User:JurassicClassic767/sandbox

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Pteranodon
Temporal range:
Ma
↓
Mounted replica skeleton of an adult male P. longiceps at the American Museum of Natural History
Scientific classification Edit this classification
Domain: Eukaryota
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Order: †Pterosauria
Suborder: †Pterodactyloidea
Family: †Pteranodontidae
Subfamily: †Pteranodontinae
Williston, 1892
Genus: †Pteranodon
Marsh, 1876
Type species
†Pteranodon longiceps
Marsh, 1876
Other species
  • †
    P. sternbergi
    ?
    Harksen, 1966
Synonyms
Genus synonymy
  • Pteranodon (Longicepia)
    Miller, 1971
  • Pteranodon (Occidentalia)
    Miller, 1971
  • Geosternbergia
    ?
    Miller, 1978
  • Dawndraco?
    Kellner, 2010
Species synonymy
  • Pteranodon (Longicepia) longiceps
    (Marsh, 1876)
  • Pteranodon marshi
    Miller, 1972
  • Pteranodon (Longicepia) marshi
    (Miller, 1972)
  • Pteranodon (Pteranodon) marshi
    (Miller, 1972)
  • Pteranodon walkeri
    Miller, 1972
  • Pteranodon (Geosternbergia) walkeri
    (Miller, 1972)
  • Pteranodon (Sternbergia) walkeri
    (Miller, 1972)
  • Geosternbergia sternbergi?
    (Harksen, 1966)
  • Dawndraco kanzai?
    Kellner, 2010

Pteranodon (

rock formations in North America, which date back to the Santonian and Campanian stages of the Late Cretaceous period, around 86 to 84.5 million years ago. Fossil remains of Pteranodon are currently the most common of all pterosaurs, with more than 1,100 different specimens identified, but even so, many of these lack completeness, and therefore not enough to give researchers very detailed anatomical information. Pteranodon lived throughout the United States, and some specimens were even found in other formations that extended as far north as Canada. During the Late Cretaceous, most of central United States and Canada was covered by a large inland sea called the Western Interior Seaway, this meant that Pteranodon likely lived near the coast, and led to the idea that its diet mainly consisted of fish
.

Similar to other pterosaurs of its family, Pteranodon is mostly known for its elongated

cranial crest, which projected upward and backward from the skull. In males, the crest is much more elongated than in females, a feature that can be distinguished easily between the two sexes, leading to the idea that Pteranodon was sexually dimorphic
. Pteranodon is one of the few pterosaurs that had a uniquely built cranial crest, and paleontologists have concluded that it may have been used for heat exchange, allowing them to absorb or shed heat and regulate their body temperature, which also would account for the correlation between crest size and body size. Unfortunately, no evidence of extra blood vessels in the crests of Pteranodon has been found to prove this purpose.

When Pteranodon was unearthed in 1870, it was, back then, the largest known pterosaur, with wingspan estimates of about 6.25 meters (20.5 ft). Larger wingspan estimates have been done in the past however, and some have reached an impressive 7.25 meters (23.8 ft) based on specimens that were proportionally larger than any other known Pteranodon specimens. Throughout the history of Pteranodon, many species were also formerly assigned to it, e.g.

Geosternbergia and Nyctosaurus. Some fossilized remains of Pteranodon have also been found to contain fish bones in the stomach area, and several fossilized fish bolus have been found between the jaws of another Pteranodon specimen.[1][2]

History of discovery

Earliest finds

Othniel Charles Marsh was the first paleontologist to discover fossil remains of Pteranodon

The first fossil remains of Pteranodon were uncovered in an 1870 expedition led by American

YPM 1160 and YPM 1161), a wing metacarpal (each one of the bones that form the intermediate part of the hand) was recovered. Marsh estimated a wing expanse, based on the wing metacarpal he had found, not less than 6.1 meters (20 ft), which is more than twice that of the largest European pterosaurs known at the time. This estimate also provided the first indication that pterosaurs had wingspans in considerable excess of any modern flying animals. In 1871, Marsh had found more wing remains of Pteranodon, and later created a new species called "Pterodactylus oweni", in honor of the British paleontologist Sir Richard Owen. Marsh also indicated the presence of teeth associated with the pterosaur remains, noting that they are "smooth and compressed",[3][4] however, the supposed tooth that was found was actually from a fish called Xiphactinus.[5] Marsh assumed that it belong to "P. oweni" given that virtually all pterosaurs known at that time had teeth.[3]

Later, in 1872, Marsh had realized that the name he had chosen, "P. oweni", had already been used for a pterosaur species described by British paleontologist

joints of the crushed limb bones of P. occidentalis and the two newly named species (P. ingens and P. velox), and used these differences, as well as their size, to separate them as different species.[5][3][6]

1872 illustration of Pteranodon by Edward Drinker Cope (it was back then known as Ornithochirus umbrosus by him). Cope had erroneously believed that the pterosaur had teeth[4]

In the same year, 1872, Marsh's rival, paleontologist

syntypes of both species, which showed that they were nearly the same size.[5][7]

Naming

Specimen YPM 1177, the holotype of Pteranodon. It is interpreted as a female individual due to its short cranial crest

In 1874, Marsh had hired many fossil collectors to work in the exposures of the Niobrara Formation. More fossil material was collected in the next 6 years, among these include specimen YPM 1177, which was discovered in 1876. YPM 1177 is a well-preserved and nearly complete skull, this specimen revealed that the pterosaur species from the Niobrara Formation were different from every other pterosaur species that were then known, this is because it possessed features such as toothless jaws and a

generic name is derived from the Greek words πτερόν (pteron, meaning "wing"), ἀν (an, meaning "without"), and ὀδούς (odous or odont, meaning "tooth"), in reference to the toothlessness of its jaws,[9] while the specific name, longiceps, derives from the Latin words longus (meaning "long") and ceps (meaning "headed").[10] He assigned this species as the type species of the genus, and subsequently, he reassigned all known North American species of Pterodactylus to Pteranodon, distinguishing them only by their toothlessness. He considered P. longiceps to be somewhat larger than P. occidentalis, but smaller than P. ingens. Additionally, he indicated skull lengths of more than 1.2 meters (4 ft) and wingspans reaching 7.6 meters (25 ft).[5][3]

Other discoveries

In the same paper publishing P. longiceps, Marsh named another species, Pteranodon gracilis, based on a

dorsal vertebrae of Nyctosaurus. The other species Marsh named as a very small one, Pteranodon nanus, based on fragments of the jaw, a partial notarium, a humerus, and a scapulocoracoid. Thi specimen was placed in Pteranodon because its scapulocoracoid was fully co-ossified, as in other Pteranodon species Altogether, Marsh had named six Pteranodon species that ranged in size from the very small P. nanus to the very large P. ingens. Morphological characters were noted for each of the species, however, it is clear that Marsh used the size of the species as the main difference between them.[5]

Revising species

Early representation of the pterosaur Ornithostoma, which was once thought to have been a senior synonym of Pteranodon

In 1892, Samuel Williston examined the classification of Pteranodon by Marsh, and he noticed that back in 1871, Seeley had mentioned the existence of a partial set of toothless pterosaur jaws from the Cambridge Greensand of England, which he named "Ornithostoma",[12] and because the primary characteristic Marsh had used to separate Pteranodon from other pterosaurs was its lack of teeth, Williston concluded that "Ornithostoma" must be considered the senior synonym of Pteranodon, and he reassigned the species P. ingens as Ornithostoma ingens due to this conclusion.[13][5] Interestingly, he also reassigned Cope's Ornithochirus harpyia into Ornithostoma, creating the new combination Ornithostoma harpyia.[5] In 1901 however, German paleontologist Felix Plieninger pointed out that "Ornithostoma" had never been scientifically described or even assigned to a species name until Williston's work, and therefore had been a nomen nudum and could not beat out Pteranodon for naming priority.[14][3] Williston accepted this conclusion and went back to calling the genus Pteranodon. Both Williston and Plieninger however, were incorrect, because unnoticed by both of them was the fact that back in 1891, Seeley himself had finally described and properly named Ornithostoma, assigning it to the species named as O. sedgwicki.[5][15] In the 2010s, more research on the identity of Ornithostoma showed that it was probably not Pteranodon or even a close relative, but may in fact have been an

azhdarchoid, a different type of toothless pterosaur.[13][5]

Williston was also the first scientist to critically evaluate all of the Pteranodon species classified by Cope and Marsh. He did agree with most of Marsh's classifications, but a few exceptions were made.[3] First, he did not believe that P. ingens and P. umbrosus could be considered synonyms, which even Cope had come to believe. Williston considered both P. velox and P. longiceps to be dubious; the first (P. velox) was based on non-diagnostic fragments, and the second (P. longiceps), though known from a complete skull, probably was a synonym of one of the other previously named species.[5] In 1903, Williston revisited the question of Pteranodon classification, and revised his earlier conclusion, in which he stated that there were only three species of Pteranodon, instead of seven. He also considered both P. comptus and P. nanus to be specimens of Nyctosaurus, and divided the others into small (P. velox), medium (P. occidentalis), and large species (P. ingens) primarily based on the shape of their upper arm bones.[16] He also followed his first conclusion of P. longiceps being a synonym of either P. velox or P. occidentalis based on its size, but he did not specify to which of the two species would be synonymized.[16] Later that year, paleontologist George Francis Eaton became the first scientist to publish a more detailed description of the entire Pteranodon skeleton. He used his findings to revise the classification of this genus, once again based on a better understanding of the differences in pteranodontid anatomy.[5] Eaton found that most of the differences in bone shapes could be easily explained by the pressures of fossilization, and concluded that none of the Pteranodon skeletons had any significant differences from each other besides their size. Therefore, Eaton was left to decide his classification scheme based on differences in the skulls alone. He assigned the different sized skulls into different species according to their size, but in the end, Eaton only recognized three valid species: P. occidentalis, P. ingens, and P. longiceps.[17][18] In 1910, Eaton assigned specimen YPM 1164 as the type species of P. occidentalis, and stated that back then, Marsh had observed the form of the jaws of P. occidentalis in a fragmentary skull of specimen YPM 1179, and from his notes it is evident to also consider this specimen as the type, thus assigning it as the "type skull" of P. occidentalis.[19] This was incorrect however, because the remains found of YPM 1179 were not collected until after the initial publication of P. occidentalis in 1871 by Marsh, which was published under the preoccupied name "Pterodactylus" oweni.[19]

In the same year as the assignments of YPM 1164 and YPM 1179, Eaton had given credit to Williston's conclusions after he had criticized them back in 1903, this was due to the incompleteness and uncertainty of the specimens. Eaton also limited his discussions of the skeletons of Pteranodon afterwards.[20] In doing so, he noticed one issue: he couldn't trace a fibula in the preserved specimens, which was stated by Williston back then. Williston then mentioned that he found distinct remains of the fibula fused with the tibia, and therefore, he conducted experiments in 1912 using clay models of bones to help determine the effects of crushing and flattening on the shapes of the arm bones that Eaton had used in his own classifications.[20][21] In 1920, paleontologist Carl Wiman had noted that in his description of the specimens purchased by fossil collector Charles Hazelius Sternberg, a tibia of which he figured to belong to Pteranodon included a remnant of a fibula, this meant that at least several specimens had this state of preservation.[20]

Dawndraco kanzai

In 1952, paleontologist

Geosternbergia, because Sternbergia was found have been named to a genus of flower, and therefore had been preoccupied at the time.[26][27] Finally, Miller named the subgenus Occidentalia for P. eatoni, due to its skull being formerly associated with P. occidentalis. He further expanded the concept of Pteranodon to include Nyctosaurus as a fourth subgenus, and considered these to be an evolutionary progression, with the primitive Nyctosaurus, at the time thought to be crestless, giving rise to Occidentalia (with a small crest), which in turn evolved to Pteranodon with its long backwards crest, and finally leading to Geosternbergia with its large, upright crest.[24] In 1972, Miller followed Eaton's assignments of specimens as the types of dubious species.[19] He accepted that specimen YPM 1164 would be the type of P. occidentalis, though assigning YPM 1179 as the type of P. eatoni. Following Eaton yet again, Miller also accepted specimen YPM 1175 as the type of P. ingens, while listing specimen YPM 1176 as the type of P. velox, to which Eaton did not state a number.[19] Both Miller and Eaton however, made several mistakes in their studies concerning which specimens Marsh had assigned to which species, and most scientists disregarded his work on the subject in their later research.[28][29]

Later revisions

Skeletal mount of P. occidentalis wherein arms, shoulder girdle and fingers are actual bones, while the rest has been drawn from other specimens

In 1975, paleontologist

lectotype of P. ingens due to the it being the most complete specimen. He also mentioned that back in 1972, Miller had accepted Eaton's assignment of specimen YPM 1175 as the type of P. ingens, but stated that this wouldn't be case due to the fact that YPM 1175 was collected after Marsh's initial description of P. ingens. Schoch also noted that Miller had stated that the cataloged bones of YPM 1175 were found in two different localities, Schoch however, hadn't found a single evidence to prove this statement.[19] Later, in 1994, pterosaur researcher S. Christopher Bennett
made an extensive revision of the species of Pteranodon, and only recognized two species as valid: P. longiceps and P. sternbergi (or Geosternbergia sternbergi), and regarded the other species as nomina dubia based on inadequate materials, or junior synonyms based on specimens of different size, sex, or age than the type specimens of the valid species.[5]

Description

Size

Life restoration of an adult male in flight, notice its elongated cranial crest

Pteranodon specimens are extremely well represented in the fossil record, with at least 1,200 identified, which is more than any other pterosaur. Detailed descriptions of their anatomy and analysis of their life history have been debated since, and even with the amount of specimens found, more than half still lack completeness, so paleontologists base upon the better known specimens to extract data.[5][11]

Marsh initially estimated the wingspan of Pteranodon around 7.6 meters (25 ft) following his publication of the genus, this made Pteranodon the largest known pterosaur back then, and no other wingspan estimates could challenge it. This was later downsized by Eaton in 1910 however, giving a lower estimate of about 6.8 meters (22 ft). In 1910, Eaton concluded that factoring flexions to the wing bones would give a more realistic wingspan estimate, instead of just adding the length of both wing bones snd shoulder width.

Pierre Shale Formation were found to have been proportionally larger than any other known Pteranodon specimens, these specimens were estimated to have had a wingspan of about 7.25 meters (23.8 ft) based on flexions added to wing joints, while also excluding the shoulder width.[3] If this statement is correct, then it would most likely be the largest known Pteranodon specimen.[5] Recent studies however, conclude that this specimen may have belonged to the separate species Geosternbergia maysei instead.[27]

Size of a male (green) and female (orange) compared to a human

Average wingspan estimates for Pteranodon had since decreased, adult males are estimated to have had a wingspan of only about 5.6 meters (18 ft), and adult females were yet smaller, and according to several analyses, their wingspans only measured about 3.8 meters (12 ft).

crocodilians.[33]

Several methods have been used to estimate the mass of large male specimens, which have also been considered notoriously unreliable, producing a wide range of estimates from as low as 20 kilograms (44 lb), to as high as 93 kilograms (205 lb). Published in 2010, a review of pterosaur size estimates concluded by researchers

Mark Witton and Mike Habib demonstrated that the largest wingspan estimates of Pteranodon are almost certainly incorrect given the total volume of a Pteranodon body.[34] Witton and Habib considered the methods used by researchers who obtained smaller mass estimates equally flawed. Most have been produced by scaling up modern animals such as bats and birds up to the size of Pteranodon, despite the fact that pterosaurs have vastly different body proportions, as well as soft tissue anatomy compared to any living animal today.[34]

Skull and beak

Fossilized skull of the specimen AMNH 7515
pteranodontian
skulls, including the ones belonging to Pterandon longiceps (middle left), the one belonging to Pteranodon sp. (lower left), and the one belonging to the dubious species P. ingens (lower right)

When Pteranodon was discovered, the skull was yet to be known, and therefore paleontologists based upon other pterosaur genera (most notably Pterodactylus) to make early reconstructions of the animal, in which Pteranodon had teeth, and lacked the cranial crest. When the first skull of Pteranodon was unearthed and then analyzed, paleontologists had understood more about the skull anatomy of Pteranodon, and concluded that it was unique compared to European pterosaurs such as Rhamphorhynchus.

skull bones projecting upward and backward from the skull. The size and shape of these crests varied due to a number of factors, including age, sex, and species. Males from the species Pteranodon sternbergi (now known as Geosternbergia), likely had a more vertical crest with a broad forward projection, while their later descendant species, Pteranodon longiceps, evolved a narrower, more backward-projecting crest.[11] Females of both species however, bore smaller, rounded crests. These crests were probably mainly display structures, specially in males, though several conclusions of paleontologists led to the idea that the crests may have had other functions as well.[36][11]

Unlike earlier pterosaurs such as Rhamphorhynchus and Pterodactylus, Pteranodon had a toothless beak that was made of solid, bony margins that projected from the base of the jaws, similar to modern-day birds. The beaks also had subparallel dorsal and ventral margins, as well as slender and thin, but sharp points. The maxilla was found to be longer than the mandible, and was curved upward, this was more exaggerated in males than in females.[37] One specimen in particular (UALVP 24238) has been found to possess a distinctive curvature than in other specimens, which likely corresponded with the beak widening towards the tip. While the tip of the beak is not known in this distinct specimen, the level of curvature suggests it would have been extremely long. The unique form of this specimen's beak led to a genus reassigning in 2010 by Brazilian paleontologist Alexander Kellner, in which the genus would be called Dawndraco.[27] A recorded skull length of Pteranodon based on several skull fragments was about 1.3 meters (4.3 ft), this was concluded by Marsh with his publication of P. longiceps back in 1876.[3]

Shoulder girdle

ribcage of Pteranodon, notice its shoulder girdle connected to a notarium

The

manubrium was much deeper than widely, and the sharp inferior edge continued backward middle of the broad part of the sternum, similar in shape to a rudimentary keel.[31]

In YPM 1175, the scapula and coracoid were united, and were defective behind and below the

glenoid. The right scapula and right coracoid of specimen YPM 1181 had a deep and narrow depression that lies immediately behind the glenoid surface, this depression is presumably the coracoidal foramen as seen unmistakably, but no other specimen showed clear evidence of this feature, so there is no specific reason for supposing this in other species. A large oval facet was present in the distal extremity of the scapula, and was placed obiquely to the long axis, while also obliquely to the transverse axis of the body, this indicates that the facet was not only directed outward and downward, but also more or less forward.[31] The glenoid articulation is deeply concave from above downward, convex from side to side, and bounded both above and below by a prominent ridge that was much stronger than the upper one, and the ridge itself is located on the inferior border. An articular process arised from the scapula, and reaches the anterior surface of the coracoid, to which it was somehow joined, and as stated by Williston, this fusion is called "coracoscapula", and it is described as U-shaped.[38] The articular process incloses a small, oval foramen just located at the back of the middle section of the glenoid surface, and the diameter of the foramen is about 12 millimeters (0.47 in).[31]

Wings

Skeletal diagram of Pteranodon depicted as in flight position

Pteranodon had wings very similar in build to the modern-day

soaring birds such as the mentioned albatross. The aspect ratio of Pteranodon is estimated to be about 9:1, while the one estimated for albatrosses is 8:1.[39][40]

The structure of the wings also suggest that Pteranodon flew very long distances without flapping constantly, similar to the related

brachiopatagium extending down to their lower hindlimbs, therefore looking somewhat bat-like.[43] Several other reconstructions however, have found that pterosaurs such as Pteranodon had ther wing-membranes extended only until their hips, and as a result, it is associated with the hindlimb at about the level of the knee.[43][44]

Forelimbs

Side view of the attached wing fingers, notice their elongated structure

Pteranodon had unusually long forelimbs compared to other pterosaur genera, this may be, yet again, another indication that Pteranodon was more advanced, or at least more derived.

centrale or the first carpale was also found, and finally, he noted a distal finger which represented the fourth carpale alone, therefore it would have been highly probable that the carpale is the fourth, and that it supports its proper finger, meaning that the fifth had either migrated to a more anterior carpale, or was potentially lost.[45]

Vertebral anatomy

neural spines, which were generally tall and spikelike; plate-like bony ligaments strengthening the vertebrae above the hip were also found in some specimens. Similar to its close relatives, Pteranodon also had a relatively long and robust neck, and it was proportionally longer than the torso itself.[46][37]

Pteranodon had nine cervical vertebrae, counting the atlas and the axis as the first two units of the vertebral column. All of the Pteranodon specimens had the atlas and axis co-ossified, but in specimens YPM 1175 and YPM 1177, it is not possible to trace readily the limits of the theoretical elements that composed the fused vertebrae. The third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh cervicals are similar in appearance in terms of general form, their only slight difference is seen in their lengths. The natural sequence of the cervicals of Pteranodon can also be seen without any doubt. Measurements of the cervical centra of YPM 1175 have been done by Eaton in 1910; following him, the third cervical centrum measured 61 millimeters (2.4 in), the fourth 67 millimeters (2.6 in), the fifth 88 millimeters (3.5 in), the sixth 76 millimeters (3.0 in), and the seventh 65 millimeters (2.6 in). With these measurements of the cervical centra in mind, it would appear that the third cervical was the shortest of the five vertebrae, then the fourth and fifth successively increasing in length, but afterwards, the sixth and seventh were decreasing, and the size of the seventh cervical was reduced comparably to the fourth. While this sequence is present in YPM 1175, it is also substaintiated in part by YPM 2594, where the third cervical is anything but greater in size than the united atlas and axis, which is where it is remained attached. Pneumatic canals have found to lighten the cervical vertebrae to where they enter the centra.[31][47][32]

notarial vertebrae
(lower left)

Nearly all the dorsal vertebrae of Pteranodon are involved in one or two heavily fused girder-like structures called the

neural arch of the vertebrae of Pteranodon was proportionally smaller than that of the close relative Nyctosaurus. In a posterior view of the neural arch, the convex oval termination of the centrum appears to be transversely more produced than the one seen in Nyctosaurus, and the supplementary articular processes, while not confluent, remained separate and distinct, similar to the cervicals. An extention of the notarium of Pteranodon is formed by eight dorsal vertebrae which are bound together by paired ossifications. The first dorsal vertebra is found to have the largest centrum; its length and width are about equal, and its oval articular "cup" as well as the anterior articulating facets resemble those of the last cervical of Pteranodon.[31][47] A fusion of vertebral ribs and dorsal vertebrae, and dorsal vertebrae themselves is seen in Pteranodon, as well as in the pterosaurs Dsungaripterus and Tupuxuara. This may likely reflect a response to the structural demands placed on these regions by stresses transmitted through the body during flight, and as suggested, it might have immobily rendered the dorsal portion of the thorax, though did not completely restrict thoracic movement.[49]

Tail and caudal

The last few vertebrae were fused into a long rod that extended until the beginning of the animal's tail. The tail of Pteranodon was relatively short compared to earlier genera such Rhamphorhynchus, which led to the idea that the later genera such as Pteranodon used their tail less often. The entire length of the tail was about 3.5 percent the size of the wingspan, and was up to 25 centimeters (9.8 in) in the largest males, which is not that impressively large in terms of tail-to-wingspan ratio.

caudal vertebrae of Pteranodon were overall shorter. However, it is unknown if the distal caudals of Dawndraco also extended into a rod-like structure.[27]

Hindlimbs

In contrast to the forelimbs of Pteranodon, its hindlimbs were relatively short compared to the overall size of the body. Pteranodon, and its relative Nyctosaurus, had the shortest hindlimbs of any pterosaur genera, in terms of hindlimb-to-body ratio, only about 20 percent the size of the wing.[41]

Some remains of the feet of Pteranodon were also found, and are enough for paleontologists to determine how their size were. Contrary to the small feet seen in earlier pterosaurs such as

boreopterids, the feet of Pteranodon were found to have been similar to the larger feet of ornithocheirids. Another feature that Pteranodon had was that it only bore four toes instead of five, a common synapomorphy also seen in most of the later genera. The large feet of Pteranodon appear to have helped it take off from the ground, acting like strong propulsors, while flapping repeatedly before gaining control of a soar flight.[41][11][32]

Classification

Evolution and timespan

Geosternbergia sternbergi

Fossils of Pteranodon are primarily known from the Niobrara Formation of the central United States. Broadly defined, Pteranodon existed for more than 4 million years, from the late Coniacian to the early Campanian stages of the Late Cretaceous period.[5] The genus is present in most layers of the Niobrara Formation except for the upper two; in 2003, Kenneth Carpenter surveyed the distribution and dating of the fossils in this formation, demonstrating that the species P. sternbergi, now considered to belong to the separate genus Geosternbergia, existed in the formation from 88 to 85 million years ago, while the type, and potentially only species, P. longiceps, existed between 86 and 84.5 million years ago.[42]

In the early 1990s, Bennett noted that the two major

pteranodontids present in the Niobrara Formation were precisely separated in time with little, if any, overlap. Due to this, and to their gross overall similarity, he suggested that they probably represent chronospecies within a single evolutionary lineage lasting about 4 million years. In other words, only one species of Pteranodon would have been present at one time, and the species P. sternbergi (or G. sternbergi) in all likelihood was the direct ancestor of the type species, P. longiceps, or more specifically, the genus Geosternbergia would have been the dirtect ancestor of Pteranodon.[5][29]

Phylogeny

Studies on Pteranodon specimens have suggested that it was a distant relative of the ornithocheirids such as Ornithocheirus due to the similar diet, as well as the flight techniques and features. A genus called Anhanguera for example, had broad caudal vertebrae that was similar to that of Pteranodon.[37][52][53]

Phylogenetic analyses have placed the type species of Pteranodon, P. longiceps, within the family Pteranodontidae, as the sister taxon of the species P. sternbergi, which is now reassigned as Geosternbergia sternbergi. The recently named genus Tethydraco has been included within the family Pteranodontidae in an analysis presented by Nicholas Longrich et al. in 2018, and placed as the sister taxon of both P. longiceps and P. sternbergi, but within a more basal position.[54] The clade Pteranodontia was once thought to have been the more inclusive clade containing the pteranodontids, the ornithocheirids, and their descendants, but recent analyses have concluded that the clade Pteranodontoidea would have been the more inclusive group, while restricting Pteranodontia with the families Pteranodontidae and Nyctosauridae.[54][55][56]

Topology 1: Andres and Myers (2013).[57]

Paleobiology

Flight and aerodynamics

Skeletal reconstruction of a quadrupedally launching male

The flight ability of Pteranodon was intensively more than pterosaurs, and the flight techniques that Pteranodon used were similar to those of modern-day albatrosses, which consisted in long distance flights and rarely flapping.

fulmars, a typical man-made glider, and P. ingens. In the comparison, Heptonstall concluded that P. ingens would have had difficulties hovering, this is due to the volume of muscle required, and as a result, P. ingens would be unable to take off without the assistance of a prevailing wind. Heptonstall also concluded that the cranial crest is shown to have been adapted for controlling yawing movements while reducing the torque on the neck muscles, therefore Pteranodon was also well suited to thermal soaring.[40]

Later, in 1974,

center of gravity of the animal. Turned through 90 degrees, the head would have also been a good air brake, contributing drag that is equal to that of the rest of the animal, and about half this drag is due to the crest.[47][59]

Another flight analysis of the species P. ingens was conducted by Ross Stein in 1975. In the analysis, Stein considered that Pteranodon would have been better suited for soaring or gliding rather than a flapping flight, as concluded in previous analysis. He also concluded that the minimum flight velocity of P. ingens was calculated to have been about 4.5 meters (15 ft) per second, while the maximum was around 15 meters (49 ft) per second. Along with this, the wing-beat cycle of Pteranodon would have been about 1 stroke per second, and therefore it would have allowed an unassisted takeoff.[60][58]

Terrestrial locomotion

[47]

Respiration

P. sternbergi
Diagrams showing the breathing motion of Rhamphorhynchus (A) and Pteranodon (B; left), and internal air sac system of Pteranodon (B; right) and Anhanguera (C and D)

Studying and analyzing the

theropods, sternocostapophyses have an analogous function in lung ventilation. Another similarity found in sternocostapophyses is that the leverage provided by the sternocostapophyseal projections of Pteranodon and other pterosaurs likely lowered the work of breathing of the intercostal musculature, and have resulted in costal and sternal displacement. Unlike the uncinate processes of birds however, the mechanical leverage provided by the sternocostapophyses likely differed from that conferred by the uncinate processes of maniraptoran theropods and birds, and the greatest mechanical leverage would have been provided in the ventral region rather than in the dorsal thoracic. Yet another dissimilarity found in pterosaurs such as Pteranodon that is not seen in birds is that the sternocostapophyses are located on the sternal ribs rather than the vertebral ribs, and generally, there are multiple sternocostapophyseal projections per sternal rib, rather than a singular uncinate process.[49]

Skeletal pneumatization

anhanguerid), and in a specific species of Pteranodon: P. longiceps. Analyzing dorsal vertebrae, Buchmann and Rodrigues found that the presence of pneumatic foramina has appeared at least four times independently within these bones, and only in specific types of pterosaurs: the anhanguerids, the azhdarchids, a specific species of Rhamphorhynchus: R. muensteri, and in P. longiceps. They also found that P. longiceps had lateral pneumatic foramina in the mid-cervicals, but none in the posterior cervicals.[61]

Diet and feeding

[63][64]

References

  1. ISBN 9780813724270
    .
  2. S2CID 131057784
    .
  3. ^
    S2CID 128801077
    .
  4. ^ a b Everhart 2017, p. 275.
  5. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v Bennett, S.C. (1994). "Taxonomy and systematics of the Late Cretaceous pterosaur Pteranodon (Pterosauria, Pterodactyloidea)" (PDF). Occasional Papers of the Natural History Museum, University of Kansas. 169: 1–70.
  6. ^ Everhart 2017, p. 276.
  7. ^ Everhart 2017, pp. 276–277.
  8. ^ Everhart 2017, p. 278.
  9. ^ "Pteranodon". Lexico.
  10. ^ "longiceps". EngYes.
  11. ^ a b c d e Bennett, S.C. (2000). "Inferring stratigraphic position of fossil vertebrates from the Niobrara Chalk of western Kansas" (PDF). Current Research in Earth Sciences: Kansas Geological Survey Bulletin. 244: 26.
  12. doi:10.1080/00222937108696309
    .
  13. ^
    S2CID 67809186
    .
  14. ^ Plieninger F., 1901. Beiträge zur kenntnis der Flugsaurier. Palaeontolographica, 53, 209–213.
  15. doi:10.1080/00222939109460638
    .
  16. ^ a b c Williston, S. W. (1903). "On the osteology of Nyctosaurus (Nyctodactylus), with notes on American pterosaurs" (PDF). Field Columbian Museum. 2 (3): 125–163.
  17. doi:10.2475/ajs.s4-16.91.82
    .
  18. doi:10.2475/ajs.s4-17.100.318
    .
  19. ^ a b c d e f g Schoch, R.M. (1984). "Notes on the type specimens of Pteranodon and Nyctosaurus (Pterosauria, Pteranodontidae) in the Yale Peabody Museum collections" (PDF). Postilla. 194. Peabody Museum of Natural History Yale University: 1–23.
  20. ^ a b c Everhart 2017, p. 289.
  21. doi:10.1086/621967
    .
  22. JSTOR 3626742
    .
  23. ^ a b Harksen, J. C. (1966). "Pteranodon sternbergi, a new fossil pterodactyl from the Niobrara Cretaceous of Kansas" (PDF). Proceedings South Dakota Academy of Science. 45: 74–77.
  24. ^
    JSTOR 3627663
    .
  25. JSTOR 3627664
    .
  26. S2CID 132670322
    .
  27. ^
    PMID 21152777
    .
  28. ^ Everhart 2017, p. 293.
  29. ^ a b Bennett, S.C. (1994). "The Pterosaurs of the Niobrara Chalk". The Earth Scientist. 11 (1): 22–25.
  30. ^ Everhart 2017, p. 294.
  31. ^ a b c d e f g Eaton, G.F. (1910). "Osteology of Pteranodon". Memoirs of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences. 2: 1–38.
  32. ^
    S2CID 90380603
    .
  33. S2CID 90893067
    .
  34. ^
    PMID 21085624
    .
  35. ^ Cite error: The named reference marsh1876a was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  36. ^ Cite error: The named reference Bennett1992 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  37. ^ a b c d Witton 2013, p. 177.
  38. ^ a b Williston, S.W. (1897). "Restoration of Ornithostoma (Pteranodon)". Kansas University Quarterly. 6: 35–51.
  39. doi:10.1017/S009483730000765X
    .
  40. ^
    S2CID 129846497
    .
  41. ^ a b c d e f g h Witton 2013, p. 179.
  42. ^
    ISBN 978-1-4020-1443-7
    .
  43. ^
    S2CID 51960058. {{cite journal}}: Cite uses deprecated parameter |authors= (help
    )
  44. ^ "Clipping the Wings of Giant Pterosaurs: Comments on Wingspan Estimations and Diversity". Acta Geoscientica Sinica. 31: 79–81. 2010. {{cite journal}}: Cite uses deprecated parameter |authors= (help)
  45. doi:10.1086/621914
    .
  46. ^ Everhart 2017, p. 292.
  47. ^
    doi:10.1098/rstb.1974.0007.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link
    )
  48. ^ Benton 2014, p. 237.
  49. ^
    PMID 19223979. {{cite journal}}: Cite uses deprecated parameter |authors= (help
    )
  50. ^ a b Bennett, S. C. (1987). "New evidence on the tail of the pterosaur Pteranodon (Archosauria: Pterosauria)." Pp. 18–23 in Currie, P. J. and E. H. Koster (eds.), Fourth Symposium on Mesozoic Terrestrial Ecosystems, Short Papers. Occasional Papers of the Tyrrell Museum of Paleontology, #3.
  51. ^ Witton 2013, p. 195.
  52. PMID 21437387
    .
  53. ^ "Description of a new species of Anhangueridae (Pterodactyloidea) with comments on the pterosaur fauna from the Santana Formation (Aptian–Albian), northeastern Brazil". National Science Museum Monographs. 17: 1–135. 2000. {{cite journal}}: Cite uses deprecated parameter |authors= (help)
  54. ^
    PMID 29534059.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link
    )
  55. PMID 31784545
    .
  56. doi:10.26879/1015
    .
  57. S2CID 84617119
    .
  58. ^ a b Everhart 2017, pp. 293–294.
  59. ^ "Aerodynamic characters of the cranial crest in Pteranodon" (PDF). Hone, D.W.E. And Buffetaut, e. (Eds) Flugsaurier: Pterosaur Papers in Honour of Peter Wellnhofer. Zitteliana B. 28: 167–174. 2008. {{cite journal}}: Cite uses deprecated parameter |authors= (help)
  60. S2CID 130404646
    .
  61. ^
    S2CID 155090508
    .
  62. PMID 31652295
    .
  63. doi:10.1080/02724634.1983.10011963
    .
  64. S2CID 135332458
    .

Further reading
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:JurassicClassic767/sandbox&oldid=1091511409"