacherns Cave, Comaum Forest Cave, and Wombeyan Caves are all estimated to be Pleistocene based on faunal composition (Hope and Wilkinson, 1982; Lundelius, 1983; Flannery and Pledge, 1987). We have assigned an age range of the entire Pleistocene (Cohen et al., 2013 [updated]) to this terminal. ASSIGNED AGE RANGE: 2.580 –0.012 Mya. REMARKS: † Warendja wakefieldi was originally described based on two mandibles and six isolated teeth from McEacherns Cave, Victoria (Hope and Wilkinson, 1982). These specimens preserve characteristic vombatid apomorphies, most notably open-rooted (hypselodont) molars, but nevertheless appear distinctly more plesiomorphic than those of other known vombatids. Additional cranial material and teeth were subsequently recovered from Comaum Forest Cave, South Australia (Flannery and Pledge, 1987; Pledge, 1992), enabling reconstruction of a partial cranium (Pledge, 1992). Based on these specimens, the cranial morphology of † W. wakefieldi appears markedly more gracile than that of living vombatids (Pledge, 1992; Murray, 1998). Brewer (2007) described additional specimens of † W. wakefieldi from Wombeyan Caves, New South Wales, and we used her description to score some characters for this terminal. Brewer et al. (2007) described another species († W. encorensis) based on fragmentary dental remains from the Riversleigh Faunal Zone D (?late Miocene) Encore Site at Riversleigh, but we did not use those specimens for scoring purposes.Published as part of Beck, Robin M. D., Voss, Robert S. & Jansa, Sharon A., 2022, Craniodental Morphology And Phylogeny Of Marsupials, pp. 1-353 in Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2022 (457) on page 328, DOI: 10.1206/0003-0090.457.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/697135
Palaeothentidae
No full text† Palaeothentidae (Sinclair, 1906) <p> CONTENTS: † <i>Acdestis</i> and † <i>Palaeothentes.</i></p> <p>STEM AGE: 27.4 Mya (95% HPD: 21.3–34.7 Mya).</p> <p>CROWN AGE: 19.8 Mya (95% HPD: 15.3–25.8 Mya).</p> <p>UNAMBIGUOUS CRANIODENTAL SYNAPOMORPHIES: Cristid obliqua of m1 contacts metaconid (char. 169: 1→0; ci = 0.250).</p> <p> COMMENTS: † <i>Acdestis</i> and † <i>Palaeothentes</i> have been included in our analysis as the two palaeothentids currently best represented by craniodental material (Sinclair, 1906; Marshall, 1980; Goin et al., 2003; Abello, 2007; Forasiepi et al., 2014b; Engelman and Croft, 2016). Monophyly of Palaeothentidae has been consistently supported in published phylogenetic analyses (Goin et al., 2007b, 2009a; Abello, 2013; Forasiepi et al., 2013; Rincón et al., 2015; Engelman et al., 2016; Abello et al., 2020, 2021), but our late Oligocene-early Miocene estimate for the divergence between † <i>Acdestis</i> and † <i>Palaeothentes</i> is considerably younger than the ~31 Mya estimate for this event in the <i>a posteriori</i> time-scaled phylogeny of Abello et al. (2020: fig. 2).</p>Published as part of <i>Beck, Robin M. D., Voss, Robert S. & Jansa, Sharon A., 2022, Craniodental Morphology And Phylogeny Of Marsupials, pp. 1-353 in Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2022 (457)</i> on page 203, DOI: 10.1206/0003-0090.457.1.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/6971356">http://zenodo.org/record/6971356</a>
- …
