1996
DOI: 10.1016/s0016-7878(96)80004-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An important marine vertebrate-bearing locality from the Lower Kimmeridge Clay (Upper Jurassic) of Westbury, Wiltshire

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Marine reptile finds are also common towards the top of the formation (Taylor & Benton 1986 (Arkell 1933;Benton & Spencer 1995;Grange et al 1996).…”
Section: It Is Important To Note That the International Stage Boundarmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Marine reptile finds are also common towards the top of the formation (Taylor & Benton 1986 (Arkell 1933;Benton & Spencer 1995;Grange et al 1996).…”
Section: It Is Important To Note That the International Stage Boundarmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More details of the locality, stratigraphy, discovery and excavation of the Westbury pliosaurs are given by Taylor and Cruickshank (1993), Taylor et al . (1995), Grange et al . (1996) and Sassoon et al .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1). Although no formal description of BRSMG Cd6172 exists to date, the specimen has been referred to as ‘in all likelihood’ a specimen of Pliosaurus brachyspondylus on the basis of the ‘elongated mandibular symphysis’ (Grange et al . 1996, p. 112).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ischiopubis of Undorosaurus gorodischensis differs markedly from Ophthalmosaurus icenicus in its lack of distal fusion between the two bones, enclosing the obturator 'foramen' only proximally.DISCUSSIONOPHTHALMOSAURUS ICENICUS IN THE KIMMERIDGE CLAY?To date, there is no conclusive evidence for the presence of Ophthalmosaurus in the Kimmeridge Clay Formation of Britain. Records of this taxon have mostly been founded on humeral material, which, due to the number of more recently identified ophthalmosaurid taxa, is now non-diagnostic at this level (see the taxonomic discussion in Part 1 and Taxa invalida above;Fischer et al 2011).Cope (1967, p. 10) claimed to have found the anterior part of a skeleton of Ophthalmosaurus, and further remains have been found at Westbury(Grange et al 1996). Assignment of the material is not helped by its generally incomplete and often fragmentary nature.Perhaps the most likely example of Ophthalmosaurus is NHMUK PV 41237, from the Kimmeridge Clay Formation of Weymouth, which includes several skull elements that are consistent with the diagnosis for Ophthalmosaurus icenicus in Part 1; this does, however, represent a juvenile.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%