2013
DOI: 10.1134/s0031030113010048
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cranial morphology of Dvinia prima amalitzky (Cynodontia, Theromorpha)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
14
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
1
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The apparent contact seen in Fig. 8 is an artifact of deformation in AMNH FARB 2227 (as is also the case in some specimens of Procynosuchus and Dvinia ; Abdala & Allinson, ; contra Ivakhnenko, ). Here, the left palatal process of the maxilla is clearly broken off and displaced, overlapping the right one (Fig.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 63%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The apparent contact seen in Fig. 8 is an artifact of deformation in AMNH FARB 2227 (as is also the case in some specimens of Procynosuchus and Dvinia ; Abdala & Allinson, ; contra Ivakhnenko, ). Here, the left palatal process of the maxilla is clearly broken off and displaced, overlapping the right one (Fig.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 63%
“…), but it probably originated as structural support for the snout (Thomason & Russell, ) and evolved multiple times in different therapsid lineages (Hopson & Barghusen, ; Angielczyk & Walsh, ). The earliest appearance of a secondary palate homologous with that of mammals is in Permian cynodonts such as Procynosuchus , Dvinia and Abdalodon (Tatarinov, ; Kemp, ; Hopson & Kitching, ; Ivakhnenko, ; Kammerer, ). However, these taxa do not possess a complete osseous secondary palate; the medial projections (transverse laminae) of their premaxillae, maxillae and palatines do not contact each other on the midline.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…SAM‐PK‐K10138 can be distinguished from Dvinia prima (based on PIN 2005/2465 and PIN 2005/2469) by most of the features that also separate it from Procynosuchus , as well as the absence of a maxillary perforation for the lower postcanine and completely different postcanine morphology (strongly labiolingually expanded with numerous cuspules in Dvinia , as is also the case for another Russian Permian cynodont, Sludica bulanovi , known only from isolated dentition) (Ivakhnenko , ). Dvinia does have a depression on the lateral surface of the maxilla, but it is dissimilar to that of SAM‐PK‐K10138 and Charassognathus , being in a higher, more posterior position and being an anteroposteriorly elongate ovoid (Ivakhnenko ) as opposed to being dorsoventrally elongate and located immediately posterior to the canine. SAM‐PK‐K10138 can also be differentiated from the purported Russian Permian ‘thrinaxodontids’ Nanocynodon seductus and Uralocynodon tverdokhlebovae (both known only from partial lower jaws, PIN 2415/1 and SGU 104 89/308): in these taxa, the lower postcanine tooth row is not inset.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Botha et al . () considered the notch in the posterior margin of the dentary (anterior to the mandibular fenestra) of Charassognathus to be a precursor of the masseteric fossa, as a similar notch is present at the base of the fossa in Dvinia and Procynosuchus (Kemp ; Ivakhnenko ). However, there is no evidence that this notch is part of a transformational series in the development of the masseteric fossa: similar mandibular openings (but never a masseteric fossa) are present independently in therocephalians, and both notch and masseteric fossa are absent in the more crownward cynodont clade Galesauridae (Kammerer pers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%