2009
DOI: 10.1080/08912960903154511
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A large archosauriform tooth with multiple supernumerary carinae from the Upper Triassic of New Mexico (USA), with comments on carina development and anomalies in the Archosauria

Abstract: Here we report a tooth of a large archosauriform from the Upper Triassic of New Mexico, USA that displays developmental anomalies of carina formation. This tooth has two supernumerary carinae, both on the lingual side of the tooth. Previously, carina anomalies of this sort were primarily known from theropod dinosaurs, but always from the labial surface. Integrating this specimen into a reassessment of the published accounts of carina anomalies in other fossil diapsids reveals that supernumerary carinae are mor… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Enamel thickness in observed specimens shows that, like many other archosauromorphs (Sander,1999; Beatty and Heckert,2009), Dakosaurus enamel remained thin despite the large size of the teeth. This restricts microwear studies largely to the dentine surface.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 56%
“…Enamel thickness in observed specimens shows that, like many other archosauromorphs (Sander,1999; Beatty and Heckert,2009), Dakosaurus enamel remained thin despite the large size of the teeth. This restricts microwear studies largely to the dentine surface.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 56%
“…These differences are substantial, and similar to the way in which enamel thickness has been observed to change from thin at the base to thicker near the apex in some archosauromorphs (Beatty and Heckert 2009) and squamates (Pellegrini and Beatty 2011) that lack surface ornamentation. Interestingly, a Kimmeridgian Machimosaurus tooth from England also shows this substantial difference in enamel thickness (Young and Steel 2014).…”
Section: Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 59%
“…(2007) considered ‘ornithischian’ taxa such as Crosbysaurus (reported by Heckert 2004) as valid taxa, but diagnostic only of Archosauriformes incertae sedis . More recently, Beatty and Heckert (2009) documented a large, pathological archosauriform tooth that could pertain to a phytosaur (as suggested by Heckert 1997 a , b ), but more likely represents a rauisuchian or other large archosaur from the same stratigraphic interval.…”
Section: Geological Settingmentioning
confidence: 92%