Search the Community

First off: happy new year, everyone! Blezingeria ichthyospondylus is an enigmatic marine reptile from the Ladinian-stage Triassic, Upper Muschelkalk of Baden-Württemberg in southwestern Germany, first discovered in Crailsheim. Although various material has been referred to the species through time, its affiliation remains unclear. Initially described as nothosaurian and later as cymbospondylid ichthyosaurian, it has most recently been classed as thalattosaurian. Fossilworks, however, still defines it as cymbospondylid, whereas Muschelkalk.eu classifies it as an Eosuchian. Below is an overview of some of the material that has been attributed to the species: Source: Wikipedia Vertebrae & humerus. Source: Wikimedia Commons Source: Muschelkalkmuseum Ingelfingen Vertebrae & scapula. Source: Muschelkalk.eu As you can see, the vertebrae are amphicoelous, just like those of ichthyosaurians. Though, contrary to in ichthyosaurs, the neural arch in B. ichthyospondylus is attached to the vertebral body. Scapulae and pubis bones are also highly reminiscent of those found in ichthyosaurs. All this, of course, is not to say that there were no other early marine reptiles with amphicoelous vertebrae - such as those of Placodus gigas figured below, for example: Sources: online vendor & figure 13 from Diedrich, 2013. Review of the Middle Jurassic "sea cow" Placodus gigas (Reptilia) in Pangea's shallow marine macroalgae meadows of Europe At the same time, and in the same area, true ichthyosaurs were also already around, and already had characteristic their amphicoelous vertebrae free of neural arch, including such species as Cymbospondylus sp., Phantomosaurus sp. - which, according to Fossilworks, are sister taxa to B. ichthyospondylus - and, possibly, Pessosaurus sp., to which the below Middle Triassic vertebra has tentatively been ascribed: Source: Muschelkalkmuseum Ingelfingen The most comprehensive overview of Blezingeria ichthyospondylus material, however, comes from Diedrich, 2015. The vertebrates from the Lower Ladinian (Middle Triassic) bonebed of Lamerden (Germany) as palaeoenvironment indicators in the Germanic Basin (figure 9): Looking at the above image, the similarities with ichthyosaur skeletal material is indeed no longer obvious, which is reflected in the reconstruction, though there are still similarities to be found in the bone morphology of B. ichthyospondylus' fibula (no. 11 in the image above) and the Utatsusaurus sp. (primitive ichthyosaur) paddle in the diagram below: Figure 4 from Motani, 2005. Evolution of Fish-Shaped Reptiles (reptilia: Ichthyopterygia) in Their Physical Environments and Constraints The only cladistic data I can find on the interrelationships between thalattosauria, ichthyopterygia and sauropterygia, however, comes from the Pterosaur Heresies and Reptile Evolution - and, therefore, doesn't derive from the most reliable sources - lacks documented source references, and seems, at least in part, internally contradictory: Not having read Diedrich 2015 yet, my first question is, is there any more information on Blezingeria ichthyospondylus out there on easily accessible media (i.e., the internet, preferably open access)? Does anyone on TFF know about this species, and what is there to know about this species? Where does it fit in phylogenetically, and how does this relate to the other clades of marine reptile? Is there any merit to the above cladograms? Thanks for your help!

Hello, I just wondered if anyone has seen something like this before. This tooth is from the Redonda formation, in Quay Co., NM. It measures 34mm long, and has a misplaced 8mm ridge of serrations, in addition to the two main edges that most teeth of this type have.

Hi people. I found this fish in the Malagasy mountains in 2014. I think it's a Piveauia madagascariensis Lehman, 1952 ?? To get to the site we have to walk in the mountains for 4-5 hours, depending on the site we want to visit, for me it was a fabulous period, not only for the fossils, but also for the discovery of the way of life of the Malagasy, the all those that surrounds it. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year 2021 !!

I’ve got 186 pieces that all pretty much fit together. I numbered them and took photos to send to a paleontologist who is going to try to photoshop them together. I got the first two together.

Last month my dad and I ventured to the site of the former Granton Quarry in hopes of adding some nice Late Triassic fossils to my collection. We only stayed for an hour and a half because there isn't much there anymore. Much of the fossiliferous layer has been carved out by collectors. One spot looked as if someone just scooped out all of the rock. We were quite fortunate to find a spot that had been missed or had only recently been exposed. We came close on two occasions to finding a complete Diplurus newarki, but no luck this time around. That will just have to wait until our next trip! Here are some of my favorite finds: Some conchostracans (Estheria ovata) Several plates just covered in assorted bones and scales - I love the white/blue hue to these! First of the shamers. This fish is potentially complete, but when I tried to remove the last chip to see how well preserved the head is, the rock began to separate, so I just left it as is. For what it is worth, it is two-thirds of a Diplurus newarki, and two-thirds of a coelacanth is better than none! Here is the other one. This piece split off unevenly from a larger block - as often happens at Granton Quarry - exposing two heads of Diplurus newarki. One of the heads is incredibly well preserved and was likely part of a complete fish that was broken in half when the rock split. It is still a pretty cool find!

This skull is from the Triassic Formation of Yunnan Province, China. Any idea what kind of marine reptile is that?

I was looking at Triassic animals and the strange longisquama. I have only seen one image of a fossilized specimen, is there only one found? The things on its back I've also seen pits pictured two ways, either wings or coming out of its back straight up. Do we know enough so both are technically valid? Most interpretations I've seen have seven of the spikes but I counted eight. How many are there? Attached are pictures of the only specimen that came up, what I believe is the only bones found and two ways it has been made to look. This image says the display kind of like dimetrodon is the most likely one.

Hi everyone, I recently acquired the below fossil, taking a chance as to what it might be. It came labelled as Mixosaurus sp. from the Keuper (Upper Triassic) of Kirchberg an der Jagst, but I can't place the bone... Initially, I thought it could be a broken mixosaur coracoid, though the shape doesn't match at all. In the below image the break is circled in blue, with the red circle marking a projection from the bone that I would not expect to be present if the bone were indeed a (mixosaur) coracoid, as shown in the drawing next to it (from Jiang, Schmitz, Hao and Sun, 2006. A new mixosaurid ichthyosaur from the Middle Triassic of China). Moreover, according to the Handbook of Paleoherpetology on ichthyopterygians, mixosaurs were no longer around in the Upper Triassic. Nor is it the coracoid of a more derived species of ichthyosaur, as these have neither notch nor the aforementioned projection - as is illustrated by the image below (don't mind the incorrect bone ID on the label). Thus, in line with a suspicion I already had, it doesn't look like this is a mixosaur coracoid at all. But what could it be then? Well, one option seems to be that this could be a pelvic bone, either of a shastasaurid or other early ichthysaur like Cymbospondylus sp. or Besanosaurus sp., to judge by the notch at the top of the bone. The below drawings, taken again from the Handbook of Paleoherpetology, demonstrate what I mean, as does the supplied image of a shastasaurid pelvic girdle from China (figure 4 from Shang & Chun, 2009. On the occurrence of the ichthyosaur Shastasaurus in the Guanling biota (Late Triassic), Guizhou, China): Unfortunately, however, most of the species in which this condition occurs don't seem to have survived beyond the Middle Triassic. What's more, reference material I have of a cast of Besanosaurus sp. taken in the Museo Civico dei Fossili die Besano don't make things much clearer for that particular species, as such a notch cannot be observed (nor am I entirely sure it's visible in the above photograph of the Shastasaurus tangae): Similarly, the best preserved Cymbospondylus sp. specimen at the Zoological and Palaeontological Collections of the University of Zürich is of little contribution, because of it lacking the hind part of its body. A second specimen, however, does seem to preserve the pubis (albeit in less direct association): This being the case, could it my bone be an early ichthyosaurian pubis? Or should we still rule that out for the above reasons (i.e., the species showing the characteristics notch not being recorded for the Upper Triassic)? What about other options? As can be seen in the below image, the shape of the bone looks kind of reminiscent of a plesiosaur (here , at the Zoological and Palaeontological Collections of the University of Zürich) pubis, though obviously a lot smaller. Could it be, then, that rather than stemming from an ichthyopterygian the bone derives from a sauropterygian? If so, placodont is not very likely, since, as far as I know, 1) these were not around during the Upper Triassic, and 2) the shape of the bone does not seem to match elements from either pectoral or pelvic girdles amongst the little reference material I have of Placodus gigas. Something of a pachypleurosaur then? Doesn't look likely either, based on some reference material I took of a Serpianosaurus mirigiolensis specimen at the Museo dei fossili del Monte San Giorgio in Meride: Looking at nothosaurid specimens from the Paläontologische Sammlung of the MUT in Tübingen (first) and Zoological and Palaeontological Collections of the University of Zürich (rest: Ceresiosaurus sp.), although not providing a direct match, seem more promising as comparison material:

Here is a picture of a Bivalve imprint I found whilst in a Creek in Western Wake County. I was in the Triassic Basin and they have fossils dating back around 230 Ma ± 2 ma. It was part of the Carnian Stage of the Triassic part of the bigger Newark Supergroup. I presume it is a freshwater genus but I don't hear much about freshwater Bivalves when it comes to Triassic fossils.