Protoalligator

Last updated

Protoalligator
Temporal range: Paleocene Middle Paleocene
O
S
D
C
P
T
J
K
Pg
N
Protoalligator huiningensis (Paleozoological Museum of China, May 23, 2008).jpg
Partial skull and jaw of Protoalligator huiningensis, on display at the Paleozoological Museum of China
Scientific classification OOjs UI icon edit-ltr.svg
Domain: Eukaryota
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Reptilia
Clade: Archosauromorpha
Clade: Archosauriformes
Order: Crocodilia
Superfamily: Alligatoroidea
Clade: Globidonta
Clade: Orientalosuchina
Genus: Protoalligator
Wang, Sullivan & Liu, 2016
Species
  • P. huiningensis(Young, 1962)
Synonyms
  • Eoalligator huiningensisYoung, 1962 (type)

Protoalligator is an extinct genus of alligatoroid from the Paleocene Wanghudun Formation of China. It was first described as a species of Eoalligator in 1982 before being placed in its own genus in 2016. The name, which translates to "first alligator", was meant to carry on the same meaning as that of Eoalligator ("dawn alligator") as the latter was thought to be synonymous with another crocodilian by the team describing it. Recent studies have suggested that Protoalligator was part of an early radiation of alligatoroids endemic to Asia known as orientalosuchins, though not all studies agree with it being placed within this group nor with orientalosuchins being alligatoroids in the first place. Protoalligator is a monotypic genus, containing only the type species: Protoalligator huiningensis.

Contents

History and naming

The remains of Protoalligator huiningensis were first discovered in 1966 by a geological survey team in Huaining County of the Anhui Province, China, specifically in sediments regarded as part of the Upper Wanghudun Formation. [1] They were subsequently described as a species of Eoalligator by Yang Zhongjian (also known as C.C. Young) in 1982 based on the single partial skull found. [2] Young had erected Eoalligator in 1964, though as noted by later researchers was not especially thorough, assigning a plethora of material to the type species Eoalligator chunyii without proper preparation or comparison with the chosen holotype. Similar problems affected Eoalligator huiningensis, who Young had established without explicitly comparing it to E. chunyii of the genus in the diagnosis. This would come to create some issues later, when Yan-Yin Wang, Corwin Sullivan and Jun Liu noted that certain specimen of Eoalligator chunyii shared several features with Asiatosuchus nanlingensis , which Young had named in the same 1964 study. Wang, Sullivan and Liu addressed this issue by publishing a comprehensive revision of the three crocodilians in 2016, concluding that Eoalligator chunyii was a junior synonym of A. nanlingensis. However, the team still found Eoalligator huiningensis to be sufficiently distinct from Young's other taxa and, as a consequence, placed it in a newly formed genus which they named Protoalligator. [3] In 2018 however, further analysis of the bones of A. nanlingensis and Eoalligator did show that the two were separate taxa after all, though Protoalligator nonetheless remained a distinct genus in its own right, supported in part due to the continued hypothesis of one being an alligatoroid and the other being a crocodyloid. [4] Not long after, in 2019, several Asian crocodilians were placed in the newly named clade Orientalosuchina, among them both Protoalligator and Eoalligator. Orientalosuchina, as initially defined, alligned more closely with the placement of Protoalligator among early alligatoroids. Eventhough this meant that Protoalligator and Eoalligator were once again close relatives rather than falling into entirely different groups of crocodilians, subsequent authors continued following Wang and colleagues in retaining them as two separate taxa distinguished in their anatomy. [5] [6]

The name Protoalligator translates to "first alligator" and was chosen specifically to retain the same meaning as Eoalligator ("dawn alligator") as coined by Young in 1964. [3]

Description

The holotype of Protoalligator as seen from above. Protoalligator holotype dorsal view.jpg
The holotype of Protoalligator as seen from above.

Protoalligator is known from a single specimen, which preserves the front of the snout and parts of the lower jaw, with proportions suggesting that it was relatively short-snouted. The nares are oval in shape and mostly surrounded by the premaxillae. Notably, the surrounding bone appears to have formed a process at the front that would have extended backwards into the opening, [7] though the preserved portion of this process is incomplete in the holotype. [3] The presence of such a process is similar to modern alligators, in which the nares are split in two by a complete nasal bar formed by the premaxillae and the nasal bones, whereas in basal alligatoroids the nares are neither bisected nor do they feature a premaxillary process at all. However, no evidence exists to proof that the nares of Protoalligator were fully bisected as in modern alligators, though they did still clearly extend into the nares as in other orientalosuchins. [3]

Between the premaxilla and the maxilla lies a notch that serves to receive the enlarged fourth tooth of the lower jaw when the mouth was closed as in several other orientalosuchins, though its shape is somewhat exaggerated by the distortion of the holotype. Two depressions can be observed in the surface of the maxilla, which Young listed as one of the distinguishing features of the animal. Though shallow, the depression is relatively wide, stretching from close to the tooth row all the way to the contact between the maxilla and nasal bone, creating an irregular outline. However, the 2016 revision has cast some doubt over the usefullness of this feature, arguing that it may represent an artifact of preservation and even if a genuine anatomical trait is likely of little relevance in regards to taxonomy. A second depression is located further back, overlapping the suture between the maxilla, lacrimal and jugal. The shape of this depression is described as an irregular oval and more distant from the toothrow. Initially, Young suggested that this depression is what remains of the antorbital fenestra, though later research has found this hypothesis to be unsupported, both due to the possibility of it being a preservational artifact, the fact that crocodylians consistently lack this opening even in a reduced state and because the region that is associated with the antorbital fenestra generally does not include participation of the jugal. [3]

The lacrimals are only partially preserved, but there is no sign of the maxilla extending into the space between lacrimal and nasal. The postorbital bar, formed by the jugal, was slightly inset relative to the outer surface of the bone. [3]

Lower jaw

The mandibular symphysis of Protoalligator, the region of the lower jaw where the two halves connect, extends from the very tip of the mandible to the fifth dentary tooth, which separates it from Asiatosuchus nanlingensis. The symphysis was likely formed entirely by the dentary bones, with no involvement of the splenial, although the very tip of the latter is damaged. [3] [6]

The holotype of Protoalligator in dorsolateral view. Protoalligator holotype dorsolateral.jpg
The holotype of Protoalligator in dorsolateral view.

Dentition

Each premaxilla of Protoalligator bears four teeth, with the fourth being the largest, while in Asiatosuchus nanlingensis the third is the largest. Following the revision of the taxon, 12 teeth are thought to have been present throughout each maxilla. All premaxillary and the first two maxillary teeth are described as small and slender, though within the maxilla the teeth show a clear tend of size increase from the third to the fifth, with the latter being the largest maxillary tooth alongside the sixth. Subsequent teeth are shorter and blunter, even described as bulbous, though teeth ten to twelve are slightly larger than the fourth. Based on the right dentary, each half of the lower jaw would have contained at least 14 teeth. The first two are noted for facing straight up rather than being tilted somewhat forwards and the fourth is the largest, sliding neatly into the notch between premaxilla and maxilla. The eleventh dentary tooth is also noted for its greater size. [3] With the exception of the enlarged fourth dentary tooth, all other teeth of the lower jaw would have occluded medially to those of the upper jaw, giving the animal an overbite. [5]

Phylogeny

Protoalligator has been historically considered to be an alligatoroid as suggested by the name, a placement that was also supported following the 2016 revision, though in the case of the latter it was placed in a large polytomy at the base of Globidonta. [1] [3] A better resolved phylogenetic position was recovered with the recognition of Orientalosuchina. [5] Studies following Massonne and recovering a monophyletic Orientalosuchina generally find Protoalligator to be an early-diverging member of the clade. The 2019 study found it in a polytomy with Eoalligator and Jiangxisuchus , while the descriptions of Dongnanosuchus and Eurycephalosuchus find it as the second most basal orientalosuchin, branching from the rest of the group after Krabisuchus . [8] [6]

Notably, though Protoalligator was initially erected to account for the fact that Wang and colleagues recovered Eoalligator as a crocodyloid and possible synonym of Asiatosuchus nanlingensis, [3] later studies including those of Massonne repeatedly recovered both of them as distinct yet closely related animals. [5] [6] The synonymity between Eoalligator and A. nanlingensis has come to be disregarded by 2018, with additional evidence coming to light that clearly distinguishes both forms. Nevertheless, the authors maintained that Protoalligator represented an alligatoroid and Eoalligator a crocodyloid (specifically a crocodyline), [4] though this study was published before Orientalosuchina was coined by Massonne and colleagues.

However, even disregarding studies published prior to the naming of the clade, not all studies find Protoalligator as a member of Orientalosuchina. While Chabrol et al. 2024 managed to find several orientalosuchins clade with each other, both phylogenetic analysis of their study found Protoalligator as a non-orientalosuchin alligatoroid. [9] Ristevski et al. 2023 meanwhile recovered two phylogenetic trees (out of eight) in which orientalosuchins were placed within the family Mekosuchinae, however like Chabrol and colleagues, Ristevski's team did not find Protoalligator to be among them. [10]

Paleobiology

The only known specimen of Protoalligator has been recovered from the Wanghudun Formation, which is thought to date to the middle Paleocene and crops out within the Qianshan Basin of China. [3] The Lower Member as well as the lower part of the Upper Member of this formation are thought to correlate with the Shanghu Formation and Shizikou Formation and correspond to the Shanghuan Asian Land Mammal Age while the upper part of the Upper Member seems to date to the Nongshanian. [1] Yuan-Qing Wang and colleagues identified the strata that Protoalligator was recovered from as the lower Wanghudun Formation, [1] [7] whereas Yan-Yin Wang and colleagues state that the fossils came from the upper part of the formation. [3] According to the former, the Dinghuawu locality that yielded Protoalligator also preserved the fossils of the turtle Anhuichelys , which is widespread across both members of the formation. Both members preserve the squamate Qianshanosaurus as well as a variety of early mammals like anagaloids (related to rodents and lagomorphs), pantodonts and tillodontians. Exclusive to the Upper Member are members of Simplicidentata, Mimotonida and Didymoconida. Carnivores are represented by the mesonychid Yantanglestes in the Lower Member and the bird Qianshanornis as well as the carnivoran Pappictidops in the Upper Member. [1]

The Qianshan basin also preserves other crocodylomorphs, such as the crocodyloid Qianshanosuchus , which is only known from juvenile remains recovered from the Upper Member. [7] The enigmatic Wanosuchus is also known from the Paleocene of the Qianshan Basin, though its locality of origin is not known. [1]

Related Research Articles

<i>Mekosuchus</i> Extinct genus of reptiles

Mekosuchus is a genus of extinct Australasian mekosuchine crocodilian. Species of Mekosuchus were generally small-sized, terrestrial animals with short, blunt-snouted heads and strong limbs. Four species are currently recognized, M. inexpectatus, M. whitehunterensis, M. sanderi and M. kalpokasi, all known primarily from fragmentary remains.

<i>Australosuchus</i> Genus of reptiles

Australosuchus is an extinct monospecific genus of crocodylian belonging to the subfamily Mekosuchinae. The type and only known species Australosuchus clarkae lived during the Late Oligocene and the Early Miocene in the Lake Eyre Basin of South Australia. It was described in 1991 by Paul Willis and Ralph Molnar from fossil material discovered at Lake Palankarinna.

<i>Kambara</i> Extinct genus of reptiles

Kambara is an extinct genus of mekosuchine crocodylian that lived during the Eocene epoch in Australia. It is generally thought to have been a semi-aquatic generalist, living a lifestyle similar to many of today's crocodiles. Four species are currently recognised, the sympatric Kambara murgonensis and Kambara implexidens from sediments near Murgon, the poorly preserved Kambara molnari from the Rundle Formation and the youngest of the four, Kambara taraina, also from the Rundle Formation. Kambara were medium-sized crocodilians, with mature specimens generally reaching lengths from 3–4 m (9.8–13.1 ft).

<i>Ceratosuchus</i> Extinct genus of reptiles

Ceratosuchus is an extinct genus of alligatorine crocodylian from latest Paleocene rocks of Colorado's Piceance Basin and earliest Eocene rocks of Wyoming's Bighorn Basin in North America, a slice of time known as the Clarkforkian North American Land Mammal Age. Like its modern relatives, Ceratosuchus was a swamp-dwelling predator. It is named for the pair of flattened, triangular bony plates that extend from the back of its head.

Eoalligator is an extinct genus of alligatoroid crocodilian from Paleocene deposits in China.

<i>Necrosuchus</i> Extinct genus of reptiles

Necrosuchus is an extinct genus of caiman from modern day Argentina that lived during the Paleocene epoch. It inhabited the marine or fluvio-lacustrine environment of the Patagonian Salamanca Formation.

<i>Asiatosuchus</i> Extinct genus of reptiles

Asiatosuchus is an extinct genus of crocodyloid crocodilians that lived in Eurasia during the Paleogene. Many Paleogene crocodilians from Europe and Asia have been attributed to Asiatosuchus since the genus was named in 1940. These species have a generalized crocodilian morphology typified by flat, triangular skulls. The feature that traditionally united these species under the genus Asiatosuchus is a broad connection or symphysis between the two halves of the lower jaw. Recent studies of the evolutionary relationships of early crocodilians along with closer examinations of the morphology of fossil specimens suggest that only the first named species of Asiatosuchus, A. grangeri from the Eocene of Mongolia, belongs in the genus. Most species are now regarded as nomina dubia or "dubious names", meaning that their type specimens lack the unique anatomical features necessary to justify their classification as distinct species. Other species such as "A." germanicus and "A." depressifrons are still considered valid species, but they do not form an evolutionary grouping with A. grangeri that would warrant them being placed together in the genus Asiatosuchus.

<i>Chrysochampsa</i> Extinct genus of reptiles

Chrysochampsa is an extinct monospecific genus of caiman of the clade Brachychampsini. Fossils have been found from the Golden Valley Formation of North Dakota and date back to the Wasatchian regional North American faunal stage of the early Eocene. During this time North Dakota experienced the Early Eocene Climatic Optimum, creating lush forests, swamps and meandering rivers that were the home to at least four distinct crocodilians. Unlike the contemporary Ahdeskatanka, which was a small animal with crushing teeth, Chrysochampsa would have been a generalist and due to its size and lack of significant mammalian carnivores the apex predator of the region. The genus had been proposed to be synonymous with Allognathosuchus in 2004s, but this claim has since then been repeatedly refuted. A 2024 study has recovered it as an early branching member of the Caimaninae, forming a clade with Cretaceous forms such as Brachychampsa. Chrysochampsa is a monotypic genus, containing only the type species, Chrysochampsa mlynarskii.

<i>Sebecus</i> Extinct genus of reptiles

Sebecus is an extinct genus of sebecid crocodylomorph from Eocene of South America. Like other sebecosuchians, it was entirely terrestrial and carnivorous. The genus is currently represented by two species, the type S. icaeorhinus and S. ayrampu. Several other species have been referred to Sebecus, but were later reclassified as their own genera.

Prodiplocynodon is an extinct genus of basal crocodyloid crocodylian. It is one of the only crocodyloids known from the Cretaceous and existed during the Maastrichtian stage. The only species of Prodiplocynodon is the type species P. langi from the Lance Formation of Wyoming, known only from a single holotype skull lacking the lower jaw.

"Crocodylus" megarhinus is an extinct species of crocodile from the Eocene of Egypt. A partial skull was found by British paleontologist Charles William Andrews in the Fayum Depression. Andrews named Crocodylus megarhinus in 1905 on the basis of the holotype skull. A complete skull was also uncovered from Egypt in 1907 but was not recognized as "C." megarhinus until 1927.

<i>Astorgosuchus</i> Extinct genus of reptiles

Astorgosuchus is an extinct monospecific genus of crocodilian, closely related to true crocodiles, that lived in Pakistan during the late Oligocene period. This crocodile may have reached lengths of up to 7–8 m (23–26 ft) and is known to have preyed on many of the large mammals found in its environment. Bite marks of a large crocodile have been found on the bones of juvenile Paraceratherium, however if these were left by Astorgosuchus cannot be said with certainty. The genus contains a single species, Astorgosuchus bugtiensis, which was originally named as a species of Crocodylus in 1908 and was moved to its own genus in 2019.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Orientalosuchina</span> Extinct clade of crocodilians

Orientalosuchina is an extinct clade of alligatoroid crocodylians from Southeast and East Asia that lived between Maastrichtian and Eocene.

<i>Orientalosuchus</i> Extinct genus of reptiles

Orientalosuchus is an extinct genus of crocodilian from the Late Eocene that was found in the Na Duong Formation in Vietnam. The genus was described in 2019 based on the fossil remains of at least 29 individuals and was key in establishing the clade Orientalosuchina, initially interpreted as a group of early alligatoroids endemic to Asia, although later studies have argued for them actually being crocodyloids instead. Orientalosuchus was a comparably small crocodilian with a blunt and rounded snout and dentition that featured both pointed teeth towards the front of the jaw and blunt, conical teeth in the back. During the Late Eocene it would have inhabited the tropical to warm-subtropical freshwater biomes of the Na Duong Formation, which featured ponds, an annoxic lake and swamp forests as some of the primary habitats. Orientalosuchus would have shared these with the narrow-snouted gavialoid Maomingosuchus and a large taxon similar to Asiatosuchus. Compared to these, interpreted as a piscivore and a generalist respectively, Orientalosuchus would have been better equiped to deal with hard-shelled prey, such as the plethora of turtles found in the region.

<i>Dongnanosuchus</i> Extinct genus of crocodilians

Dongnanosuchus is an extinct monotypic genus of orientalosuchin crocodilian known from the middle to late Eocene Youganwo Formation of China. Like other members of Orientalosuchina, Dongnanosuchus was a comparably small-bodied animal with a short, rounded snout that shares characteristics with both early alligatoroids and crocodylids, rendering the precise placement of the clade uncertain. It contains a single species, Dongnanosuchus hsui, which lived during the latter part of the Eocene in what is now the Maoming Basin of China, which at the time featured subtropical forests and a prominent lake that would be the foundation of the local oil shale. This environment was shared by the tomistomine Maomingosuchus and similar cohabitation between Maomingosuchus and orientalosuchins is known from similar sites across East Asia.

<i>Jiangxisuchus</i> Extinct species of reptile

Jiangxisuchus is an extinct genus of crocodylian that lived during the Late Cretaceous, likely Maastrichtian, in what is now China. At the time of its description in 2019 it was proposed to be a basal member of Crocodyloidea. However, another concurrent 2019 study recovered Jiangxisuchus instead placed it in the clade Orientalosuchina, which were proposed to be early alligatoroids. The classification of Jiangxisuchus has since then remained in flux. Like other orientalosuchins, Jiangxisuchus was a small to medium-sized animal with a short, blunt snout. The genus is monotypic, containing only the species Jiangxisuchus nankangensis.

<i>Ultrastenos</i> Extinct genus of reptiles

Ultrastenos is an extinct genus of Australian mekosuchine crocodilian that lived during the Late Oligocene in northwestern Queensland, Australia. Following its discovery, it was speculated that Ultrastenos was a slender-snouted animal similar to modern gharials or freshwater crocodiles due to the seemingly abruptly narrowing mandible. However, a later study found that this was a missinterpretation of the fossil specimen and that Ultrastenos instead had a more generalized lower jaw. The same publication also provided evidence that the fossils of Ultrastenos belonged to the same animal previously named "Baru" huberi, adding further evidence to the idea that the animal was short snouted, contrary to the initial hypothesis. Given that "Baru" huberi was named first, the type species of Ultrastenos changed from U. willisi to U. huberi in accordance with the rules of the ICZN. Ultrastenos was a small mekosuchine, measuring upwards of 1.5 m long.

Qianshanosuchus is a genus of basal crocodyloid from the Paleocene of the Qianshan Basin, China. The fossil material, which includes an incomplete skull and parts of the lower jaw, show various features usually associated with juvenile crocodiles alongside various unique traits that were used to erect a new genus. It is the first and only basal crocodyloid currently known from the Paleocene of China, which had previously only yielded alligatoroids and planocraniids. Its presence in this part of the world and its basal position to species of the genus Asiatosuchus supports the idea that crocodyloids dispersed from Asia into Europe. Qianshanosuchus only includes a single species, Qianshanosuchus youngi.

Eurycephalosuchus is an extinct genus of orientalosuchine alligatoroid from the Late Cretaceous Jiangxi Province of China. Known from a well preserved skull and mandible alongside various postcranial remains, Eurycephalosuchus possessed a short and broad skull with a very short skulltable. Eurycephalosuchus lived with at least one other crocodilian, an indetermined member of the clade Brevirostres. The genus is monotypic, containing only the species Eurycephalosuchus gannanensis.

<i>Ahdeskatanka</i> Genus of alligator

Ahdeskatanka is an extinct genus of alligator from the Early Eocene Golden Valley Formation of North Dakota, USA. Ahdeskatanka had a short, rounded snout with globular teeth that are well-suited for crushing hard-shelled prey, though its exact ecology is not known. Ahdeskatanka inhabited the vast wetlands that covered much of western North Dakota during the Early Eocene Climatic Optimum, an environment it shared with at least three other crocodilians. These include the large caiman Chrysochampsa and at least two unnamed forms, one a large crocodyloid and one more similar to Ahdeskatanka. Phylogenetic analysis suggests that it was an early diverging member of the Alligatorinae, possibly related to Allognathosuchus, though its position is not very stable. Only a single species, Ahdeskatanka russlanddeutsche, is placed in this genus.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wang, Y.-Q.; Li, C.K.; Li, Q.; Li, D.-S. (2016). "A synopsis of Paleocene stratigraphy and vertebrate paleontology in the Qianshan Basin, Anhui, China". Vertebrata PalAsiatica. 54 (2): 89–120.
  2. Young, C. C. (1982). "A Cenozoic crocodile from Huaining, Anhui.". Selected Works of Yang Zhongjian. Academia Sinica; China. pp. 47–48.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Yan-Yin Wang; Corwin Sullivan; Jun Liu (2016). "Taxonomic revision of Eoalligator (Crocodylia, Brevirostres) and the paleogeographic origins of the Chinese alligatoroids". PeerJ. 4: e2356. doi: 10.7717/peerj.2356 . PMC   5012266 . PMID   27635329.
  4. 1 2 Wu, X.-C.; Li, C.; Wang, Y.-Y. (2018). "Taxonomic reassessment and phylogenetic test of Asiatosuchus nanlingensis Young, 1964 and Eoalligator chunyii Young, 1964". Vertebrata PalAsiatica. 56 (2): 137–146.
  5. 1 2 3 4 Tobias Massonne; Davit Vasilyan; Márton Rabi; Madelaine Böhme (2019). "A new alligatoroid from the Eocene of Vietnam highlights an extinct Asian clade independent from extant Alligator sinensis". PeerJ. 7: e7562. doi: 10.7717/peerj.7562 . PMC   6839522 . PMID   31720094.
  6. 1 2 3 4 Wu, X.C.; Wang, Y.C.; You, H.L.; Zhang, Y.Q.; Yi, L.P. (2022). "New brevirostrines (Crocodylia, Brevirostres) from the Upper Cretaceous of China". Cretaceous Research. 105450. doi:10.1016/j.cretres.2022.105450.
  7. 1 2 3 Boerman, S.A.; Perrichon, G.; Yang, J.; Li, C.S.; Martin, J.E.; Speijer, R.P.; Smith, T. (2022). "A juvenile skull from the early Palaeocene of China extends the appearance of crocodyloids in Asia back by 15–20 million years". Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society. doi:10.1093/zoolinnean/zlac067.
  8. Shan, Hsi-yin; Wu, Xiao-Chun; Sato, Tamaki; Cheng, Yen-nien; Rufolo, Scott (2021). "A new alligatoroid (Eusuchia, Crocodylia) from the Eocene of China and its implications for the relationships of Orientalosuchina". Journal of Paleontology. 95 (6): 1–19. Bibcode:2021JPal...95.1321S. doi:10.1017/jpa.2021.69. ISSN   0022-3360. S2CID   238650207.
  9. Chabrol, N.; Jukar, A. M.; Patnaik, R.; Mannion, P. D. (2024). "Osteology of Crocodylus palaeindicus from the late Miocene–Pleistocene of South Asia and the phylogenetic relationships of crocodyloids". Journal of Systematic Palaeontology. 22 (1). 2313133. Bibcode:2024JSPal..2213133C. doi:10.1080/14772019.2024.2313133.
  10. Ristevski, J.; Willis, P.M.A.; Yates, A.M.; White, M.A.; Hart, L.J.; Stein, M.D.; Price, G.J.; Salisbury, S.W. (2023). "Migrations, diversifications and extinctions: the evolutionary history of crocodyliforms in Australasia". Alcheringa: An Australasian Journal of Palaeontology: 1–46. doi: 10.1080/03115518.2023.2201319 . S2CID   258878554.