2

Brochu (1996) concluded that crown group crocodylians have a caudal to cranial pattern of suture closure, not cranial to caudal as you state here. Likewise, Irmis (2007) observed the caudal to cranial pattern in phytosaurs.

Given that all your vertebrae preserved vertebrae are from the dorsal portion of the column and all have open sutures, I don't see how you can conclude one way or anot...

read more, vote or answer

waiting for moderation
Ask a question about this section

Postcranial anatomy of Pissarrachampsa sera (Crocodyliformes, Baurusuchidae) from the Late Cretaceous of Brazil: insights on lifestyle and phylogenetic significance

View article
PeerJ

Main article text

 

Introduction

Material and Methods

Systematic paleontology

Field work permit

Additional information

Description

Axial skeleton

Dorsal vertebrae

The suture line between the neural arch and the vertebral centrum is clearly distinguishable in the best preserved isolated vertebra, and it is very likely that the neurocentral suture was also not completely closed in the dorsal vertebrae of the articulated series. Brochu (1996) proposed a cranial to caudal closure pattern of this suture for the crown-group Crocodylia, so that juveniles retain the suture opened in caudal presacral vertebrae. Irmis (2007) observed a similar pattern in phytosaurs and tentatively suggested it is typical of members of the Pseudosuchia lineage, but not of the Avemetatarsalia lineage. However, after analyzing dorsal vertebrae of Notosuchus terrestris, Pol (2005) commented that this pattern described in Brochu (1996) might not be valid for Crocodyliformes outside the Crocodylia clade, such as Pissarrachampsa sera. As the vertebrae described here belong to the holotype, which is likely a mature specimen based on comparisons to smaller specimens from the type locality, our results reinforce the inference of Pol (2005). Finally, Ikejiri (2012) showed that sutures of presacral vertebrae remain opened even in some very mature extant alligators, and Bailleul et al. (2016) have demonstrated that addressing the stage of maturity of archosaurian specimens based on the level of sutural closure in the skull can be misleading. In this context, vertebral sutural closure should not be used as the single factor when inferring the stage of maturity in crocodyliforms.

Appendicular skeleton

Forelimb

Ulna.
Radius.
Carpus.
Manus.

Pelvic girdle

Ilium.
Ischium.
Pubis.

Hindlimb

Femur.
Tibia.
Fibula.
Tarsus.
Pes.

Results and Discussion

Body size and mass estimates of Pissarrachampsa sera

Terrestriality in Pissarrachampsa sera

The lack of osteoderms in Pissarrachampsa sera

Phylogenetic analysis and the significance of postcranial characters in Crocodyliformes phylogeny

Conclusions

Supplemental Information

Body size and mass estimations and details of the phylogenetic analyses

DOI: 10.7717/peerj.2075/supp-1

Phylogenetic matrices

Matrices used for phylogenetic analyses in this study, including the exploratory analyses (nexus format).

DOI: 10.7717/peerj.2075/supp-2

Additional Information and Declarations

Competing Interests

The authors declare there are no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Pedro L. Godoy and Mario Bronzati conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, wrote the paper, prepared figures and/or tables, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Estevan Eltink, Júlio C. de A. Marsola and Giovanne M. Cidade contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, wrote the paper, prepared figures and/or tables.

Max C. Langer contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Felipe C. Montefeltro conceived and designed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, wrote the paper, prepared figures and/or tables, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Data Availability

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

The raw data is available as Supplemental Information.

Funding

PLG is supported by a “University of Birmingham-CAPES (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior) Joint Scholarship” (grant number: 3581-14-4), and was also funded by the “Doris O. and Samuel P. Welles Research Fund” to visit the University of California Museum of Paleontology, Berkeley and received additional support from the University of Birmingham. MB is supported by a “Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)—“Ciência sem Fronteiras” Scholarship” (grant number: 246610/2012-3). EE, JCAM, GMC, MCL and FCM were supported by grants from “FAPESP (São Paulo Research Foundation)” (grant numbers: 2008/57642-6; 2009/54656-9; 2013/06811-0; 2013/23114-1; 2013/04516-1; 2014/03825-3) and were funded by the “Programa de Pós-Graduação em Biologia Comparada, FFCLRP-USP”. FCM was also supported by grants from the “Programa Doutorando com Estágio no Exterior, CAPES” (grant number 1275/10-0), “Brazil Visiting Fellows Scheme of the University of Birmingham,” and “Primeiros Projetos PROPe UNESP #730”. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

56 Citations 12,240 Views 1,348 Downloads