Crax sp.

Nascimento, Rafael S. & Silveira, Luís Fábio, 2024, Fossil and subfossil birds of Brazil, Zoologia (e 23079) 41, pp. 1-234 : 104-110

293. Crax sp.

Quaternary – MG

Crax ? [in part] – Lund (in Winge 1887): 24.

Crax sp. 1 vel 2 – Winge 1887: 24.

“uma ou duas [especies] de Crax ” – Goeldi 1894: 440.

Crax sp. – Lambrecht 1933: 752.

Crax fasciolata – Brodkorb 1964: 306.

Crax fasciolata – Mones 1986: 85.

Crax fasciolata – Cuello 1988: 40–41.

Crax sp. – Nascimento and Silveira 2020: 490.

Winge (1887) described material he considered to be one or two Crax species. From Lapa da Escrivânia V, a coracoid, the proximal and distal ends of a tibiotarsus, and part of a tarsometatarsus, all larger than in a recent skeleton. From Lapa da Escrivânia XI, part of the proximal end of a humerus and a tibiotarsus (approximately the same size as the one from Lapa da Escrivânia V). From Lapa do Capão Seco, a humerus (“ Crax ?” in Lund’s catalog) and a tibiotarsus, of similar size to that observed in recent skeletons (although the humerus is more robust) but considerably smaller than the material of the other caves. Finally, from “various caves” [26], the distal end of an ulna, slightly larger than in recent skeletons. Only two recent skeletons with a similar size were available for comparison but without a reliable identification of the species.

Odontophoridae Gould Odontophorus Vieillot 294. Odontophorus capueira (Spix)

Quaternary – MG, RS

Perdix dentata [in part] – Lund 1841d: 18.

Perdix [?; in part] – Giebel 1846: 312.

“Überreste einer der P. dentata nah verwandten Art” [in part]

– Giebel 1847: 23.

Perdix [in part] – Pictet 1853: 415.

“les Perdix ” [in part] – Liais 1872: 303.

Perdix aff. dentatae [in part] – Lund (in Winge 1887): 24. Odontophorus dentatus – Winge 1887: 24–25.

Odontophorus dentatus – Goeldi 1894: 440.

Odontophorus dentatus – Lambrecht 1933: 752.

Odontophorus gujanensis – Brodkorb 1964: 327.

Odontophorus gujanensis [ Odontophorus dentatus ] – Mones 1986: 85–86.

Odontophorus gujanensis – Cuello 1988: 41.

Odontophorus gujanensis (= O. dentatus ) – Tambussi and Noriega 1996: 251.

Odontophorus capueira – Nascimento and Silveira 2020: 490.

Winge (1887) reported remains from various sites. From Lapa da Escrivânia V, a tarsometatarsus. From Lapa do Marinho II, two paired humeri and two tibiotarsi. From Lapa do Periperi I, a coracoid and an ulna. From Lapa Vermelha (Lagoa Santa), a humerus (“ Perdix aff. dentatae ” in Lund’s catalog). From “various caves” [26], a tibiotarsus and a tarsometatarsus. Finally, of unknown origin, several humeri (two of them determined as “ Perdix aff. dentatae ” from “caves in Mocambo” in Lund’s catalog), a coracoid, and a tarsometatarsus. He further noted that some of these humeri are probably from Lapa da Escrivânia V.

This material was listed as Odontophorus gujanensis by Brodkorb (1964), which was followed by Mones (1986) and Cuello (1988), but this species is not found, at least in the present, in Minas Gerais. Winge probably based the name Odontophorus dentatus (Temm.) on Reinhardt’s (1870) Odontophorus dentatus (Licht.) . Krabbe (2007) reviewed the skins collected by Lund and Reinhardt and associated the name used by Reinhardt with Odontophorus capueira capueira .

Odontophorus capueira – Jacobus 2004: 99.

Odontophorus capueira – Jacobus and Rosa 2013: 246.

Jacobus (2004) reported remains from the Dalpiaz (RS-LN-1) rock shelter in Maquiné, Rio Grande do Sul. The material is deposited in the MARSUL collection.

† Quercymegapodiidae Mourer-Chauviré † Taubacrex Alvarenga 295. † Taubacrex granivora Alvarenga

Late Oligocene/Early Miocene – SP

Fig. 33A

Type locality: Tremembé Formation , Taubaté basin, municipality of Tremembé, State of São Paulo, Brazil .

Etymology: Taubacrex , a portmanteau of Taubaté and the Greek krex (a rallid), and granivora, Latin for “grain eater”.

Rallidae – Castro et al. 1988b: 2362.

Taubacrex granívora sp. n. [new genus and species] – Alvarenga 1988: 321–328, figs 1–3, 6.

Taubacrex granivora – Alvarenga 1993a: 63.

Taubacrex granivora – Alvarenga 1997: 123.

Taubracrex granivora – Kellner 1998: 654, 659.

Taubacrex granivora – Alvarenga and Höfling 2000: 589. Taubacrex granivora – Alvarenga and Höfling 2004: 827. Ameripodius granivora – Mourer-Chauviré et al. 2011: 620. Taubacrex granivora – Alvarenga and Höfling 2011: 128. Taubacrex granivora – Carmo et al. 2024: 5.

Alvarenga (1988) described this new genus and species from remains preserved in a pyrobituminous shale fragment of the Tremembé Formation. It was collected at a depth of about 6 m at the Mina Nossa Senhora da Guia by Petrobrás engineer Mustafá Hanzagic in 1950. Its appearance indicates the remains were preserved completely, but parts of the skeleton were lost, possibly during their collection.

The specimen consists of an incomplete and fragmented post-cranial skeleton (IG-208-V, holotype) with bone remains and impressions including the right coracoid, a humerus, the left radius, the left pelvis, the femora, the tibiotarsi, and the left tarsometatarsus, aside from ossified tendons in the tibiotarsus and tarsometatarsus. The preservation of the gizzard with nine spheroidal gastroliths and seed impressions indicates its eating habits and consists of the oldest record of this nature for the Galliformes ( Mayr 2009) . There are also feather impressions with a carbonized/ imprint preservation ( Prado et al. 2016a) without relief, and they appear to be small tectrices and upper wing coverts, and some larger ones may be secondary remiges. Primary remiges or larger rectrices are absent. A preserved ungual phalanx and the impression of another with relatively short and slightly curved claws suggest, along with other features of the skeleton, that it was cursorial, although capable of flying. Its dimensions were close to those of Gallinula galeata . The fragment of the shale containing the fossil has a triangular shape and measures about 22 x 20 cm. It was originally published as part of the Seção de Paleontologia e Estratigrafia of IG (now Museu Geológico de São Paulo, Instituto de Pesquisas Ambientais), but it could not be found in that collection nor its registers as of 2023 (IPA – Núcleo de Museus, Acervos ArquivÍsticos e Iconográfico, personal communication) and its whereabouts are unknown.

Alvarenga placed the taxon within Rallidae ( Gruiformes ) and pointed out that similarities with Galliformes were observed but always secondarily to the previous group. Mourer-Chauviré (2000) reanalyzed the material (including comparison with Ameripodius from France) and attributed it to Quercymegapodiidae . Contemporarily, Alvarenga and Höfling (2000) also suggested a classification as a galliform closer to the megapodiids. It was mentioned as Ameripodius granivora by Mourer-Chauviré et al. (2011) and was followed by Tambussi and Degrange (2013). This combination, however, was possibly a mistake (C. Mourer-Chauviré, personal communication). Mayr (2009, 2022) noted that even though T. granivora and Ameripodius silvasantosi differ in the shape of the coracoid ( Mourer-Chauviré 2000), this bone is slightly crushed in the holotype of the former, and a direct comparison of the actual specimens is necessary to exclude the possibility that the two are conspecific.

† Ameripodius Alvarenga 296. † Ameripodius silvasantosi Alvarenga

Late Oligocene/Early Miocene – SP

Fig. 33B

Type locality: State of São Paulo, municipality of Tremembé, Santa Fé Farm; Taubaté Basin, Tremembé Formation, uppermost layer of pyrobituminous shales at indeterminate level. Etymology: Ameripodius , a portmanteau of America and the Greek podius (foot), referring to the similarity to the Megapodiidae , and silvasantosi , honoring Brazilian paleoichthyologist Rubens da Silva Santos (1918–1996).

Galliformes – Alvarenga (in Mourer-Chauviré 1992b): 7, 8. Galliformes – Alvarenga 1993b: 24, fig. 18.

Ameripodius silvasantosi sp. n. [new genus and species] – Alvarenga 1995b: 33–44, figs 2–8.

Ameripodius silvasantosi – Alvarenga 1997: 123.

Ameripodius silvasantosi – Kellner 1998: 654, 659.

Ameripodius silvasantosi – Alvarenga and Höfling 2000: 589. Ameripodius silvasantosi – Alvarenga and Höfling 2004: 827. Ameripodius silvasantosi – Alvarenga and Höfling 2011: 128. Ameripodius silvasantosi – Carmo et al. 2024: 5.

Alvarenga (1995b) described this new genus and species from the partial impression of a skeleton found in the Tremembé Formation of the Fazenda Santa Fé. The fossil was found in July 1989 through the cooperative work of Alvarenga, Rubens da Silva Santos, and other professors from UERJ. It was then considered the first record of a galliform for the Tertiary of South America ( Alvarenga 1993b, 1995b; see Taubacrex ).

The material (MN 4488-V, holotype) consists of part of the shoulder girdle and wings, preserved in a pyrobituminous shale plate divided into part and counterpart. The cranial half of the right coracoid, the left coracoid, and the left carpometacarpus were almost completely removed from the shale. The humeri were removed in fragments, leaving an impression cast. Partial impressions of the right radius, ulna, and carpometacarpus were also obtained. The anterior margin of the sternal keel, the left clavicle including the symphysis region, the fragmented and incomplete right scapula, the almost complete left radius, and the phalanges 1 and 2 of the major digit of the left wing were embedded in the matrix. The relatively robust and slightly arched ulna suggests its wings were proportionally short and strong. Its overall dimensions were that of an Odontophorus -sized bird. Alvarenga attributed it to the Quercymegapodiidae , which at the time included only Quercymegapodius depereti from the late Eocene and Quercymegapodius brodkorbi from the middle and late Eocene, both from Phosphorites du Quercy, France ( Mourer-Chauviré 1992 a, 2006). A second, larger species of the Brazilian genus was described by Mourer-Chauviré (2000) as Ameripodius alexis , from the early Miocene of Saint-Gérand-le-Puy, France. The presence of this genus in both continents emphasizes the similarity between the early Paleogene South American and European avifaunas ( Mourer-Chauviré 2000). Mourer-Chauviré (1999, 2000) hypothesized that, like the Megapodiidae , which are capable of crossing large extensions of water and colonizing islands, there was a possible direct dispersion for Ameripodius across the ocean between Europe and South America, or vice versa, when the Atlantic was considerably narrower than it is today. According to Mayr (2016), the very narrow carpometacarpus of the quercymegapodiids indicates they differed from the living Galliformes in their flight capacity, which agrees with the fact that they are the only stem group of the clade known to have reached the geographically isolated South American continent.

† Odontopterygiformes Howard

† Pelagornithidae Fürbringer † Pelagornis Lartet

297. † Pelagornis longirostris (Spulski)

Paleogene? – BR?

Fig. 22

Type locality: None attributed.

Etymology: Pelagornis, Greek for “sea bird”, and longirostris, Latin for “long face”.

Odontopteryx longirostris [new species] – Spulski 1910: 507–521, figs 1–7.

Odontopteryx longirostris – Lambrecht 1921: 41. Pseudodontornis longirostris – Lambrecht 1930: 1–17, figs 3, 6, pls. 1–2.

Pseudodontornis longirostris – Lambrecht 1933: 305–307, figs 110–111.

Pseudodontornis longirostris – Brodkorb 1963: 263. Pseudodontornis longirostris – Fisher 1967: 739. Pseudodontornis longirostris – Harrison and Walker 1976: 15–17, figs 15C, 17D, 21A, 24, 25B, 25D, 26B, 30B. Pseudodontornis longirostris [“ Odontopteryx ” longirostris ] – Mones 1986: 79.

Pseudodontornis longirostris – Boche ń ski 1997: 300.

Pelagornis longirostris – Mayr and Rubilar-Rogers 2010: 1327. Pelagornis (Pseudodontornis) longirostris – Ksepka 2014: 10624. Pseudodontornis longirostris – Mayr 2022: 44, fig. 4.2A.

Spulski (1910) erected the species Odontopteryx longirostris for an incomplete, 40-cm skull and jaw of unknown age and origin, characterized by pseudoteeth. The fossil also had conserved the right eye’s sclerotic ring, which was lost in an accident before the analysis. The specimen was supposedly brought from Brazil to Germany by a sailor five years earlier, who sold it to the rarities dealer J. Schulze in Königsberg, and it was then acquired in 1905 by Prof. Braun for the Zoologische Institut.

Spulski compared it with Odontopteryx toliapica from the early Eocene of London Clay described by Richard Owen in 1873. However, after further preparation and study of the specimen, in addition to also examining Owen’s fossil, Lambrecht (1930) found it distinct enough to be classified into the new genus Pseudodontornis , based on the pseudoteeth and other characteristics.

Spulski noted the orbits were filled with pure and granular limestone and speculated the fossil could date from the Eocene, based on the significant similarity he found with the Odontopteryx toliapica skull, as well as its “primitive characteristics”. Lambrecht disagreed and mentioned that the mere presence of pseudoteeth is not a sufficient argument and the Pseudodontornis longirostris skull is quite specialized, and these two isolated points cannot serve as a basis to determine its age.

During the fossil reanalysis, Lambrecht presented a portion of the matrix to Prof. Friedrich von Huene, who had returned from South America, and asked his opinion on its origin. He was, however, unaware of any similar rock. Lambrecht achieved the same result by showing Prof. von Fryberg, who had been to Brazil three times. Due to the “impression of being surprisingly new” and the highly crystalline character of the rock, Lambrecht discarded an origin associated with freshwater. The presence of brachiopod traces reinforced the association with a marine coastal environment. On its probable age, he also observed a negative impression of a bivalve shell, “close to Cardium (Laevicardium) cingulatum ”, from the late Oligocene of Europe (“but that also occurred in the Pliocene”) but noted that it might be a secondary deposition in the matrix.

Lambrecht (1930, 1933) did not exclude the possibility that the fossil was found in Germany and was attributed to Brazil so that it could be sold at a higher price. However, the pelagornithids had a worldwide distribution from the late Paleocene to the late Pliocene ( Mayr 2016), including records from four Neogene formations in South America—in Chile, Peru, and Venezuela ( Solórzano and Rincón 2015)—and it would not be unlikely that representatives of the group had inhabited Brazil, especially given its extensive coastline. Mayr and Rubilar-Rogers (2010) speculated that the species probably lived during the Neogene. Brodkorb (1963) suggested a Miocene age and German origin. Mones (1986) associated it, with uncertainty, with the Eocene. MlÍkovský (2002), in contrast to Brodkorb’s assumption, argued there are no suitable locations of Miocene age in that part of Europe, and that if the fossil indeed came from that continent, it would have been from the Eocene marine deposits in the North Sea Basin, which are well represented in northern Germany, Denmark, and England.

Mayr (2022) argued against a Brazilian origin for the fossil. His assumption was based on the fact that it was initially described in the early twentieth century and is preserved in what seems to be a fairly solid matrix, which indicates it may come from the London Clay of Isle of Sheppey in southern England. If this is the case, it would possibly belong to Dasornis emuinus , of similar size and morphology.

The specimen was deposited in the Geological-Paleontological Museum of the Institutes der Albertus-Universität Königsberg, then in Prussia. Königsberg was heavily bombed by the Allies during World War II and, by the end of the war, it was annexed to the Soviet Union and renamed Kaliningrad. The fossil appears to have been destroyed during these events ( Mayr and Rubilar-Rogers 2010, Ksepka and Habib 2016). Harrison and Walker (1976) tried to locate the specimen with the help of Dr. E.N. Kurotchkin (Paleontological Museum of the Moscow Academy of Sciences) but had no success.

Pelagornithid remains were reported from South Carolina in the USA by Hopson (1964), including a fragment of the mandible which he associated with Pseudodontornis longirostris . It was initially attributed to the early Miocene but probably comes from the late Oligocene according to Olson (1985b). Hopson commented that the discovery of this material strengthens the assumption that the type specimen came from the Western Hemisphere, but not necessarily from North America, and argued that an oceanic bird of this size probably had a wide distribution. In addition, the distal portion of a tarsometatarsus he attributed almost certainly to Palaeochenoides mioceanus —a species initially described from an incomplete femur from the same deposit by Shufeldt in 1916—was later considered to belong to P. longirostris by Howard and Warter (1969) and Harrison and Walker (1976).

Gamble (1985) associated a jaw fragment from the early Paleogene Oldhaven Formation in Shelford Sandpit, England, with P. longirostris . The specimen, as well as another indeterminate jaw fragment associated with the Odontopterygiformes , does not appear to be of a bird but are possibly fish remains according to Harrison (1985).

Chávez and Stucchi (2002) associated cranial remains from the BahÍa Inglesa Formation, northern Chile, with Pseudodontornis cf. longirostris . However, the same fossils, dating from the middle Miocene, have been reassigned to Pelagornithidae indet. cf. Pelagornis by Chávez et al. (2007), who adopted more conservative criteria while waiting for new materials.

Further materials were associated with Pseudodontornis , but their classification is uncertain due to the generally poor preservation state of this group’s fossils ( Mayr and Rubilar-Rogers 2010). In New Zealand, remains found on the South Island were originally described as Pseudodontornis stirtoni by Howard and Warter (1969), of Miocene or Pliocene age ( Howard and Warter 1969, McKee 1985). From North Island, McKee (1985) reported unidentified pelagornithid remains from the middle Pliocene, which he thought might belong to Pseudodontornis , as it was the only genus described for the country. In England, Pseudodontornis tenuirostris was described from the late Paleocene by Harrison (1985). From Kazakhstan, of the same age, Pseudodontornis tshulensis was described by Averianov et al. (1991), both forms with questionable validity due to little knowledge about the intraspecific variability of pseudoteeth in pelagornithids ( Mayr 2009). From the early Eocene of England, there is also Pseudodontornis longidendata described by Harrison and Walker (1976), which is possibly synonymous with Dasornis emuinus (Bowerbank 1854) according to Mayr (2008, 2009). The genus was also mistakenly listed (in place of “pseudodontornids”) by Becker (1987 apud Goedert 1989) for the Miocene of Astoria Formation, central coast of Oregon, USA.

Olson (1985b) noted the possibility that Pseudodontornis is synonymous with Pelagornis , a genus originally proposed by Lartet in 1857 to Pelagornis miocaenus from the Miocene of France. Mayr and Rubilar-Rogers (2010), by reviewing the taxonomy of the Neogene pelagornithids, considering the present knowledge, and aiming at clarity in the study of the materials, proposed that all its components be classified under Pelagornis . This would include, in addition to P. miocaenus , the following species then recognized as valid: P. longirostris , P. stirtoni , P. orri from the Miocene of California, P. mauretanicus from the Pliocene of Africa, and P. chilensis from the Miocene of Chile (see also Mayr et al. 2013). Pelagornis sandersi , notable for its enormous wingspan, was later described from material from the Oligocene of South Carolina ( Ksepka 2014) .

Phoenicopteriformes Fürbringer

Phoenicopteridae Bonaparte † Agnopterus Milne-Edwards

298. † Agnopterus sicki Alvarenga

Late Oligocene/Early Miocene – SP

Fig. 33C

Type locality: Brazil, state of São Paulo, municipality of Tremembé, Santa Fé Farm, Taubaté Basin, Tremembé Formation ; layer of montmorillonite clay below the uppermost strata of pyrobituminous shales .

Etymology: Agnopterus, Greek for “unknown wing” ( Milne-Edwards 1869 –1871: 84), and sicki , honoring German-Brazilian ornithologist Helmut Sick (1910–1991).

Agnopterus sicki sp.n. [new species] – Alvarenga 1990: 335–345, figs 1–2.

Agnopterus sicki Alvarenga 1990 – Alvarenga 1997: 123. Agnopterus sicki – Kellner 1998: 654, 659.

Agnopterus – Alvarenga and Höfling 2000: 591.

Agnopterus – Alvarenga and Höfling 2004: 829.

Agnopterus sicki – Alvarenga and Höfling 2011: 127. Agnopterus sicki – Carmo et al. 2024: 5.

Alvarenga (1990) described this new species from remains collected between 1984 and 1989 in the montmorillonite clays below the uppermost pyrobituminous shales of the Tremembé Formation in the Fazenda Santa Fé.

The material consists of a well-preserved distal fragment of the right tibiotarsus (holotype, MN 4257-V), possibly from an individual that had not reached adulthood, and a diaphysis fragment ( MN 4258 -V), which perhaps belongs to the same bone .

The genus Agnopterus was erected by Milne-Edwards (1869 –1871) for Agnopterus laurillardi from the late Eocene of France. Tugarinov (1940) described a second species, Agnopterus turgaiensis , from the late Oligocene of Kazakhstan. The Brazilian species is notably similar to the latter in morphology and size. Alvarenga noted that the genus must be revised. The inclusion of A. turgaiensis was questioned by Olson and Feduccia (1980) due to the significant age difference from the material described by Milne-Edwards. Mayr (2009, 2022) also commented that A. sicki and A. turgaiensis are based on too fragmentary material for a reliable taxonomic assignment within the Phoenicopteriformes . Another species, Agnopterus hantoniensis , was associated with this genus by Lydekker (1891) from material of the late Eocene of England, but its status is uncertain ( Mayr 2009, Zelenkov 2013). Mayr (2009) considered it a stem member of the Phoenicopteriformes .

† Palaelodidae Stejneger

† Palaelodus Milne-Edwards

299. † Palaelodus aff. ambiguus Milne-Edwards

Late Oligocene/Early Miocene – SP

Fig. 33D

Palaelodus aff. ambiguus – Alvarenga 1990: 335–345, figs 3–9. Palaelodus – Alvarenga 1993a: 63.

Palaelodus sp. – Alvarenga 1993b: 24, fig. 17.

Palaelodus – Alvarenga (in Sick 1993): 152.

Palaelodus sp. – Alvarenga 1997: 123.

Palaelodus – Alvarenga (in Sick 1997): 226.

Palaelodus aff. ambiguus – Kellner 1998: 654, 659.

Palaelodus – Alvarenga and Höfling 2000: 591.

Palaelodus – Alvarenga and Höfling 2004: 829.

Palaelodus – Alvarenga and Höfling 2011: 129.

Palaelodus aff. ambiguous [lapsus] – Tambussi and Degrange 2013: 44.

Palaelodus aff. P. ambiguus – Carmo et al. 2024: 5.

Besides the material described as Agnopterus sicki, Alvarenga (1990) associated five other dissociated fragments with the genus Palaelodus , which show great affinity in size and form with Palaelodus ambiguus . They may represent a new species, but the poor state of preservation prevents a more specific diagnosis.

The material consists of the distal end of a left tibiotarsus (MN 4259-V), the distal end of a right tarsometatarsus lacking the lateral trochlea (MN 4261-V), a right coracoid lacking the upper end and the lateral half of the sternum joint (MN 4262-V), the proximal end of a left tibiotarsus (MN 4260-V), and the proximal half of a left first phalanx of the wing (MN 4263-V).

The genus Palaelodus is represented by several species: Palaelodus ambiguus , Palaelodus crassipes , and Palaelodus gracilipes in Europe, described initially from the early Miocene of France, with the validity of the last two questioned; Palaelodus aotearoa from the early Miocene of New Zealand; Palaelodus kurochkini from the middle Miocene of Mongolia; and Palaelodus pledgei and Palaelodus wilsoni from the late Oligocene to the middle Miocene of Australia, where a specimen from the middle Pleistocene was also associated with P. wilsoni , but its specific status is still uncertain ( Baird and Vickers-Rich 1998, Worthy et al. 2010, Zelenkov 2013). In the late Oligocene or early Miocene, the palaelodids had already reached an almost global distribution ( Mayr 2016).

Noriega and AgnolÍn (2008) reported the distal end of a right tarsometatarsus ( MACN PV 12756 ) from the “Mesopotamiense”, Ituzangó Formation (late Miocene) of Entre RÍos Province, Argentina. It was referred to as Palaelodus cf. ambiguus , and its measurements and morphology coincide with the Brazilian material .

Podicipediformes Fürbringer

Podicipedidae Bonaparte 300. † Podicipedidae indet. 1

Late Oligocene/Early Miocene – SP

Podicipedidae – Alvarenga 1993b: 24.

Podicipedidae – Alvarenga 1997: 123.

Podicipedidae ? gen. sp. – Carmo et al. 2024: 5.

Alvarenga (1993b, 1997) mentioned poorly preserved, undescribed podiciped remains from the Tremembé Formation that await the discovery of new specimens for further study. Alvarenga (in Castro et al. 1988b) mentioned indeterminate anatid remains that appear to be reassigned to podicipedids in subsequent mentions.

301. Podicipedidae indet. 2

Late Holocene – RJ

Podicipedidae – Carvalho 1984: 57.

Podicipedidae [in part?] – Gaspar 2003: 58.

Carvalho (1984) reported podicipedid remains among the material discovered in 1978 at the Corondó site (RJ-JC-64) in São Pedro da Aldeia, Rio de Janeiro.

302. Podicipedidae indet. 3

Late Holocene – RS

Podicipedidae – Silva et al. 2006: 338.

Silva et al. (2006) reported this family from the RS- RG-49 site in Rio Grande, Rio Grande do Sul. The material is deposited in the IAP/Unisinos collection.