4.3 Article

First records of diapsid Palacrodon from the Norian, Late Triassic Chinle Formation of Arizona, and their biogeographic implications

期刊

ACTA PALAEONTOLOGICA POLONICA
卷 63, 期 1, 页码 117-127

出版社

INST PALEOBIOLOGII PAN
DOI: 10.4202/app.00426.2017

关键词

Diapsida; Palacrodon; microvertebrate; biostratigraphy; Triassic; Chinle Formation; North America

资金

  1. Petrified Forest Museum Association

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Vertebrates from the Triassic Period have broadly disparate tooth shapes and dentition patterns, the result of intense morphospace experimentation following the Permo-Triassic extinction. Here, we describe fragmentary tooth-bearing jaw elements of the rare Gondwanan Middle Triassic taxon Palacrodon that represent first occurrences from the Upper Triassic Chinle Formation in northeastern Arizona. These specimens come from two notably diverse macrovertebrate and microvertebrate assemblages, the coprolite layer horizon in Petrified Forest National Park, and the Placerias Quarry near St. Johns, Arizona. Palacrodon is diagnosed by the presence of acrodont maxillary and dentary dentition of labiolingually-widened, bulbous teeth, which are fused to one another mesiodistally, and are pyramidal in lateral view. We agree with previous workers and refer Palacrodon to Diapsida based on the presence of a posterior jugal spur and a quadrate that has a quadratojugal foramen and a concave posterior surface. Formerly known only from the Cynognathus Assemblage Zone in southern Africa and Antarctica, the presence of Palacrodon in the Norian of North America represents a temporal range extension of at least 15 million years and represents the first tetrapod genus known to be present in the Karoo Basin, Fremouw Formation, and the Upper Triassic of the southwestern United States. Range extensions such as this suggest that some vertebrate biostratigraphic hypotheses for the Triassic may be less robust than previously believed and subject to significant sampling biases.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据