1941
DOI: 10.2475/ajs.239.11.836
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Carboniferous dipnoans from Nova Scotia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…). The distinction between Sagenodus and Ctenodus can be somewhat blurred (see for example the debate surrounding ‘ Sagenodus ’ plicatus : Dawson ; Romer and Smith ; Sternberg ; Baird ; Schultze and Chorn ), but in general the two are differentiated by radiation being weak or absent in the tooth ridges of the former (Schultze and Chorn ). Sagenodus is only distinguishable from the closely related Straitonia (Upper Carboniferous of Midlothian, Scotland) by the arrangement of the dermal bones of the skull (Thomson ); the dentition of Straitonia is unknown, but generally assumed to be similar to that of Sagenodus (Thomson ; Campbell and Barwick , ), so it cannot be excluded that the specimens described here belong to Straitonia .…”
Section: Family Sagenodontidae Woodward Genus ?Sagenodus Owen ?Samentioning
confidence: 99%
“…). The distinction between Sagenodus and Ctenodus can be somewhat blurred (see for example the debate surrounding ‘ Sagenodus ’ plicatus : Dawson ; Romer and Smith ; Sternberg ; Baird ; Schultze and Chorn ), but in general the two are differentiated by radiation being weak or absent in the tooth ridges of the former (Schultze and Chorn ). Sagenodus is only distinguishable from the closely related Straitonia (Upper Carboniferous of Midlothian, Scotland) by the arrangement of the dermal bones of the skull (Thomson ); the dentition of Straitonia is unknown, but generally assumed to be similar to that of Sagenodus (Thomson ; Campbell and Barwick , ), so it cannot be excluded that the specimens described here belong to Straitonia .…”
Section: Family Sagenodontidae Woodward Genus ?Sagenodus Owen ?Samentioning
confidence: 99%
“…NBMG 10740 shows more prominent separated apices than C. cristatus (Sharp & Clack , fig. 2) and C. murchisoni (Sternberg , figs 1–3). These prominent apices are similar to C. interruptus (see Sharp & Clack , figs 5, 14).…”
Section: Systematic Palaeontologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Gardiner () erroneously transferred C. cristatus without explanation to the lungfish genus Sagenodus . Presumably he had confused Ctenoptychius cristatus with Ctenodus cristatus Agassiz (), which was identified by Sternberg () as a junior synonym of Sagenodus cristatus . To complicate matters further, Conchodus plicatus (= Ctenodus or Sagenodus ; Schultze and Chorn ; see also below) from Joggins was also discussed in those papers.…”
Section: Historical Review Of Dawson's Speciesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although figured under the name Conchodus plicatus , Dawson () offered no justification for placing it in a new species, merely stating that it ‘appears to belong to M'Coy's genus Conchodus’ (p. 209). Dawson's specimen was transferred to Ctenodus by Woodward () and then to Sagenodus by Sternberg (), in each case retaining the plicatus species epithet. Baird () argued that the specimen was too fragmentary for species‐level identification, and dismissed Sagenodus plicatus as a nomen vanum .…”
Section: Historical Review Of Dawson's Speciesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation