Visitors   Views   Downloads
NOT PEER-REVIEWED
"PeerJ Preprints" is a venue for early communication or feedback before peer review. Data may be preliminary.

Supplemental Information

Figure 1: The location of Comb Ridge in the state of Utah. Modified from Gay and St. Aude (2015)

The location of Comb Ridge (star) within the state of Utah. San Juan County is highlighted. Modified from Gay and St. Aude (2015).

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-1

Figure 2: Tetrapod tooth in situ at The Hills Have Teeth (MNA locality 1724), showing the lithology of the fossil-bearing layer

Small, unidentified tetrapod in the field in May 2015 showing the lithology of the fossil-bearing layer at The Hills Have Teeth. Site is dominated by gray-white mudstone with carbonaceous clasts.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-2

Figure 3: Photographs of MNA V10668

MNA V10668 in A) lingual, B) labial, C) distal, D) mesial, E) apical, and F) basal views. Ap, apex; RP, resorption pit. Scale bar = 1 mm.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-3

Figure 4: Interpretive line drawing of MNA V10668

Interpretive line drawing of MNA V10668 in A) lingual, B) labial, C) distal, D) mesial, E) apical, and F) basal views. In A-D, dark gray represents missing enamel, light gray represents a resorption pit. In E and F no missing enamel is figured; dark gray represents worn apex, light gray represents resorption pit. Ap, apex; RP, resorption pit. Scale bar = 1 mm.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-4

Figure 5: Juvenile phytosaur jaws

Juvenile phytosaur jaws. Top: PEFO 13890/MNA V1789, Macheroprosopus zunii premaxillae in A) ventral view. Bottom: MNA V3601 right dentary in B) lateral C) dorsal views. Stars show locations of selected teeth figured in Figures 6, 7, and 8.TC, tooth crowns; A, alveoli. Scale bar = 1 cm.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-5

Figure 6: Unerupted juvenile phytosaur tooth crown

An unerupted tooth crown from a juvenile phytosaur, PEFO 13890/MNA V1789 showing distinct symmetrical tooth crown profile and lack of serrations. A, alveolus; TC, tooth crown. Scale bar = 1 mm.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-6

Figure 7: Juvenile phytosaur dentary teeth

Close-up view of two erupted dentary teeth in the posterior portion of MNA V3601 in lateral view. Teeth are tall and conical in labiolingual and mesiodistal profiles. Teeth are also unserrated. TC, tooth crown. Scale bar = 1 mm.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-7

Figure 8: juvenile phytosaur terminal dentary teeth

Anteriormost erupted and broken tooth crowns from MNA V3601 in dorsal view showing rounded base of crown and rounded alveoli. Both tooth fragments do not possess serrations. A, alveoli; BTC, broken tooth crown. Scale bar = 1 mm.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-8

Editor Decision - Revision

The "revise and resubmit" decision from the academic editor, Matt Wedel, on August 25th.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-9

Reviewer 1 - Revision Letter

This is the summary letter that Reviewer 1 wrote to accompany the annotated manuscript for the "revise and resubmit" decision we received on August 25th.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-10

Sterling Nesbitt - Revision Letter

This is the summary letter that Sterling Nesbitt wrote to accompany the annotated manuscript for the "revise and resubmit" decision we received on August 25th.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-11

Reviewer 1 Annotated Manuscript - Revision

Submitted manuscript annotated by Reviewer 1, received on August 25th.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-12

Sterling Nesbitt Annotated Manuscript - Revision

Submitted manuscript annotated by Sterling Nesbitt, received on August 25th.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-13

Authors' Rebuttal Letter

Our response to the "revise and resubmit" decision of August 25th.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-14

Editor Decision - Rejection

The "reject" decision from the academic editor, Matt Wedel, on October 21st.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-15

Reviewer 1 - Rejection Letter

This is the summary letter that Reviewer 1 wrote to accompany the annotated manuscript for the "reject" decision we received on October 21st.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-16

Sterling Nesbitt - Rejection Letter

This is the summary letter that Sterling Nesbitt wrote to accompany the annotated manuscript for the "reject" decision we received on October 21st.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-17

Reviewer 1 Annotated Manuscript - Reject

Submitted manuscript annotated by Reviewer 1, received on October 21st.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-18

Sterling Nesbitt Annotated Manuscript - Reject

Submitted manuscript annotated by Sterling Nesbitt, received on October 21st.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.1110v3/supp-19

Additional Information

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Andres Lopez analyzed the data, wrote the paper.

Isabella St. Aude performed the experiments, analyzed the data, wrote the paper.

David Alderete analyzed the data, wrote the paper.

David Alvarez performed the experiments, analyzed the data, wrote the paper.

Hannah Aultman analyzed the data, wrote the paper.

Dominique Busch performed the experiments, analyzed the data, wrote the paper.

Rogelio Bustamante performed the experiments, analyzed the data, wrote the paper.

Leah Cirks performed the experiments, analyzed the data, wrote the paper.

Martin Lopez analyzed the data, wrote the paper.

Adriana Moncada performed the experiments, analyzed the data, wrote the paper.

Elizabeth Ortega performed the experiments, analyzed the data, wrote the paper.

Carlos Verdugo performed the experiments, analyzed the data, wrote the paper.

Robert J Gay 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.

Field Study Permissions

The following information was supplied relating to field study approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):

Bureau of Land Management permit UT14-001S - not for work on living animals or plants.

Data Deposition

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

The research in this article did not generate any raw data.

Funding

The authors received no funding for this work.

Feedback on other revisions


Add your feedback

Before adding feedback, consider if it can be asked as a question instead, and if so then use the Question tab. Pointing out typos is fine, but authors are encouraged to accept only substantially helpful feedback.

Some Markdown syntax is allowed: _italic_ **bold** ^superscript^ ~subscript~ %%blockquote%% [link text](link URL)
 
By posting this you agree to PeerJ's commenting policies