1,721,056 research outputs found
Figure 4 in Simplification of the enameloid microstructure of large stingrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes): a functional approach
No full textFigure 4. Schematic organization of the enameloid layers found in sampled batoid taxa. Proportions are not respected.Published as part of Enault, Sebastien, Cappetta, Henri & Adnet, Sylvain, 2013, Simplification of the enameloid microstructure of large stingrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes): a functional approach, pp. 144-155 in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 169 (1) on page 149, DOI: 10.1111/zoj.12059, http://zenodo.org/record/528773
Sélaciens et Holocéphale du Gargasien de la région de Gargas (Vaucluse)
No full textThe Gargasian of the Gargas country has yielded an interesting fish fauna containing 14 selachian species, 2 of which are new : Anomotodon principalis nov. sp., and Rhinobatos picteti nov. sp., and one Holocephale species. The genus Notidanodon nov. is proposed for some cretaceous and tertiary species. This fauna allows us to enlarge the geographic and stratigraphie range of several species and appears as the first "modern" selachian fauna.Le Gargasien de la région de Gargas a livré une intéressante faune de poissons comprenant 14 espèces de sélaciens dont 2 nouvelles : Anomotodon principalis nov. sp. et Rhinobatos picteti nov. sp., et une espèce d'Holocéphale. Le genre Notidanodon nov. est proposé pour quelques espèces crétacées et tertiaires. Cette faune permet d'élargir la répartition géographique et stratigraphique de plusieurs espèces et apparaît comme la première faune de sélaciens de caractère "moderne".Cappetta Henri. Sélaciens et Holocéphale du Gargasien de la région de Gargas (Vaucluse). In: Géologie Méditerranéenne. Tome 2, numéro 3, 1975. pp. 115-133
Figure 5 in Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference
No full textFigure 5. Argoubia barbei gen. nov., sp. nov. A-E, Antero-lateral tooth, holotype, DAK3-1. A, lingual view; B, profile; C, labial view; D, occlusal view; E, basal view. F-J, Antero-lateral tooth, paratype, DAK3-2. F, lingual view; G, profile; H, labial view; I, occlusal view; J, basal view.Published as part of Adnet, Sylvain, Cappetta, Henri, Guinot, Guillaume & Sciara, Giuseppe Notarbartolo Di, 2012, Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference, pp. 132-159 in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 166 (1) on page 144, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2012.00844.x, http://zenodo.org/record/540858
Figure 9. A in Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference
No full textFigure 9. A: Probable evolution of toothed jaw in mobulids, compared to sister groups of Myliobatidae (Myliobatis) and Rhinopteridae (Rhinoptera). Except for the living taxa, layout of teeth and number of tooth files were artificially reconstructed based on tooth morphologies and phylogenetic relationships performed on isolated teeth (number of tooth files and scales were not respected between taxa). B, Phylogenetic relationships from Fig. 8B constrained by the fossil record of Mobulidae (see text). Vertical bar, stratigraphical occurrences; dashed bar, uncertain records.Published as part of Adnet, Sylvain, Cappetta, Henri, Guinot, Guillaume & Sciara, Giuseppe Notarbartolo Di, 2012, Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference, pp. 132-159 in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 166 (1) on page 153, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2012.00844.x, http://zenodo.org/record/540858
Figure 6 in Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference
No full textFigure 6. Oromobula dakhlaensis gen. nov., sp. nov. A-D, DAK2B-4, tooth position unknown. A, lingual view; B, profile; C, labial view; D, occlusal view. E-H, holotype DAK2B-5, tooth position unknown. E, lingual view; F, profile; G, labial view; H, occlusal view; I-L, DAK2B-6, tooth position unknown; I, lingual view; J, profile; K, labial view; L, occlusal view. M-N, young element DAK2B-7, tooth position unknown. M, lingual view; N, profile. O-P, young element DAK2B-8, tooth position unknown. O, lingual view; P, occlusal view. Vertical scale bar for A-H, horizontal scale bar for I-P.Published as part of Adnet, Sylvain, Cappetta, Henri, Guinot, Guillaume & Sciara, Giuseppe Notarbartolo Di, 2012, Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference, pp. 132-159 in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 166 (1) on page 146, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2012.00844.x, http://zenodo.org/record/540858
Figure 7 in Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference
No full textFigure 7. Eoplinthicus underwoodi sp. nov. A-E, DAK2A-2, holotype: tooth position unknown. A, lingual view; B, labial view; C, occlusal view; D, basal view; E, profile. F-G, DAK2A-3, paratype, tooth position unknown. F, lingual view; G, occlusal view. H-J, DAK2B-2, tooth position unknown. H, lingual view; I, labial view; J, occlusal view. K-O, DAK2B-3: young element, tooth position unknown. K, lingual view; L, labial view; M, occlusal view; N, basal view; O, profile.Published as part of Adnet, Sylvain, Cappetta, Henri, Guinot, Guillaume & Sciara, Giuseppe Notarbartolo Di, 2012, Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference, pp. 132-159 in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 166 (1) on page 147, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2012.00844.x, http://zenodo.org/record/540858
Figure 1 in Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference
No full textFigure 1. Body shapes of pelagic Myliobatiformes are expanded to show familial differences in head shape. The two main phylogenetic hypotheses (see text for references) concerning the myliobatoids are reported on both sides: according the first one (A), more derived myliobatoids possess more enlarged cephalic lobes (shaded grey), according the second one (B), more derived myliobatoids possess a complete fusion of cephalic lobes. Line drawing inspired by Sasko et al. (2006).Published as part of Adnet, Sylvain, Cappetta, Henri, Guinot, Guillaume & Sciara, Giuseppe Notarbartolo Di, 2012, Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference, pp. 132-159 in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 166 (1) on page 133, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2012.00844.x, http://zenodo.org/record/540858
Figure 3 in Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference
No full textFigure 3. Cobblestone and comb-like tooth morphologies of sexed specimens of A-S, Mo. tarapacana (UM-REC 30M: ♂ 2500 mm DW, NS 83-141: ♀ 3015 mm DW) and T-M′, Mo. thurstoni (NS 83-077: ♂ 1770 mm DW, NS 83-020: ♀ 1626 mm DW). For each species and sex, teeth are sorted from anterior (right) to lateral (left) positions. A-E, J-N, T-X, D′-H′, upper teeth; F-I, O-S, Y-C′, I′-M′, lower teeth. Abbreviations of the view are indicated on the right hand side of each tooth, o, occlusal view; li, lingual view; la, labial view; p, profile; b, basal view. Detail of specimens in Appendix 1.Published as part of Adnet, Sylvain, Cappetta, Henri, Guinot, Guillaume & Sciara, Giuseppe Notarbartolo Di, 2012, Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference, pp. 132-159 in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 166 (1) on page 137, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2012.00844.x, http://zenodo.org/record/540858
Figure 4 in Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference
No full textFigure 4. Comb-like tooth morphology of sexed specimen of A-T, Mo. munkiana (NS 82-015: ♂ 895 mm DW, NS 84-004:♀ 931 mm DW); U-L′, Mo. rochebrunei (UM-REC 25M: ♂ 1170 mm DW, UM-REC 14M: ♀ 1310 mm DW); M′-Z′, Mo. hypostoma (UM-REC 28M: ♂ size unknown, UM-REC 29M: ♀ size unknown). For each species and sex, teeth are sorted from anterior (right) to lateral (left) positions. A-E, K-O, U-X, A′-F′, M′-P′, U′-W′, upper teeth; F-J, P-T, Y-Z, G′-L′, Q′-T′, X′-Z′, lower teeth. Abbreviations of the view are indicated on the right hand side of each tooth, o, occlusal view; li, lingual view; la, labial view; p, profile; b, basal view. Detail of specimens in Appendix 1.Published as part of Adnet, Sylvain, Cappetta, Henri, Guinot, Guillaume & Sciara, Giuseppe Notarbartolo Di, 2012, Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference, pp. 132-159 in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 166 (1) on page 138, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2012.00844.x, http://zenodo.org/record/540858
Figure 2 in Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference
No full textFigure 2. Peg-like tooth morphology of sexed specimens of A-N, Mo. mobular (UM-REC 26M: ♂ 2400 mm DW; UM-REC 27M: ♀ 1400 mm DW); O-W, Mo. japanica (NS 83-024: ♂ 2077 mm DW; NS 83-070: ♀ 2108 mm DW); X-G′, Ma. birostris (NS 83-003: ♂ and NS 83-160: ♀ size unknown). For each species and sex, teeth are sorted from anterior (right) to lateral (left) positions. A-J, O-W, upper teeth; K-N, X-G′, lower teeth. Abbreviations of the view are indicated on the right hand side of each tooth: o, occlusal view; li, lingual view; la' labial view; p, profile; b, basal view. Detail of specimens in Appendix 1.Published as part of Adnet, Sylvain, Cappetta, Henri, Guinot, Guillaume & Sciara, Giuseppe Notarbartolo Di, 2012, Evolutionary history of the devilrays (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatiformes) from fossil and morphological inference, pp. 132-159 in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 166 (1) on page 135, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2012.00844.x, http://zenodo.org/record/540858
- …
