Veldmeijer
Cretaceous, toothed pterosaurs from Brazil. A reappraisal
12. Notes
1
Material from non–marine sediments, from a clear context from Mongolia, currently in
Berlin, remained inaccessible.
2
Edited version of Veldmeijer (2003a). Note that the introduction of the original version has
been partly moved to the introduction in the present work.
3
But see Veldmeijer (2003b).
4
See http://members.lycos.nl/palarch/ for the complete CT–scan.
5
This morphology of the dentary sagittal groove is a feature of Anhanguera (Veldmeijer et
al., 2005a).
6
Veldmeijer et al. (2005a).
7
Veldmeijer et al. (submitted).
8
See also Veldmeijer et al. (2005a).
9
See below, but also Veldmeijer et al. (in review).
10
Measurements, taken by the author of the original specimen in Tokyo, confirm this.
11
Veldmeijer et al. (in review).
12
Veldmeijer et al. (2005a).
13
Veldmeijer et al. (in review).
14
Edited version of Veldmeijer (2002). The introduction of the original version has been
partly removed as to avoid repetition. The photographs of the material, have been inserted
here; these are colour photographs rather then the black and white ones, published by
Veldmeijer & Hense (2004).
15
Note that this differs from the original (see chapter 7). Veldmeijer (2002: 3) erroneously
referred to Criorhynchus as Owen, 1874.
16
The measurements of the dentition are included in chapter 7.
17
In the present work regarded as Co. piscator, see Veldmeijer (2003a).
18
See also Veldmeijer (2003a), Veldmeijer et al. (2005a). The anterior start of the dentary
sagittal crest is now generally accepted.
19
Veldmeijer (2003a).
20
This differs from Veldmeijer (2002).
21
This differs from Veldmeijer (2002). Here, SMNS 55409 was classified as Ornithocheirid
(see also note 26).
22
Kellner & Tomida (2000: 104) reclassified S. araripensis as An. araripensis, because "the
preserved dorsal portion of the praemaxilla becomes gradually sharper toward the preserved
rostral part of the skull, suggesting the presence of a sagittal crest, rostral to the nasoantorbital
fenestra". However, Veldmeijer (2003a) regards S. araripensis as Co. araripensis as
explained by Veldmeijer et al. (in review). In this chapter the material is referred to as Co.
araripensis.
23
This is the conservative view by Wellnhofer (1985). Currently, S. pricei is regarded An.
pricei by Unwin (2003) and should accordingly be classed in Ornithocheiridae. However, the
present work does not support this view due disagreement of type specimen (explained in
chapter 7) and a tentative classification of S. pricei within Anhangueridae is proposed here.
24
Co. araripensis.
25
Co. araripensis.
26
Because S. araripensis has been renamed Co. araripensis, this feature is seen in
Coloborhynchus as wel.
27
See chapter 7.
28
This differs from Veldmeijer (2002). See chapter 7.
29
Note that this differs from Veldmeijer (2002).
147
Veldmeijer
Cretaceous, toothed pterosaurs from Brazil. A reappraisal
30
Note, as previously mentioned, that the re–classification of S. araripensis as Co.
araripensis, this ridge not an feature is exclusively for Santanadactylus.
31
Edited version of Veldmeijer et al. (2005a).
32
Although it is not common to publish material from private collections, the decision to do
so is based on the fact that the collection is unconditionally accessible. Furthermore, other
scientists (i.e. Wellnhofer & Kellner, 1991) have used the collection in their studies, which
underlines the quality of the collection and its professional management. Finally, none of the
fossils are holotypes. Access to the original specimens can be arranged through the owner of
the collection (St. Gallen, Switzerland, [email protected]) or the Natural History Museum at
St. Gallen (Nature Museum St. Gallen, Museumstrasse 32, [email protected]).
33
See chapter 7.
34
Edited version of Veldmeijer (2003b).
35
Ample attention to this topic is given in chapter 7.
36
Also Veldmeijer et al. (submitted).
37
This differs from Veldmeijer (2003b); see chapter 7 for the explanation.
38
See Veldmeijer et al. (2005b).
39
This seems premature, as the crest is clearly broken or at least damaged. Full preparation
and comparison with Ludodactylus needs to shed light on this, but the visible remnant seems
to suggest a stronger developed crest relative to Anhanguera (also Veldmeijer et al., 2005b).
40
Edited version of Veldmeijer et al. (submitted).
41
The publication in Bennett’s bibliography, Owen’s supplement no. III to the monograph on
the fossil reptilian, has been published in 1861, rather than 1860 as suggested by Bennett.
42
See chapter 7 for the explanation.
43
See chapter 7.
44
See Veldmeijer (2003a) for a discussion on the classification of this holotype and An.
santanae in the AMNH collection).
45
Note that Sayão & Kellner (2000: 2) erroneously mention the presence of a medial ridge on
the dorsal aspect of the lower jaw.
46
See chapter 7.
47
Edited version of Veldmeijer et al. (2005b). Additonal data (measurements, individual
graphs of the dentition of the various specimens) can be found in 11.1).
48
This contrast to his own analysis (see also below).
49
Although this systematic part has been included in chapter 6, it is included here again to
better understand the discussion in this chapter. The same has been done for the updates of
Coloborhynchus, Anhanguera and Criorhynchus.
50
This classification however, can be abandoned as the differences between B. araripensis
and O. compressirostris (see below) are obvious (cf. figure 7.1 and 7.30).
51
See also the introduction to the Brasileodactylus update (7.1.1). Note that an exception is
made for type the specimen of Coloborhynchus, originating from the Cambridge Greensands,
England.
52
See also the introduction to the Brasileodactylus update (7.1.1.).
53
See the introduction to the Brasileodactylus update (7.1.1.).
54
Note that Unwin refers to his unpublished revision of the Cambridge material.
55
148