ON PLESIOCETUS VAN BENEDEN, 1859 (MAMMALIA, CETACEA, MYSTICETI)

IF 1.6 3区 地球科学 Q2 GEOLOGY Rivista Italiana Di Paleontologia E Stratigrafia Pub Date : 2021-06-08 DOI:10.13130/2039-4942/15745
Michelangelo Bisconti, Mark Bosselaers
{"title":"ON PLESIOCETUS VAN BENEDEN, 1859 (MAMMALIA, CETACEA, MYSTICETI)","authors":"Michelangelo Bisconti, Mark Bosselaers","doi":"10.13130/2039-4942/15745","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A new analysis of the “type” Plesiocetus collection established by Van Beneden in the 19th century is performed to provide an updated taxonomy of this genus. Plesiocetus was established based on isolated finds that were assembled together to reconstruct almost complete skeletons of four species: P. brialmontii, P. dubius, P. hupschii, and P. burtinii. Plesiocetus has then been used by different authors in taxonomic studies of mysticete faunas and became a taxonomic wastebasked that is now in critical need of revision. Unfortunately, the diagnosis of Plesiocetus provided by Van Beneden does not allow to distinguish it from other mysticete taxa. For this reason, the analysis of all the specimens that Van Beneden assigned to Plesiocetus was necessary to understand the characters of the genus. The revision was done through a comparative anatomical analysis of all the specimens. The results of this work revealed that, among the specimens used by Van Beneden to set Plesiocetus, there is a variety of individuals that must be assigned to different genera in several families. Specimens were assigned to Cetotheriidae, basal thalassotherians, Balaenoidea, Balaenidae, Balaenopteroidea and Balaenopteridae. All the specimens are assigned to gen. et sp. indet. because of their lack of taxonomically-informative characters. The conclusion of this study is that Plesiocetus is a nomen dubium and must be abandoned by mysticete taxonomists. This result has important taxonomic implications for a number of specimens previously assigned to Plesiocetus. We reviewed all these specimens and provided new taxonomic interpretations.","PeriodicalId":54451,"journal":{"name":"Rivista Italiana Di Paleontologia E Stratigrafia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rivista Italiana Di Paleontologia E Stratigrafia","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13130/2039-4942/15745","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

A new analysis of the “type” Plesiocetus collection established by Van Beneden in the 19th century is performed to provide an updated taxonomy of this genus. Plesiocetus was established based on isolated finds that were assembled together to reconstruct almost complete skeletons of four species: P. brialmontii, P. dubius, P. hupschii, and P. burtinii. Plesiocetus has then been used by different authors in taxonomic studies of mysticete faunas and became a taxonomic wastebasked that is now in critical need of revision. Unfortunately, the diagnosis of Plesiocetus provided by Van Beneden does not allow to distinguish it from other mysticete taxa. For this reason, the analysis of all the specimens that Van Beneden assigned to Plesiocetus was necessary to understand the characters of the genus. The revision was done through a comparative anatomical analysis of all the specimens. The results of this work revealed that, among the specimens used by Van Beneden to set Plesiocetus, there is a variety of individuals that must be assigned to different genera in several families. Specimens were assigned to Cetotheriidae, basal thalassotherians, Balaenoidea, Balaenidae, Balaenopteroidea and Balaenopteridae. All the specimens are assigned to gen. et sp. indet. because of their lack of taxonomically-informative characters. The conclusion of this study is that Plesiocetus is a nomen dubium and must be abandoned by mysticete taxonomists. This result has important taxonomic implications for a number of specimens previously assigned to Plesiocetus. We reviewed all these specimens and provided new taxonomic interpretations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关于范贝内登蛇颈龙,1859年(哺乳动物、鲸目动物、神秘动物)
对Van Beneden在19世纪建立的“类型”蛇颈龙属进行了新的分析,以提供该属的最新分类。Plesiocetus是根据单独的发现建立的,这些发现被组装在一起,重建了四个物种的几乎完整的骨骼:P.brialmontii、P.dubius、P.hupschii和P.burtinii。蛇颈龙后来被不同的作者用于神秘动物的分类学研究,并成为一种分类学上的废物,现在急需修订。不幸的是,Van Beneden提供的蛇颈龙的诊断无法将其与其他神秘分类群区分开来。因此,对Van Beneden分配给蛇颈龙属的所有标本进行分析对于了解蛇颈龙的特征是必要的。翻修是通过对所有标本的比较解剖分析完成的。这项工作的结果表明,在Van Beneden用来设置蛇颈龙的标本中,有各种各样的个体必须被分配到几个科的不同属。标本被分为喜树科、基底丘脑亚目、Balaenoidea、Balaenidae、Balaenopteroidea和Balaenopterodae。所有标本均归属于gen.et sp.indet。因为它们缺乏提供分类学信息的特征。这项研究的结论是,蛇颈龙是一个名词dubium,必须被神秘主义分类学家抛弃。这一结果对以前被分配到蛇颈龙属的许多标本具有重要的分类学意义。我们回顾了所有这些标本,并提供了新的分类学解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.30%
发文量
28
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia was founded in 1895. It publishes original papers dealing with all fields of paleontology and of stratigraphy, from Italy and the Mediterranean to the Tethys, as well across the globe from China to North America.
期刊最新文献
NEW ACROPOMATIFORM FOSSILS FROM THE UPPER KUEICHULIN FORMATION (LOWER PLIOCENE), NORTHERN TAIWAN REVISITING THE CRETACEOUS LUNGFISH ATLANTOCERATODUS IHERINGI (AMEGHINO 1898) FROM THE MATA AMARILLA FORMATION (ARGENTINA) WITH COMMENTS ON TOOTH PLATES HISTOLOGY FIRST REPORT ON THE UPPERMOST PERMIAN OSTRACODS FROM THE MASORE SECTION (EXTERNAL DINARIDES), SLOVENIA EOCENE STALKED CRINOIDS IN THE GENUS ISSELICRINUS (ECHINODERMATA, CRINOIDEA, ISOCRINIDA) FROM NORTHEASTERN ITALY NEW REPORT OF DECAPOD AND ISOPOD CRUSTACEANS FROM THE LOWERMIDDLE PLEISTOCENE OF MONTALBANO JONICO, MATERA (BASILICATA, SOUTHERN ITALY)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1