Zemes un vides zinātnes Earth and Environment Sciences - Latvijas ...
Zemes un vides zinātnes Earth and Environment Sciences - Latvijas ... Zemes un vides zinātnes Earth and Environment Sciences - Latvijas ...
110 ADVANCES IN PALAEOICHTHYOLOGY Fig. 7. Number of fossils of different size from the Pavāri locality. A, for all measured specimens. B, estimated for the dorsal wall of the trunk shield of Bothriolepis. C, generalized reconstruction of Bothriolepis in dorsal view. the minimum number of individuals (MNI) of Bothriolepis ciecere, based on the number of left PVL’s, their relative percentage is even higher. Holoptychius cf. nobilissimus is the second most widespread taxon according to specimen occurrence, which is more than one tenth of the total number. The minimum number of individuals based on the number of right clavicles, however, is smaller than in Ventastega curonica. The remains of Cryptolepis grossi are just slightly less common, while the estimated MNI based on the number of right lower jaws is the same as for Holoptychius. Ventastega curonica lies among the species which are comparatively common, and the estimated MNI based on the number of right lower jaws indicates that Ventastega individuals are the second most common taxa in the oryctocoenosis. It is possible that the differences between the total number of remains and the MNI can be explained by the fact that both Holoptychius and Cryptolepis are represented mainly by scales, while bones of the head, jaws and bones of the shoulder girdle are found more rarely if compared to those in Ventastega. The number of remains belonging to the rest of taxa is small. Age specific distribution. The age of the fossil individuals by the time they died can be estimated only for taxa represented by a greater number of specimens, e.g.
E. Lukševičs, I. Zupiņš. Sedimentology, fauna, and taphonomy of Pav āri 111 Fig. 8. Articulated specimens of Bothriolepis ciecere (A-F) and Ventastega curonica (G). A, anterior ventro-lateral bones with articulated proximal segments of pectoral fin LDM 81/716 in ventral view. B, head shield LDM 81/545 in dorsal view. C, articulated anterior dorso-lateral, anterior ventro-lateral, central dorsal 1 and partial central ventral 1 LDM 81/434 in right lateral view. D-F, proximal segments of pectoral fin: D, LDM 81/724 in dorsal view; E-F, LDM 81/723 in ventral and dorsal view. G, skull composed of two specimens, skull roof LDM 81/775 and left cheek LDM 81/776, supposedly from one individual; specimens were found in a distance of 45 cm. Scale bar: 10 mm. Bothriolepis ciecere and Ventastega curonica. Judging from the size of the fossil bones, no remains of juvenile individuals at all have been found at the Pavari oryctocoenosis. Bones of small sized placoderms are disproportionately rare (Fig. 7 B). Large bones which could have belonged to older individuals are also comparatively rare as well. This is the case for Ventastega as well. Judging from the individual size range of vertebrates from the Pavāri oryctocoenosis, the assemblage is represented by young adult and fully adult individuals as well as a few elder individuals. There are two possible explanations for such age specific distribution of individuals. First of all, it is possible that younger individuals (or juveniles) dwelled elsewhere aside from the adult individuals as it use to be the case in aquatic animals. Secondly, a slightly delayed burial might have resulted in bones of smaller individuals getting selectively destroyed. Skeletal disarticulation. At the Pavāri site vertebrate remains are usually represented by fully disarticulated plates of placoderms, separate teeth or bones of sarcopterygians and tetrapods, but articulated portions of placoderm head shields, trunk and pectoral fin armour, complete lower jaws or portion of skulls of sarcopterygians and tetrapod, have also been found (Fig. 8). Most of articulated specimens belongs to placoderm Bothriolepis and tetrapod Ventastega. There are at least twelve more or less complete head shields of Bothriolepis ciecere found among 664 specimens and 85 individuals belonging to this species. All complete head shields are preserved without pineal plate, orbital and jaw ossifications, since
- Page 59 and 60: H.-P. Schultze, T. Marss. Revisitin
- Page 61 and 62: H.-P. Schultze, T. Marss. Revisitin
- Page 63 and 64: H.-P. Schultze, T. Marss. Revisitin
- Page 65 and 66: H.-P. Schultze, T. Marss. Revisitin
- Page 67 and 68: H.-P. Schultze, T. Marss. Revisitin
- Page 69 and 70: H.-P. Schultze, T. Marss. Revisitin
- Page 71 and 72: H.-P. Schultze, T. Marss. Revisitin
- Page 73 and 74: H.-P. Schultze, T. Marss. Revisitin
- Page 75 and 76: H.-P. Schultze, T. Marss. Revisitin
- Page 77 and 78: H.-P. Schultze, T. Marss. Revisitin
- Page 79 and 80: ACTA UNIVERSITATIS LATVIENSIS, 2004
- Page 81 and 82: O.A. Lebedev. A new tetrapod from R
- Page 83 and 84: O.A. Lebedev. A new tetrapod from R
- Page 85 and 86: O.A. Lebedev. A new tetrapod from R
- Page 87 and 88: O.A. Lebedev. A new tetrapod from R
- Page 89 and 90: O.A. Lebedev. A new tetrapod from R
- Page 91 and 92: O.A. Lebedev. A new tetrapod from R
- Page 93 and 94: O.A. Lebedev. A new tetrapod from R
- Page 95 and 96: O.A. Lebedev. A new tetrapod from R
- Page 97 and 98: O.A. Lebedev. A new tetrapod from R
- Page 99 and 100: ACTA UNIVERSITATIS LATVIENSIS, 2004
- Page 101 and 102: E. Lukševičs, I. Zupiņš. Sedime
- Page 103 and 104: E. Lukševičs, I. Zupiņš. Sedime
- Page 105 and 106: E. Lukševičs, I. Zupiņš. Sedime
- Page 107 and 108: E. Lukševičs, I. Zupiņš. Sedime
- Page 109: E. Lukševičs, I. Zupiņš. Sedime
- Page 113 and 114: E. Lukševičs, I. Zupiņš. Sedime
- Page 115 and 116: E. Lukševičs, I. Zupiņš. Sedime
- Page 117 and 118: E. Lukševičs, I. Zupiņš. Sedime
- Page 119 and 120: E. Lukševičs, I. Zupiņš. Sedime
- Page 121 and 122: J. Valiukevičius. Silurian acantho
- Page 123 and 124: J. Valiukevičius. Silurian acantho
- Page 125 and 126: J. Valiukevičius. Silurian acantho
- Page 127 and 128: J. Valiukevičius. Silurian acantho
- Page 129 and 130: J. Valiukevičius. Silurian acantho
- Page 131 and 132: J. Valiukevičius. Silurian acantho
- Page 133 and 134: J. Valiukevičius. Silurian acantho
- Page 135 and 136: J. Valiukevičius. Silurian acantho
- Page 137 and 138: J. Valiukevičius. Silurian acantho
- Page 139 and 140: J. Valiukevičius. Silurian acantho
- Page 141 and 142: J. Valiukevičius. Silurian acantho
- Page 143 and 144: J. Valiukevičius. Silurian acantho
- Page 145 and 146: J. Valiukevičius. Silurian acantho
- Page 147 and 148: J. Valiukevičius. Silurian acantho
- Page 149 and 150: V. Pernegre, V. Dupret. Biostratigr
- Page 151 and 152: V. Pernegre, V. Dupret. Biostratigr
- Page 153 and 154: V. Pernegre, V. Dupret. Biostratigr
- Page 155 and 156: V. Pernegre, V. Dupret. Biostratigr
- Page 157 and 158: V. Pernegre, V. Dupret. Biostratigr
- Page 159 and 160: Ž. Žigaite. New telodont from Tuv
110 ADVANCES IN PALAEOICHTHYOLOGY<br />
Fig. 7. Number of fossils of different size from the Pavāri locality. A, for all measured specimens.<br />
B, estimated for the dorsal wall of the tr<strong>un</strong>k shield of Bothriolepis. C, generalized reconstruction<br />
of Bothriolepis in dorsal view.<br />
the minimum number of individuals (MNI) of Bothriolepis ciecere, based on the number<br />
of left PVL’s, their relative percentage is even higher. Holoptychius cf. nobilissimus is<br />
the second most widespread taxon according to specimen occurrence, which is more<br />
than one tenth of the total number. The minimum number of individuals based on the<br />
number of right clavicles, however, is smaller than in Ventastega curonica. The remains<br />
of Cryptolepis grossi are just slightly less common, while the estimated MNI based on<br />
the number of right lower jaws is the same as for Holoptychius. Ventastega curonica<br />
lies among the species which are comparatively common, <strong>and</strong> the estimated MNI based<br />
on the number of right lower jaws indicates that Ventastega individuals are the second<br />
most common taxa in the oryctocoenosis. It is possible that the differences between the<br />
total number of remains <strong>and</strong> the MNI can be explained by the fact that both Holoptychius<br />
<strong>and</strong> Cryptolepis are represented mainly by scales, while bones of the head, jaws <strong>and</strong><br />
bones of the shoulder girdle are fo<strong>un</strong>d more rarely if compared to those in Ventastega.<br />
The number of remains belonging to the rest of taxa is small.<br />
Age specific distribution. The age of the fossil individuals by the time they died can<br />
be estimated only for taxa represented by a greater number of specimens, e.g.