Early Miocene Paleobiology in Patagonia 2012
DOI: 10.1017/cbo9780511667381.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Paleobiology of Santacrucian native ungulates (Meridiungulata: Astrapotheria, Litopterna and Notoungulata)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
84
2
8

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 75 publications
(99 citation statements)
references
References 78 publications
5
84
2
8
Order By: Relevance
“…However, after exploring each model separately and applying second lower molar length (SLML), third lower molar length (TLML), and m1-3 length (LMRL) models, the body mass of the archaeopithecid is higher than that of N. adapinus and A. brachystephanus, but is still surpassed by the predicted mass values for T. obtentus and G. plicifera (Table 3). In summary, the body mass values obtained for Archaeopithecus rogeri fall within the range between 1.43 kg and 2.57 kg, overlapping the values for notopithecids (Table 3) and the hegetotheriids Pachyrukhos and Paedotherium (~2 kg, Cassini et al, 2012aCassini et al, , 2012bElissamburu, 2012), but below the body mass estimated for the interatheriinae Protypotherium australe (~8 kg, Scarano et al, 2011;Cassini et al, 2012a;3-5 kg, Cassini et al, 2012b;7 kg, Elissamburu, 2012). Indeed, the body mass estimates of the present study for Notopithecus and Archaeopithecus (Table 3) are very close to those previously reported by Elissamburu (2012, table 2).…”
Section: Vera-eocene Archeopithecids From Patagoniasupporting
confidence: 69%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, after exploring each model separately and applying second lower molar length (SLML), third lower molar length (TLML), and m1-3 length (LMRL) models, the body mass of the archaeopithecid is higher than that of N. adapinus and A. brachystephanus, but is still surpassed by the predicted mass values for T. obtentus and G. plicifera (Table 3). In summary, the body mass values obtained for Archaeopithecus rogeri fall within the range between 1.43 kg and 2.57 kg, overlapping the values for notopithecids (Table 3) and the hegetotheriids Pachyrukhos and Paedotherium (~2 kg, Cassini et al, 2012aCassini et al, , 2012bElissamburu, 2012), but below the body mass estimated for the interatheriinae Protypotherium australe (~8 kg, Scarano et al, 2011;Cassini et al, 2012a;3-5 kg, Cassini et al, 2012b;7 kg, Elissamburu, 2012). Indeed, the body mass estimates of the present study for Notopithecus and Archaeopithecus (Table 3) are very close to those previously reported by Elissamburu (2012, table 2).…”
Section: Vera-eocene Archeopithecids From Patagoniasupporting
confidence: 69%
“…P1 P2 P3 P4 M1 M2 M3 Specimen SW MD LL MD LL MD LL MD LL MD LL MD LL MD LL Mean values for each model and taxon, as well as the average total, are listed in Table 3. Additionally, the obtained values are compared with those previously inferred for archaeopithecids and notopithecines (Elissamburu, 2012;Vera, 2013b) and for other similar-sized notoungulates (Scarano et al, 2011;Cassini et al, 2012aCassini et al, , 2012bElissamburu, 2012 …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…The TPM includes rodents (Eocardia), notoungulates (Interatherium ), small marsupials (Palaeothentes ), cingulates (Prozaedyus , Stenotatus ), and primates (Homunculus) ). The fossorial capabilities suggested for C. patagonica , and the prey size inferred for the taxon agree with the possibility of preying on fossorial mammals (e.g., Pachyrukhos, Protypotherium, Hegetotherium , Interatherium ; Cassini et al 2012). Opportunist items, such as amphibians, reptiles, invertebrates, birds, and eggs, available on terrestrial and arboreal substrates should be also considered (Argot 2004b).…”
Section: Potential Predator-prey Relationshipsmentioning
confidence: 53%
“…counterpart and included therians (Eutheria and Metatheria represented by the crown groups and stem taxa) and survivors of Mesozoic lineages (Dryolestoidea; Rougier et al 2012). The mammalian association, other than predators, ranged in body masses from less than 20 g to greater than 1000 kg and were represented by endemic native ungulates (Astrapotheria, Notoungulata, and Litopterna; Cassini et al 2012), xenarthrans (Cingulata, Vermilingua, and Folivora; Bargo et al 2012;Vizcaíno et al 2012a), marsupials (Paucituberculata and Microbiotheria; Abello et al 2012), rodents (Caviomorpha; Candela et al 2012), and primates (Platyrrhini; Kay et al 2012a). The predator guild, feeding on vertebrates, was occupied by metatherians (Sparassodonta; Fig.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In size alone, they ranged from notoungulates no larger than rabbits (e.g., Pachyrukhos, ~2 kg; Cassini et al, 2012a) to rhino-sized astrapotheres (e.g., Parastrapotherium, ~2000 kg; Kramarz and Bond, 2008). In terms of taxonomic diversity, Notoungulata was the most successful of the SANU orders, followed by Litopterna with about a hundred species discriminated at present (Cifelli, 1983(Cifelli, , 1993Cifelli and Soria, 1983;Bond, 1986Bond, , 1999Bond et al, 1995Bond et al, , 2001Cifelli and Guerrero, 1997;Soria, 1981Soria, , 2001Scherer et al, 2009;Schmidt and Ferrero, 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%