|
Perhaps you remember when I wrote the following in
my post on the birds of Russia and Mongolia (http://www.cmnh.org/fun/dinosaur-archive/2001Feb/msg00618.html)-
"The unnamed coracoids have actually been named by
Panteleev (1998), but I have yet to see the paper or hear about it on the list,
so I don't know what the names are. If anyone has the paper, I would be
interested to hear from you."
Well, thanks to Tommy Tyrberg I was able to obtain
the reference. Thanks Tommy! Also, thanks to Jaime Headden for
helping me translate it.
The reference in question is-
Panteleev, 1998. New species of enantiornithines
(Aves: Enantiornithes) from the Upper Cretaceous of Central Kyzylkum. Russkii
Ornitologicheskii Zhurnal. Ekspress-vy.pvsk 35: 3-15.
This is where several new species of
enantiornithine are described. Unfortunately, it's in Russian.
Luckily, with the help of Babelfish and Jaime, I was able to roughly translate
it to bring all of you the details.
Explorornis Panteleev 1998
Etymology- exploro- to find out; "discover
bird"
E. nessovi Panteleev 1998
Holotype- (PO 4819) distally incomplete coracoid
(glenoid surface to nearest edge of supracoracoid foramen- 3.5 mm)
Coniacian, Late Cretaceous
Bissekty Formation, Uzbekistan
Diagnosis- A diagnosis for this species is
difficult to write, as most differences from other taxa are gradational
differences in width, expansion, orientation, etc.. The coracoid process
is less prominent than other enantiornithines, but this may be due to
wear.
Description- Like Incolornis and Abavornis, this is
assigned to the Alexornithidae by Panteleev. Refer to my post on Russian
and Mongolian birds for why I don't agree with Kurochkin's classification
scheme. It is the type species of Explorornis. This is actually the
most complete specimen in the paper, consisting of a coracoid complete except
for the distolateral corner. It has a dorsal fossa, like Protopteryx,
enantiornithines and Apsaravis. It cannot be determined if the lateral
edge was convex. The convex scapular articulation shows it is an
enantiornithine. Other comparable enantiornithines have the following
distinguishing characteristics-
Abavornis- distal shaft more expanded medially;
midshaft convex laterally?
Alexornis- coracoid process more
prominent.
Catenoleimus- larger coracoid process.
Cathayornis? caudatus- shaft expands more
gradually; slightly convex distomedial edge.
Concornis- shaft expanded much more
distally.
Cruzy coracoid- dorsal fossa more extensive
proximally; distal shaft wider; distal area of articular surface projects
medially; coracoid process more prominent.
Cuspirostrisornis- shaft expands much less
medially.
Enantiornis- articular surface projects laterally;
proximal shaft narrower; supracoracoid nerve foramen placed more centrally and
proximally.
Eoalulavis- shaft more expanded
laterally.
Eoenantiornis- shaft much wider, not expanded
medially as much.
Explorornis? walkeri- ventral edge of head slightly
convex, not concave; larger, bulbous coracoid process; mid-shaft convex
laterally.
Gurilynia- head more angled; coracoid process more
prominent; ventral acrocoracoid convexity placed further distally; articular
surface wider.
Iberomesornis- distally wider; head
narrower.
Incolornis silvae- shaft deeper; shaft less
medially expanded; small dorsal bump below articular surface.
Incolornis? martini- distal area of articular
surface projects laterally; more prominent coracoid process; small dorsal bump
below articular surface.
Largirostrisornis- head oriented
proximomedially(?); distomedial(?) edge extremely convex.
Liaoxiornis- head narrower; shaft expands more
laterally, less medially.
Longchengornis- shaft wider, expanded more
medially; head narrower.
Nanantius? valifanovi- shaft narrower; ventral
portion of head angled laterally, projecting laterally from shaft; coracoid
process more prominent.
Neuquenornis- shaft narrower, much less expanded
medially; laterally convex on midshaft; supracoracoid foramen placed more
proximally.
Spanish nestling- shaft much wider.
I lack the references to compare Lingyuanornis,
Sinornis and Cathayornis yandica to Explorornis nessovi.
Note that comparisons to most species are
difficult, as most European and Chinese specimens are only visible as ventral
outlines, while many Mongolian and Russian specimens are incomplete.
Without a phylogenetic framework to provide meaning to the above differences, if
any, it is difficult and inadvisable to place Explorornis more specifically
within the Enantiornithines.
Explorornis? walkeri (Nessov and Panteleev
1993)
= Enantiornis walkeri Nessov and Panteleev
1993
Holotype- (PO 4825) proximal coracoid (glenoid
surface to nearest edge of supracoracoid foramen- 6.5 mm)
Coniacian, Late Cretaceous
Bissekty Formation, Uzbekistan
Diagnosis- The ventrally convex coracoid head distinguishes this from most
taxa, except possibly Neuquenornis.
Description- This species is based on the proximal half of a coracoid,
which makes comparison more difficult than in E. nessovi. The lateral edge
is slightly convex and the articular surface convex, showing it is an
enantiornithine.
Alexornis- head concave ventrally; coracoid process
narrower.
Catenoleimus- shaft deeper.
Concornis- head projects
proximomedially?
Cruzy coracoid- distal area of articular
surface projects medially; coracoid process more prominent; head concave
ventrally.
Enantiornis- articular surface projects laterally;
shaft laterally concave at midlength.
Eoenantiornis- shaft much more expanded
laterally.
Explorornis nessovi- ventral edge concave; less
prominent coracoid process; mid-shaft not convex laterally.
Gurilynia- head more angled; coracoid process more
prominent, pointed; head concave ventrally; articular surface
wider.
Iberomesornis- mid-shaft not convex
laterally.
Incolornis silvae- proximal shaft deeper; small
dorsal bump below articular surface.
Incolornis? martini- distal area of articular
surface projects laterally; small dorsal bump below articular surface; head
concave ventrally.
Largirostrisornis- head oriented
proximomedially(?); head very pointed.
Liaoxiornis- head narrower; mid-shaft
not convex laterally.
Longchengornis- head narrower; mid-shaft
not convex laterally.
Nanantius? valifanovi- ventral portion of head
angled laterally, projecting laterally from shaft; coracoid process more
pointed; head concave ventrally.
Neuquenornis- no major differences, but only the
mid-section of the shafts can be compared.
Spanish nestling- mid-shaft not convex
laterally.
This specimen differs from most taxa because of its ventrally convex
head. Neuquenornis might share this however, and is very close in
proportion where they can be compared. So, I might provisionally assign
Explorornis? walkeri to the Avisauridae (Neuquenornis+Avisaurus) and separate it
from Explorornis, as I know of no uniquely shared characters between the two
species. The lack of a prominent lateral projection of the head is seen in
both Explorornis species, but is also present in a few other enantiornithines
(see below). However, the resemblence of E? walkeri to
Neuquenornis is only based on the shape of the mid-coracoid shaft and
possible presence of a ventrally convex head in Neuquenornis. Also,
although the translated diagnosis for Explorornis doesn't seem to have any good
reasons for placing the two in the same genus, Panteleev might have some that
didn't translate well. So I recommend calling this species Explorornis?
walkeri for now. E? sp.
Material- (PO 4818) incomplete coracoid (glenoid surface to nearest edge of
supracoracoid foramen- 2.3 mm)
Coniacian, Late Cretaceous
Bissekty Formation, Uzbekistan
Description- This is based on an incomplete coracoid lacking the proximal
part of the head and the distomedial corner. The fact it is only figured
in oblique views makes it difficult to compare to the other Explorornis
specimens. However, it does seem to have a wider shaft than both
and a more laterodistally expanded shaft than E. nessovi. The
laterally convex shaft and dorsal fossa suggest it is
enantiornithine. I can't identify any unique characters shared by this an
Explorornis, so I don't know if it should be referred to the genus.
E? sp.
Material- (PO 4817) proximal coracoid (glenoid surface to nearest edge of
dorsal fossa- ~5.3 mm)
Coniacian, Late Cretaceous
Bissekty Formation, Uzbekistan
Description- This coracoid is not figured, but Panteleev says it resembles
E? walkeri more than E. nessovi or the other Explorornis species. This
makes me more hesitant to refer it to Explorornis than the above species.
Incolornis Panteleev 1998
Etymology- incola- inhabitant; "inhabitant bird"
Diagnosis- very deep coracoid shaft (>40% of proximodistal head length);
proximodorsal coracoid bump.
I. silvae Panteleev 1998
Etymology- silva- forest; "bird inhabiting the forest"
Holotype- (PO 4604) proximal coracoid (glenoid surface to nearest edge of
supracoracoid foramen- 2.6 mm)
Coniacian, Late Cretaceous
Bissekty Formation, Uzbekistan
Diagnosis- proximodorsal coracoid bump placed further distally.
Description- This is based on a coracoid lacking the proximal part of the
head and the distal fourth or so. The lateral edge is slightly convex and
the articular surface is convex, so this is an enantiornithine. I can't
make out a dorsal fossa, but this could simply be due the photocopy
quality.
Abavornis- distal shaft more expanded medially,
less expanded laterally.
Alexornis- coracoid process narrower; shaft
shallower.
Catenoleimus- shallower shaft; no proximodorsal
bump.
Cathayornis? caudatus- shaft expands more
medially.
Concornis- shaft more expanded
distally.
Cruzy coracoid- distal shaft wider; distal
area of articular surface projects medially; coracoid process more prominent;
shallower shaft; no proximodorsal bump.
Cuspirostrisornis- shaft concave
laterodistally.
Enantiornis- shaft more expanded
laterally.
Eoalulavis- shaft more expanded
laterally.
Eoenantiornis- shaft much more expanded
laterally.
Explorornis nessovi- shaft shallower; shaft more medially expanded; no
proximodorsal bump.
Explorornis? walkeri- larger, bulbous coracoid
process; mid-shaft convex laterally; shaft shallower; no proximodorsal
bump.
Gurilynia- coracoid process more prominent; shaft
narrower and shallower; no proximodorsal bump.
Iberomesornis- distally wider.
Incolornis martini- proximodorsal bump placed more
proximally.
Largirostrisornis- head oriented
proximomedially(?); distomedial(?) edge extremely convex.
Liaoxiornis- head narrower; shaft expands more
laterally.
Longchengornis- shaft wider. head
narrower.
Nanantius? valifanovi- ventral portion of head
angled laterally, projecting laterally from shaft; coracoid process more
prominent; shaft shallower; no proximodorsal bump.
Neuquenornis- no proximodorsal bump.
Spanish nestling- shaft much wider.
This coracoid shows a distinctive proximodorsal bump, visible in lateral
view, right below the head. This feature is unknown in other
enantiornithines, but seems to be present in I. martini, suggesting they are
referrable to the same genus. Another distinguishing feature of this genus
is the extreme dorsoventral depth of the shaft, being over forty percent the
length of the head along the articular surface. Further consideration of
this genus' phylogenetic placement will be given below. I. martini (Nessov and Panteleev 1993)
= Enantiornis martini Nessov and Panteleev 1993
Holotype- (PO 4609) proximal fragment of coracoid
Coniacian, Late Cretaceous
Bissekty Formation, Uzbekistan
Description- This is only known from the very proximal end of a
coracoid. The convex articular surface shows it is enantiornithine, and as
noted above, it shares some characters with Incolornis silvae.
Alexornis- coracoid process narrower; shaft
shallower.
Catenoleimus- shallower shaft; no proximodorsal
bump.
Cruzy coracoid- distal area of articular
surface projects medially; coracoid process more prominent; shallower shaft; no
proximodorsal bump.
Enantiornis- head medially convex.
Explorornis nessovi- shaft shallower; no proximodorsal bump; head not
laterally convex.
Explorornis? walkeri- ventral edge convex; larger,
bulbous coracoid process; mid-shaft convex laterally; shaft shallower; no
proximodorsal bump; head not laterally convex.
Gurilynia- coracoid process more prominent; shaft
shallower; no proximodorsal bump.
Incolornis silvae- proximodorsal bump placed more
proximally.
Largirostrisornis- head oriented
proximomedially(?).
Nanantius? valifanovi- coracoid process more
prominent; shaft shallower; no proximodorsal bump.
Neuquenornis- no proximodorsal bump.
This specimen is very similar to I. silvae, differing only in the slightly
more proximally placed proximodorsal bump. Such a difference is of
questionable taxonomic significance and I think there is a strong possibility
the two are synonymous, which would make this the senior synonym to I.
silvae. However, such a synonymization shouldn't be done without more
study. As for the phylogenetic placement of Incolornis, the laterally
projecting head is known in this genus, Enantiornis, Gurilynia, Nanantius?
valifanovi and the Cruzy coracoid. It is not seen in Explorornis nessovi,
Explorornis? walkeri or a Lecho enantiornithine (PVL-4029). Among
more poorly figured species, it seems to be present in Eoenantiornis, Concornis
and the Spanish hatchling. It seems to absent in Iberomesornis,
Largirostrisornis and Longchengornis. The presence of this character in
Protopteryx would suggest it is plesiomorphic and does not indicate much about
the position of Incolornis. Therefore, I suggest Incolornis be placed in
the Enantiornithines without trying to put it in a more specific
clade. Abavornis Panteleev 1998
Etymology- abavus- great-great-grandfather; "great-great-grandfather
bird"
A. bonaparti Panteleev 1998
Etymology- after Jose Bonaparte, famous Argentinian paleontologist;
"Bonaparte's great-great-grandfather bird"
Holotype- (TsNIGRI 56/11915) coracoid shaft (glenoid surface to nearest
edge of supracoracoid foramen- 3.1 mm)
Coniacian, Late Cretaceous
Bissekty Formation, Uzbekistan
Description- This is based on the middle portion of a coracoid, lacking
almost all of the head, as well as the distal shaft. The lateral edge is
convex and there is a dorsal fossa, suggesting it is enantiornithine.
Cathayornis? caudatus- shaft expands more
laterally, much less medially.
Concornis- shaft much more expanded
laterally.
Cruzy coracoid- shaft more expanded
laterally.
Cuspirostrisornis- shaft more expanded laterally,
less medially.
Enantiornis- shaft more expanded laterally, less
medially; supracoracoid nerve foramen placed more centrally and
proximally.
Eoalulavis- shaft more expanded
laterally.
Eoenantiornis- shaft much wider, expanded more
medially, less laterally.
Explorornis nessovi- distal shaft less expanded medially; midshaft not
convex laterally.
Iberomesornis- shaft more expanded
laterally.
Incolornis silvae- shaft more expanded laterally,
less medially.
Liaoxiornis- shaft more expanded
laterally.
Longchengornis- shaft more expanded
laterally.
Nanantius? valifanovi- shaft more expanded
laterally, less medially.
Neuquenornis- shaft more expanded laterally, less
medially; supracoracoid foramen placed more proximally.
Spanish nestling- shaft more expanded
laterally.
The lack of a head or lateral/medial views makes this specimen difficult to
compare to others in way besides it's amount of expansion. Still, the
combination of a highly divergent distomedial edge and a distolateral edge than
actually angles inward looks unique. Where this belongs within the
Enantiornithines is currently unknown. A. sp.
Material- (PO 4605) coracoid shaft
Coniacian, Late Cretaceous
Bissekty Formation, Uzbekistan
Description- This is based off the distal part of a coracoid, missing the
distolateral corner. It closely resembles Avabornis bonaparti, but the
lateral edge is straight, not angled inward distally. Perhaps the edge of
A. bonaparti is broken.
Catenoleimus Panteleev 1998
Etymology- catena- lineage, leimma- remainder; "remainder of a
lineage"
C. anachoretus Panteleev 1998
Etymology- anachoretes- recluse; "reclusive remainder of a lineage"
Holotype- (PO 4606) coracoid shaft (glenoid surface to nearest edge of
supracoracoid foramen- 3.2 mm)
Coniacian, Late Cretaceous
Bissekty Formation, Uzbekistan
Description- This is based on perhaps the crappiest holotype of any
Mesozoic theropod. Said to be the middle section of a coracoid shaft,
Jaime guessed it was a proximal femur. Then we mistranslated it to be a
proximal metatarsal and easily believed it until we read the description.
I suppose if it had to be a left coracoid shaft in medial view, it isn't deep
like Incolornis and has a good-sized rounded coracoid process. I can't see
a fossa in the dorsal view and I seriously doubt such a fragment could be
certainly identified as an enantiornithine. Panteleev places this in
Enantiornithines incertae sedis. I would say Pygostylia incertae sedis, if
not indet.. Panteleev says the head is oriented differently than other
enantiornithines, but without knowing what edges are broken, I have a hard time
agreeing with him. For now, I'll trust his actual experience with the
specimen and recommend keeping it Pygostylia incertae sedis.
Enantiornithines indet.
Material- (PO 4821) proximal coracoid
Coniacian, Late Cretaceous
Bissekty Formation, Uzbekistan
Description- A distal coracoid, shaft expanded strongly in one
direction (medial or lateral). Possibly best labeled as Pygostylia
indet..
Anyone who wants the page of figures, just ask offlist.
Mickey
Mortimer |