[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: was: Pterosaur.net now: pteroid

> Some pterosaurs may not have a distinct articulating surface on the anterior 
> side of the radiale because no bone originally articulated there in basal 
> tetrapods.

If there was an articulation with the pteroid, I suppose there should
be an articular surface. I do not know of any published pterosaur
specimen with a well-differentiated articular surface on the proximal
syncarpal, yet admit I did not see enough photos.

>> I would have to re-check, but I found an example of pteroid contacting
>> the lateral carpal at its articular end, in Wellnhofer 1975, Tafel 20,
>> fig. 3, a Rhamphorhynchus specimen in the American Museum.
>> Wellnhofer, P. 1975. Die Rhamphorhynchoidea (Pterosauria) der
>> Oberjura-Plattenkalke Süddeutschlands. Palaeontographica, Abt. A, 148:
>> 1-33; 148: 132-186; 149: 1-30.
> So what does this mean, if not post-mortem disturbance?

I do not remember and cannot check now this publication to see how
disarticulated that specimen was... However, it seems that the hands
and carpus of Eudimorphodon ranzii are nicely articulated, yet the
pteroid contacts with its base on the radius. One should have to
hypothesize that the pteroid is easier to disarticulate than other
manual and carpal bones. Or that the pteroid actually articulated on
the radius in Eudimorphodon (which I, as you in Peters, 2009, do not

> Please reconstruct these pieces to see if what you are saying is correct. It 
> may be that that was a facet that, via soft tissue, connected to the anterior 
> bend in the Nyctosaurus pteroid, not the short process ball joint.

I may draw what I interpret from the text, because it is only
mentioned in the text by Bennett (2007). I actually have not seen the
preaxial carpal of Nyctosaurus.