[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Xinjiangtitan, new mamenchisaurid sauropod from Middle Jurassic of China (free pdf)
From: Ben Creisler
A pdf of the paper for the new Chinese sauropod Xinjiangtitan is
available on Oliver Wings' website (see link below). I have been
regularly checking a number of publishers' websites for the new issue
of the Chinese edition of Global Geology, but it has not been posted
yet. Many thanks to Vahe Demirjian for bringing the link to my
Wu Wen-hao, Zhou Chang-fu, Oliver Wings, Toru Sekiha & Dong Zhi-ming (2013)
A new gigantic sauropod dinosaur from the Middle Jurassic of Shanshan, Xinjiang.
Global Geology (Chinese Edition) 32 (3): 438-446
A new gigantic sauropod dinosaur, Xinjiangtitan shanshanesis gen. et
sp. nov. is reported with preliminary descriptions. It is well
preserved in situ and discovered from the Middle Jurassic Qigu
Formation in Shanshan of Xinjiang for the first time. Xinjiangtitan
(gen. nov.) is characterized by a ventral keel developed on the
penultimated cervical centrum and formed a small semi-circular process
under the distal articular facet, last two cervical vertebrae are
particularly elongated (ratio "length of the last two cervical
vertebrae/length of femur and tibia" is 0.63), sacricostal yoke
excepting the first sacral rib, and extremely robust femur (ratio
"transverse width of the distal end/femur length" is 0.33). Cladistic
analysis places Xinjiangtitan as the sister group of Mamenchisaurus.
Xinjiangtitan is definitely a new taxon of mamenchisaurid dinosaur.
However, Xinjiangtitan developed several diplodocid-like characters:
prominent ambiens process of pubis, relatively short hind limb and
caudomedially developed fourth trochanter on femoral body. The total
body length of Xinjiangtitan shanshanesis is calculated at 30-32
The formal article spells the Latin species name "shanshanesis"
throughout rather than "shanshanensis" or "shashaensis" (used in news
stories in Chinese and German). I have to assume that the correct
Latin spelling "shanshanensis" was intended, but the original spelling
in the article will stay unless the ICZN rules can be stretched at
bit. Spelling the Latin suffix "-ensis" as "-esis" is not simply a
grammatical gender issue.
Earlier versions of the name:
Curiously, the article does not include the illustration of the
outline reconstruction of the skeleton shown in a number news stories.