Squatina undetermined
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5070/P939056976 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:13E6A6E9-DE0F-4C71-BE40-2957F48D9F70 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF0849-4133-FFDF-395B-FD08FE17FA63 |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Squatina undetermined |
| status |
|
FIG. 6F–I View Figure 6
Type species — Squalus squatina Linnaeus, 1758 ;
Recent.
2009a Squatina View in CoL cf. S. angeloides Van Beneden, 1873 ; Cicimurri and Knight, page 629, fig. 3A.
2009a Cetorhinus parvus Leriche, 1908 ; Cicimurri and Knight, page 631, fig. 3D
Referred specimens(n=7) —SC2007.36.4 ( Fig.6F, G View Figure 6 ), SC2007.36.126 ( Fig. 6I View Figure 6 ), SC2007.36.149, SC2007.36.227, SC2015.29.18 ( Fig. 6H View Figure 6 ), SC2015.29.19, SC2015.33.2.
Remarks —SC2007.36.4 and SC2015.33.2 are comparable to teeth recovered from the overlying Chandler Bridge Formation that Cicimurri and Knight (2009a) identified as Squatina cf. S. angeloides Van Beneden, 1873 . Case (1980) identified S. subserrata ( Münster, 1846) from North Carolina, which Cicimurri and Knight (2009a) considered to represent the same species as their S. cf. S. angeloides . Müller (1999) reported S. subserrata from the Old Church Formation of Virginia, stating that his material was more “robust” than S. angeloides (p. 33). We could not compare the Ashley Formation teeth to the Old Church Formation material because Müller (1999) did not illustrate these specimens. However, the jaws of a Recent Squatina nebulosa Regan, 1906a (SC2020.53.5) that we examined showed that the upper teeth are slightly smaller and narrower than those in the equivalent files of the lower jaw. These differences could simply be referred to as gracile (upper teeth) and robust (lower teeth) morphologies, but with the benefit of a complete dentition we know that the morphologies instead represent a single species.
Specimens SC2 0 0 7.3 6.1 2 6, SC2 0 0 7.3 6.1 4 9, SC2007.36.227, SC2015.29.18, and SC2015.29.19 are isolated placoid scales that are similar to specimens from the Rupelian of Belgium ( van den Bosch 1984) and the Chattian Chandler Bridge Formation of South Carolina ( Cicimurri and Knight 2009a) that were referred to the cetorhinid Keasius parvus ( Leriche, 1908) . However, the Ashley Formation scales (as well as the Chandler Bridge Formation specimens) conform to scales occurring on various extant Squatina species (see Vaz and de Carvalho 2013) found in the Atlantic Ocean. Reinecke et al. (2011) have in fact associated such scales with Squatina teeth, and Case (1980) attributed a similar placoid scale from the Oligocene of North Carolina (plate 8, fig. 4) to Squatina .
It is important to note that, although gill rakers and teeth have been ascribed to the various Paleogene cetorhinid species (i.e., Welton 2013), no scales of the morphology that van den Bosch (1984) identified as being cetorhinid are directly associated with other remains. Hovestadt and Hovestadt-Euler (2011) described a partial skeleton of K. parvus , and the associated scales are dissimilar to those previously identified as Keasius parvus ( van den Bosch 1984, Cicimurri and Knight 2009a) and to those occurring in the Ashley Formation. Although Müller (1999) reported cetorhinid gill rakers from the Oligocene Old Church Formation of Virginia, neither gill rakers nor teeth have been found in the Oligocene of South Carolina. This lack of association is understandable if the scales in question represent Squatina rather than Cetorhinidae .
Squatina has also been reported from the Rupelian of Oregon ( Welton 1972), and the genus is known from Rupelian strata throughout Europe, including Poland ( van den Bosch 1981), the Czech Republic ( Brzobohaty and Kalabis 1970), Germany ( von der Hocht 1978a, 1978b, Müller 1983, Reinecke et al. 2001), Belgium ( Baut and Génault 1999, Mollen et al. 2016), and France ( Génault 1993). A larger sample of teeth is needed to accurately identify the angel shark occurring in the Ashley and Chandler Bridge formations.
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.