Nematonotus bottae (Pictet & Humbert, 1866)

By oilshale

• July 6, 2022

Taxonomy

Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata Haeckel 1874
Class: Actinopteri Cope1871
Order: Aulopiformes Rosen 1973
Family: Aulopidae Cope 1872
Genus: Nematonotus
Species: Nematonotus bottae
Author Citation (Pictet & Humbert, 1866)

Geological Time Scale

Eon: Phanerozoic
Era: Mesozoic
Period: Cretaceous
Sub Period: None
Epoch: Late
International Age: Cenomanian

Stratigraphy

Sannine Formation

Provenance

Acquired by: Purchase/Trade

Dimensions

Length: 7 cm

Location

Hakel
Byblos (Jbeil)
Mount Lebanon
Lebanon

• bottae
• cenomanian
• cretaceous
• hakel
• lebanon
• longispinus
• nematonotus
• sannine limestone
• tff-oilshale-ch2392

Comments

The transcription of the Arabic terms and names is often ambiguous. In the literature the locality is called Hakel, Haqel or Haquel.

Taxonomy from Forrey et al., 2003.
Alternative combination: Clupea bottae Pictet & Humbert, 1866; Synonym: Pseudoberyx longispina Davis 1887.

Diagnosis for the genus Nematonotus according to Woodward, 1901: ”Head large, trunk short and robust. Mandibular suspensorium nearly vertical; jaws delicate and maxilla apparently not expanded behind; teeth minute. Vertebrae about 30 in number, half being caudal; the centra at least as long as deep, with a few prominent longitudinal ridges; ribs moderately robust. Pectoral fins small, close to the ventral border; pelvic fins smaller, opposed to the dorsal fin, which is situated within the anterior half of the back and exhibits one anterior ray excessively elongated and closely articulated; anal fin very small and remote; caudal fin stout but deeply forked. Scales large, smooth, and uniform, moderately thick, not serrated at the hinder border; lateral line conspicuous.”

According to Forrey et al., 2003, p.302, the validity of N. bottae needs to be investigated: ”There are two recognized species, the other being N. longispinus (Davis, 1887), which is distinguished from the type species by having a greatly elongated third dorsal fin ray and an elongated second pectoral fin ray. Unfortunately, these hypertrophied fin rays are both extremely delicate and in all but the best-preserved specimens are usually broken. Further, it needs to be said that these fin rays are also extended to some extent in N. bottae. This makes separation of the two species difficult. … We cannot find any other differences between the two species except the elongation of the fin rays in N. longispinus. Clearly, a more intensive study of more specimens is needed to justify the validity of the two species and their defining characters.”

Identified by oilshale using Forey et al., 2003.

References:
Pictet, F. J., and Humbert, A. (1866): Nouvelles recherches sur les poissons fossiles du mont Liban. Arch. Sci. Phys. Nat., Geneve, n. s. 26, 117-133.
Woodward, A. S.  (1899): Note on some Cretaceous clupeoid fishes with pectinated scales (Ctenothrissa and Pseudoberyx). Annals and Magazine of Natural History, series 7 (3):489-492.
Woodward, A. S.  (1901): Catalogue of Fossil Fishes in the British Museum (Natural History), Part IV :1-636.
Forey, P. L., Yi, L., Patterson, C. and Davis, C. E. (2003): Fossil fishes from the Cenomanian (Upper Cretaceous) of Namoura, Lebanon. Journal of Systematic Palaeontology 1 (4) :227-330.