<oologcal j'ournal o f t h e Linnean Sociely (19841, 82: 101-1 17. W i t h 11 figures
New prosauropod material from South 'Wales
DIANE KERMACK
University College London, Gower Street, London WC1*
R w i v e d November 1983, acceptedfor publicatzon January 1984
New prosauropod material from a cave filliiig of Upper Triassic/Lower Jurassic age in Pant-yKynnon Quarry, South Wales, is described. T h e Pant-y-ffynnon fauna also includes thecodant,
coelurosaur, crorodile and lepidosaur matrrial.
Most of the prosauropod skeleton is represented. An almost complete but disartir dated skull is
prcservrd. T h e skull a n d whole skeleton of the- prosauropod are reconstructed. Evidmce from thr
size and relative proportions of the bone\, also the state of ossification, indic.ites that the
prosauropod remains represent juveniles.
T h e level of the j a w articulation rombined with the form of the teeth would suggest that the
Pant-y-ffynnon prosauropod was omnivorous.
T h e Pant-y-ffynnon prosauropod resenihles closely the much less complete Du-dham Down
(Bristol) remains of Thecodontosaurus antzguu,\ Morris; the Welsh material could well he juveniles of
that specics. Here the Pant-y-ffynnon material i s ascribed to Thecodontosawus sp.
T h e mode of deposition of the fossil material i s discussrd, to account for thc deposit containing
only juvrniles of the prosauropod.
KEY WOKDS: 4 a u r i s c h i a
-
Thecodontosawus
~
Upper l'riassic/Lower Jurassic
taphononiy.
-
C:ON?'EN'I'S
Introduction .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Material and mcthods .
. . . . . .
Reconstruction of thr Pant-y-ffynnon prosaui-opod
Krconstruction of the skull and lower jaw
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Discussion .
Summary a n d conclusions .
. . . . .
Acknowledgements
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Referrnres .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Appendix .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Abbreviations used in figures .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
101
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
102
102
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
105
109
115
115
115
116
117
IN7'RODUCTION
This paper describes a prosauropod found in the fissure deposits of Upper
Triassic/Lower Jurassic age discovered by Professor K. A. Kermack and Dr P.
L. Robinson at Pant-y-ffynnon Quarry near Bonvilston, South (Jamorgan in
1952, when they made a tour of limestone quarries in the area. Along with the
remains of the prosauropod to be described are those of other archosaurs, such
*Present address: 98 Whitchurch Gardens, Edguare, Middlesex HA8 6PB.
0024-4082/84/090101
+ 1 7 $03.00/0
101
(01984 T h e Linnean
Socicty of London
102
D. KERMACK
as the crocodile material which has been described by Crush (1981, 1984) and
thecodont and coelurosaur material described by myself (Warrener, 1983). Dr
Robinson was to describe the lepidosaur remains found with those of the
archosaurs. The geology of the quarry is described by Robinson (1957) and
Warrener (1 983).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The bones are well-preserved and often associated, with many of them in
natural articulation, in a stratified, yellow marl cave-filling. As clay/marl fissure
and cave fillings spoil the quality of the limestone being quarried, they are
frequently tipped in a worked-out part of the quarry. It was on such a tip that
the Pant-y-ffynnon material was found. Unfortunately, none of i t was found in
silu in a quarry face.
My material, including the thecoaont and coelurosaur remains as well as the
prosauropod, had already been partially prepared and consisted of about a
dozen blocks with associated bones and around 70 separate bones. Many of
these I prepared further. A list of the prosauropod specimens with their
University College London, Zoological Museum numbers is given in the
appendix to this paper. Unfortunately, the material does not contain a complete
and associated skeleton of the prosauropod, but with several specimens
consisting of parts of the skeleton and many isolated bones from different
individuals, it is possible to reconstruct the skull and skeleton with some
accuracy. Specimen P24 (Fig. 1: abbreviations used in the Figures are listed in
the Appendix) is worthy of particular mention as it includes an almost complete
but disarticulated skull, along with the neck, blade of the right scapula, ventral
end of the left scapula, both coracoids and proximal ends of both humeri. The
reconstruction of the skull was made largely from this specimen. The size of this
individual can be seen from Fig. 1; other specimens do not differ greatly in size.
Detailed descriptions of individual bones will not be given here; a full account of
them can be found in Warrener (1983).
RECONSTRUC'I'ION OF 'IHE PAN T-Y-FFYNNON PROSAUROPOD
Figure 2 represents a possible reconstruction of the Pant-y-ffynnon
prosauropod. Fuller details are given in Warrener ( 1983). T h e scale is derived
from specimen P24. The known parts of the skeleton are indicated by solid black
lines. The bones indicated by broken lines are based upon published
descriptions of the prosauropods Efraasia, Anchisaurus and Plateosaurus (Galton,
1973, 1976; Galton & Cluver, 1976) and Thecodontosaurus antiquus Morris from
Durdham Down, near Bristol, described by Riley & Stutchbury (1836, 1840).
The animal is identified as a prosauropod because of numerous detailed
similarities to these genera, especially the teeth (Fig. 9C) and the form of the
ilium.
The dorsal column is unfortunately completely unknown in the Pant-yffynnon material and so it had to be reconstructed both in number of vertebrae
and form from our knowledge of other prosauropods. Its size was estimated from
the cervical column of specimen P24, assuming that the relative proportions of
these two regions were similar to those of other prosauropods. Similarly, the
PROSAUROPOD FROM SOUTH \VALES
103
Y
Figure 1. Thecodontosaurus sp. P24. Outline drawing of skull, lower jaw, neck, right coracoid and
proximal ends of both humeri, as preserved on block. Bones that have since been remcived from the
block are shaded.
restoration of the unknown forearm, wrist and forefoot is based on the forelimbs
of other prosauropods, with the size estimated from the Pant-y-ffynnon
prosauropod’s humerus and pectoral girdle. The size of the pelvic girdle and
hiridlimb has been calculated upon the assumption that the humerus/femur
ratio is similar in all prosauropods and that the Welsh one is no exception. This
gives a hindlimb which seems rather large relative to the length of the dorsal
column. However, this is compatible with the length of the forelimb relative to
the neck, proportions of which are known, as the neck and the size of the
humerus are derived from the same specimen, P24. Also, if the hindlimb were
drawn smaller, the size of the pelvis would diminish, as it was derived from the
same specimen, P77/1, and the ilium would then be unrealistically small in
relation to the skull. Similar reasoning has been used to reconstruct the pubis
and ischium, which, except for the proximal part of the pubis, arc. unknown in
the Welsh material; here, the lengths of the two bones were reconstructed
assuming that their proportion to the length of the iliac blade wiis as in other
prosauropods. The full length of the femur has been reconstructed from the
preserved distal half of the bone, using the position of the fourth trochanter and
the length of the tibia-fibula. The latter reconstructions make the pubis and
ischium seem unusually short relative to the length of the femur when compared
with other prosauropods. However, this must be natural, for both the femur and
the ilium from which the pubis and ischium were reconstructed are from the
PROSAUROPOD FROM SOUTH WALES
105
same specimen, P77/1. The extreme caudal vertebrae are not known, and this
loss probably occurs in all fossil remains of prosauropods, so it is difficult to
ascertain if the tail be the correct length in the reconstruction.
A factor affecting the relative proportions of the skeleton in the reconstruction
is the maturity of the specimens. All the prosauropod bones from Pant-y-ffynnon
come from juvenile individuals. This is evident mainly from specimen P24 and is
supported by the small size of all the specimens. Small size alone would not
necessarily indicate juveniles, as it could possibly indicate the presence of a
species with small adults. However, as P24 shows other juvenile features, the
other specimens, which are similarly sized or smaller, must also be juveniles.
The juvenile characters of P24 include the large size of the skull relative to the
neck, equal in length to approximately five normal cervical vertebrae (Fig. 2) as
against three vertebrae in Plateosaurus and Anchisaurus (Galton, 1976: figs lB, 2B),
and the separate cervical centra and neural arches. In older individuals the
vertebral components would be fused together. The possible incomplete
ossification of the ends of some of the long bones, for example the distal end of
the femur of P77/1, is also a juvenile feature.
RECONSTRUCTION O F THE SKULL AND LOWER JAW
The skull and lower jaw of specimen P24 are reconstructed with the aid of
some information from the few isolated skull bones of other individuals.
T o obtain an overall idea of the skull and lower jaw the following views have
been reconstructed: a lateral view of the skull and lower jaw (Fig. 3), a dorsal
view of the skull (Fig. 4), a palatal view of the skull (Fig. 5), an occipital or
posterior view of the skull (Fig. 6 ) , a lateral view of the braincase (Fig. 7 ) , a
ventral view of the braincase (Fig. 8) and a lateral view of the lower jaw
(Fig. 9). The posterior part of the medial surface of the lower jaw has also been
reconstructed (Fig. l o ) , but the anterior part cannot be drawn as its component
parts are not preserved.
T h e skull is lightly built with slender bones. In dorsal and palatal views
(Figs 4, 5) it is long and narrow, with gently convex lateral outlines that
gradually widen from the tip of the snout to the widest point, across the
supratemporal fenestrae. T h e back of the skull roof is flat, curving gently into
the more or less vertical lateral walls, rather than making a sharp angle with
them as in Plateosaurus (Fig. 1 lC, D). The snout as reconstructed was fairly low,
and in lateral view its dorsal edge forms a smooth, upward curve continuous
with the dorsal outline of the orbit.
T h e skull of specimen P24 is fairly small and as reconstructed measures
approximately 80 mm long, 38 mm wide across the supratemporal fenestrae,
and 43 mm high including the lower jaw, measured through the posterior
borders of the orbits. However, in relation to the length of the neck, the skull is
quite large when compared to those of other prosauropods, being equal to the
length of about five normal cervical vertebrae.
T h e skull has large orbits (Fig. 3), each bordered by the lacrimal and
prefrontal anteriorly, the frontal dorsally, the postorbital posteriorly and the
jugal ventrally. It is typically saurischian and therefore must have possessed
well-developed antorbital fenestrae. The nostril lay quite high u p anteriorly on
the lateral side of the snout, bordered by the premaxilla, maxilla and nasal. T h e
A
Fr
B
I
ex1 man fen
Figure 3. Thecodontosaurus sp. P24. Reconstructed lateral view of the skull and lower jaw. A, Shaded
reconstruction in which all the bones are drawn as if complete; B, unshaded, outline reconstruction
which distinguishes known hones, boundaries and fenestrae from those that are either not preserved
or are obscured from view and are based on other prosauropod skulls.
I n all the skull reconstruction drawings (Figs 3, 4, 5, 6) the outline reconstruction (B) has been
drawn as follows: known bones, boundaries and fenestrae are bounded by solid lines, those not
preserved or obscured from view by broken lines. A dotted-dashed line marks off the visible extent
of an overlapped bone from the part that is obscured from view. Except where a complete left or
right bone is known and its outline has been drawn on both sides of the reconstruction (e.g.
postorbital), the known part of the outline of each hone in the reconstruction is a composite
drawing from the preserved remains of both the left and right (e.g. frontal). The broken edges of
the individual hones are therefore omitted. However, where only one incomplete bone of a pair is
preserved (e.g. maxilla), or where both are preserved hut only one has been identified with enough
certainty for use in the reconstruction (e.g. palatine), its broken edges are often included in the
correct side of the reconstruction.
PROSAUROPOD FROM SOUTH WALES
107
antorbital fenestra lay posterior to the nostril, bordered posteriorly by the
lacrimal and anteriorly by the nasal and maxilla. It was probably larger than
the nostril, as reconstructed (Fig. 3 ) , although the size of both openings has to
be assumed because of damage to the surrounding bones.
Two temporal fenestrae lie behind each orbit, the smaller supratemporal
fenestra lying on the skull roof facing dorsally, and the larger, infratemporal
fenestra in the lateral surface facing sideways. T h e former, a rounded opening
surrounded by the frontal, parietal, postorbital and squamosal, is not simply a
hole in the roof but more of an open recess, with the surrounding bones forming
a partially underlying flange (Fig. 4). The infratemporal fenestra is rectangular
Po
I
Pf
B
ext no
J
\
sf fen
Figure 4. Thecodonlosaurus sp. P24. Recon5tructrd dorsal view of the skull. For explmation of the
two drawings, A and B, see Fig. 3.
D. KERMACK
108
and is bordered anteriorly by the postorbital bar formed of the postorbital and
jugal and posteriorly by the squamosal and quadratojugal. Although the
quadratojugal is not preserved, the shape of the descending process of the
squamosal shows that the posterior border of the fenestra curved anteriorly in a
characteristic archosaurian manner (Fig.. 3'1.
The occipital plate slopes forwards so that the occipital portion lies behind the
more dorsal parts (Figs 4., 7 ,) .
The large brbits and unfused parietals are likely to be juvenile features.
The palate (Fig. 5) was perforated by large, paired postpalatine fenestrae.
Each one lay laterally between the jugal and the pterygoid, bordered posteriorly
by the ectopterygoid and anteriorly by the palatine. However, the exact nature
i
\
"
,
"
man c
I crn
+----+
Mx
fen
QI
Figure 5. Thecodontosaurus sp. P24. Reconstructed palatal view of the skull. For explanation of the
two drawings, A and B, see Fig. 3.
PROSAUROPOD FROM SOUTH WALES
I09
of the anterior border is not known because of damage to the palatine. T h e
choanae or internal nares lay in the anterior roof of the palate, bordered by the
maxillae, vomers and palatines. Their shape is not known for sure because the
vomers and the palatal portions of the maxillae are not preserved. However, the
anterior edge of the palatine is more or less complete and indicates that the
choanae were quite large.
As in other prosauropods, the nasals are markedly enlarged and the skull is
equipped with a marginal series of coarsely serrated, leaf-shaped teeth on the
premaxillae and maxillae. There is an estimated total of 15 teeth .,n each half of
the upper jaw in specimen P24.
T h e lower jaw of specimen P24 (Figs 9, 10) is lightly built like the skull. Each
ramus is long and narrow and attains its maximum height in the posterior half,
forming a convex dorsal border that fitted upwards into the gently concave
ventral edge of the jugal (Fig. 3 ) . There is a row of about 14 fairly large, leafshaped teeth (Fig. 9) in each ramus. Like the maxillary techth, these are
coarsely serrated on both their anterior and posterior borders. Posteriorly, the
ramus forms a prominent retroarticular process behind the condyle, the outer
surface of this process being formed by the surangular and the inner surface by
the articular bone. As in all reptiles, there is an adductor fossa lying posteriorly
in the medial surface. I t opens anteriorly, between the splenial and dentary, into
the Meckelian canal which carried the remains of the Meckelian cartilage. T h e
adductor fossa is quite large. It is bordered dorsally by the surangular and
presumably, as in other prosauropods, ventrally by the prearticular. T h e
external mandibular fenestra, an opening found in the lateral wall of the jaw
ramus of most archosaurs, lies in the middle of the jaw ramus, bordered
anteriorly by the dentary, dorsally by the surangular and ventrally by the
angular. Only a small part of its border is preserved on the left clentary, so the
size and shape of the opening in the reconstruction is largely assumed, although
the absence of the border on either of the surangulars gives 1he opening a
maximum posterior limit.
T h e prearticular and coronoid are not preserved, and since their shape is
totally unknown and is impossible to assess from the other lower jaw bones, they
have been omitted from the reconstruction of the medial view of the lower jaw
(Fig. 10).
T h e lower jaw articulation lies almost level with the tooth row as in
Anchisaurus, rather than below it as in Plateosaurus (Figs 3, 11).
DISCUSSION
Figure 2 indicates an agile, lightly built prosauropod about 1000 mm long. Its
head was about 85 mm in length and so relatively small compared with the rest
of the body, but the tail was long, some 600 mm. T h e hindlimbs were long
compared with the forelimbs and the animal was almost certainly bipedal and
capable of running quite fast on its toes. The forelimbs were probably usually
held high off the ground but this does not mean that they were never used in
locomotion. The prosauropod might have used them in the satne manner as
does a kangaroo today. T h e long prosauropod tail probably functioned as a
balancing organ when the animal was in motion and as a prop when it was
stationary.
D. KERMACK
110
-
a
I cm
B
D
BS
Figure 6. Thecodontosaurus sp. P24. Reconstructed occipital view of the skull. For explanation of the
two drawings, A and B, see Fig. 3.
The skull is lightly built and the large orbits indicate that sight was probably
the most important of the special senses, although smell was quite important,
judging by the large size of the nasal bones. The leaf-shaped teeth would suggest
that the animal was herbivorous. However, the jaw articulation is level with the
tooth row so that the teeth meet in pure shear, with little propalinal movement,
implying a carnivorous diet, the teeth coming together to enter, hold and kill
prey. Therefore, taking all the evidence, it seems probable that the Pant-yffynnon prosauropod was omnivorous, eating largely soft vegetable matter but
supplementing this by killing prey when possible, in a similar way to Iguana
or Uromastix today.
In general the skull resembles that of the European genus Plateosaurus
(Fig. 1 lC, D), which I studied in the Institut f i r Geologie und Palaontologie in
-
PROSAUROPOD FROM SOUTH WALES
111
I cm
par pro
a sur
\
I
s
Prootic
ExocciDital
oc
/
1
Basioccipital
Opisthotic
1I
\
Basisphenoid
\
Ps ros
\
\
bpt pro
Figure 7 . Thecodontasaurus sp. P24. Reconstructrd right lateral view of the braincase. T h e
supraoccipital is omitted as its shape in latrral view is not known. T h e paroccipital process is shown
in cross-section.
‘I’iibingen, and the North American Anchisaurus (Fig. 1 IA, B ) , which I have
studied from Galton’s description (1976), being unable to visit the Peabody
Museum of Yale University to examine the skull material. The skull of the Panty-ffynnon prosauropod is more like that of Anchisaurus in having a smooth
outline with a low snout and high posterior region, large orbits, and elongated
frontals. I n Plateosaurus the orbits are relatively much smaller, the skull has a
Basioccipita
par pro
o c
Figure 8. Thecodontosaurus sp. P24. Reconstructed bentral view of the braincase.
112
D. KERMACK
L
-
0
L
0
W
c
a
L
- O
;
€
E
In
0
a
a
m
PROSAUKOPOL) FROM SOUTH WALES
113
A
0
Art
ext man
fen
gl
fos
Figure 10. Thecodontosaurus sp. P24. Reconstructed medlal view of the posterior end of the lower j a w
ramus (without coronoid or prearticular) For explanation of the two drawings, A a i d B, see Fig. 3.
more rectangular outline with a deep snout and the frontals are reduced
anteriorly making room for the enlarged prefrontals. Also, like Anchisaurus, the
Welsh skull has the ventral end of the quadrate tilted forwards relative to the
dorsal end, rather than backwards as in Plateosaurus. However, the basisphenoid
is quite unlike that of Anchisaurus. In the latter this bone is well rounded
posteriorly with no distinct posterior processes and short basipterygoid processes.
In the skull of specimen P24 both pairs of processes are long, making the bone
X-shaped, identical to the basisphenoid of Thecodontosaurus antiquus from
Durdham Down, near Bristol (Riley & Stutchbury, 1836, 1840). An X-shaped
basisphenoid is also found in Plateosaurus.
T h e Welsh prosauropod resembles closely the much less complete Durdham
Down remains of Thecodontosaurus antiquus; any differences can be due to the
Welsh material being entirely composed of juveniles. Here the Pant-y-ffynnon
material is ascribed to Thecodontosaurus sp., and most likely represents juveniles of
T.antiquus.
I t seems strange that the Pant-y-ffynnon deposit should contain only juveniles
and no adult bones, until the possible mode of deposition is considered. In the
Late Trias very heavy ‘flash’ thunderstorms were relatively common and
juveniles may have been more likely to succumb to their rigours, being quickly
drowned. Their relatively small bodies (and this also applies to the small bodies
of the other Pant-y-ffynnon animals) would have been carried in the torrential
rain and ensuing floods down the ‘solution cracks’ or fissures, .which are and
D. KEKMACK
I14
Pf
I
I
5 cm
Fr
I
\
B
Po
Prnx
M
5cm
'
Fr
" 7
D
Figure 1 I . Reconstructed skull of Anchisaurus polyzelus (A, B) and skull of Plateosaurus (C, D ) , after
Calton (1976), in dorsal (A, C) and lateral (B, D) views.
were characteristic of a limestone land surface, leading into the underground
cave in which they were preserved. The older individuals, although not so large
as the known plateosaurids, were larger and more heavily built and may have
been more likely to survive these storms. However, it is perhaps more likely that
PROSAUROPOD FROM SOUTH WALES
I15
adults were also affected, perhaps to a lesser degree, and that their bodies were
simply too large to fall down cracks in the land surface, probably being swept
out into the nearby sea instead. T h e fact that the skeletons of the juveniles are
not disarticulated suggests that the animals drowned and were immediately
carried into the cave during heavy storms. Their drowned bodies would not
have been left on the land surface to be broken up by the action of scavengers,
sun, wind and rain before being washed into the underground water courses by
later thunderstorms. This accounts for the fossil material in the Pant-y-ffynnon
deposit being partially articulated, whilst those in the later deposits on St Bride’s
Island, which were laid down under less extreme conditions (Kermack et al.,
1973), are collections of isolated bones.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
( 1 ) New material of the prosauropod Thecodontosaurus from a cave filling of
Upper Triassic/Lower Jurassic age in Pant-y-ffynnon Quarry is (described and a
new reconstruction made of the animal.
(2) The size and relative proportions of the bones, also their state of
ossification, indicates that all the prosauropods in the deposit were juveniles.
(3) T h e mode of deposition of the fossil material is discussed, to account for
the deposit containing only juveniles.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank all those who helped me with this work, and in
particular Prof. K. A. Kermack who was my Ph.D. supervisor and who became
my father-in-law part way through my studies.
T h e work was undertaken in the Zoology Department, University College,
London and I am indebted to Prof. N. A. Michison FRS for the facilities made
available to me.
REFERENCES
CRUSH, P. J., 1981. An earb, terrestrial crucodzle ,from South Wales. Ph.D. thesis in Zoology, University of
London.
CRUSH, P. J., 1984. A Late Upper Triassic sphenosuchid crocodilian from Wales. Palalmontology, 27: 131-157.
GALTON, P. M., 1973. On the anatomy and relalionships of Efraasia diagnostica (Huene) n. gen., a
prosauropod dinosaur (Reptilia: Saurischia) from the Upper Triassic of Gertrany. Palaeontologische
zeiischrijt, 47: 229-255.
GALTON, P. M., 1976. Prosauropod dinosaurs (Reptilia: Saurischia) of North America. Postilla, Peabody
Museum of Natural History,Yale Uniuersity, 169: 1-98.
GALTON, P. M. & CLUVER, M. A , , 1976. Anchisaurus capensis (Broom) and a revision of the .4nchisauridae
(Reptilia, Saurischia). Annals of the South Afrzcan Museum, 69: 12 1-1 59.
KERMACK, K . A,, MUSSETT, F. & RIGNEY, H. W., 1973. T h e lower jaw of Morganucodon. z o o l o p a l
Journal of the Linnean Sacieo, 53: 87-175.
RILEY, H. & STUTCHBURY, S., 1836. A description of various fossil remains of Ihree distinct saurian
animals discovered in the autumn of 1834, in the Magnesian Conglomerate on Durdham Down, near
Bristol. Proceedings of the Geological Soczety o j London, 2: 397-399.
RILEY, H. & STUTCHBURY, S., 1840. A description of various fossil remains of three distinct saurian
animals, recently discovered in the Magnesian Conglomerate on Durdham Down, near Brisrol. Transactions
of the Geological Society of London, (2)5: 349-357
ROBINSON, P. L., 1957. The Mesozoic fissures of the Bristol Channel area and their vertebrate faunas.
zoological Journal of the Linnean Society. 43: 260-282.
WARRENER, D., 1983. An archosaurian fauna .from a Welsh locality. Ph.D. thesis in Zoology, University of
London.
D. KERMACK
116
APPENDIX
List of specimens of Thecodontosauru\ sp. from Pant-y-ffynnon Quarry, Bonvilston, South Glarnorgan with
their numbers. The material is at present in the collections of the Department of Zoology, University College
London.
Specimen no.
Bone o r association of bones
Specimen no.
Bone or association of bones
~
P24
Pi711
P35/1
P64/ 1
P57/1
Pl06jl
P125/1
P65/21
P59/5
P52
P141/1
P25/4
P39/2
Skull, neck, blade of right scapula,
ventral end of left scapula, both
coracoids and proximal ends of both
humeri
Right ilium, distal half of femur,
tibia, fibula and pes of right
hindlimb
Series of caudal vertebrae and
chevrons
Series of caudal vertebrae and
chevrons and distal ends of three
digits of right pes
Proximal end of fibula and distal
ends of three digits of the pes of a
right hindlimb
Right frontal
Right frontal
Right ectopterygoid
Right quadrate
Supraoccipital
Basioccipital
Ventral end of right scapula
Left coracoid
P19/7
P126/1
P6/ 1
P66/ 1
P22/1
P27/1
P39/3
PSljl
P82/2
P65/36
P50/4
P27/3
P24/1
P39/ I
P59/4
P65/25
P65/29
P6811
Left humerus
Proximal end of right pubis
Proximal end and shaft of right
fibula
Proximal end of right fibula
Phalanx
Phalanx
Large ungual, smaller ungual, two
small phalanges and distal end of a
larger phalanx
Cervical neural arch
Cervical neural arch
Cervical neural arch
Cervical neural arch
Half of centrum and posterior part of
neural arch of a cervical vertebra
Mid-caudal vertebra
Two mid-caudal vertebrae
Mid-caudal vertebra
Mid-caudal vertebra
Mid-caudal vertebra
Posterior caudal vertebra
PROSAUROPOD FROM S O U T H WALES
117
ABBREVIATIONS USED IN FIGURES
asur
An
ant.or.fen
Art
At
Ax
Bo
bpt.pro
Bs
rau.ce
ce
Cer
ch
CO
Cot1
Croc.Ul
D
Er t
EX
ext.man.fen
ext.na
f.V, f.VIII,
CXII
fmag
fen.ov
Fr
gl.fos
Hum
Hy
irr
ic.fen
J
L
La
articular surface for
angular
antorbital fenestra
articular
atlas
axis
basioccipital
basipterygoid process
basisphenoid
caudal centrum
centrum
cervical vertebra
choana
coracoid
concavity
crocodile ulna
dentary
ectopterygoid
exorcipital
external mandibular fenestra
external naris
foramina for cranial nerves V, 'I
and XI1
foramen magnum
fenestra ovalis
frontal
glenoid fossa
humerus
hyoid
intercentrum
infratemporal fenestra
La.duc
lat.wl
Iep.Fem
man.c
met&
MX
N
ne.ar
0.c
OP
or
P
par.pro
Pf
P1
Pmx
PO
postpl.fen
post.pro
Pr
Ps.ros
Pt
Pt.B
Q
Ql
R
Rb
S
SP
sq
st.fen
su
t
left
lacrimal
v
Vert
lacrimal duct
lateral wall of basisphenoid
lepidosaur femur
mandibular condyle
metotic fissure
maxilla
nasal
neural arch
occipital condyle
opisthotic
orbit
Parietal
paroccipital process
prefrontal
palatine
premaxilla
postorbital
postpalatine fer estra
posterior procers of basisphenoid
prootic
parasphenoid rostrum
pterygoid
pterygoid Aangi:
quadrate
quadratojugal
right
rib
supraoccipital
splenial
squamosal
supratemporal fenestra
surangular
tooth
vomer
vertebra