Pelobatidae, Bonaparte, 1850
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.26879/1323 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11033563 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F52665-D049-FF95-FE27-9D2CFC18746E |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Pelobatidae |
| status |
|
Pelobatidae View in CoL indet.
Figure 19 View FIGURE 19 P-U
Material. Hambach 6C: one trunk vertebra (IPB-HaH 2220); one humerus (IPB-HaH 2399).
Discussion. IPB-HaH 2220 ( Figure 19 View FIGURE 19 P-S) is a moderately large-sized and procoelous trunk vertebra. It has a cylindrical centrum and a long neural arch, with a low carina neuralis and a well-developed posterior point. Transverse processes are broken off, but they were located under the prezygapophyses.
The humerus ( Figure 19 View FIGURE 19 T-U) is small, but preserves part of the diaphysis and part of the epiphysis. The eminentia capitata is shifted laterally. A shallow fossa cubitalis ventralis, which is open on the lateral side, is present. The epicondyles are missing. The cristae medialis and lateralis are not developed. On the dorsal side, the visible part of the olecranon scar is poorly marked.
Remarks. Following Bailon (1999), these two fossils can be assigned to pelobatids. This attribution is based on: vertebra procoelous, with a long neural arch, transverse processes located ventral to the prezygapophyses, a cylindrical centrum, and a well-developed posterior point; humerus with a laterally-open fossa cubitalis ventralis and maybe also lateral shift of the eminentia capitata. The absence of more taxonomically significant elements in the Miocene level of Hambach, however, hinders a discrimination of either Eopelobates or Pelobates .
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.