Boyer diss 2009 1046..
Boyer diss 2009 1046.. Boyer diss 2009 1046..
(1976: Pl. 9b) noted that the ectotympanic bone of the basicranium has a “suspended ring” for attachment of the tympanic membrane that looks euprimate-like, which he illustrated with stereophotographs of the P .tricuspidens Pellouin skull. He identified a vidian foramen in the Pellouin skull, but did not illustrate this morphology. He confirmed Russell’s previous suggestion that there is a laterally-positioned posterior carotid foramen and canal, noting their presence in the Pellouin skull. He provided the first and only photographic documentation of the course of the internal carotid plexus in P. tricuspidens with a close-up, annotated stereophotograph of the right petrosal (Gingerich, 1976: Pl. 9c). He provided additional evidence that a stapedial artery was absent by observing (but not clearly illustrating) that there exists a bony ridge on the promontorium ventral to the fenestra ovalis that would have blocked the course of the artery. He also provided an illustration of the P. anceps specimen, showing premaxillary/frontal contact (Gingerich, 1976: fig. 32), and overview stereophotographs of MNHN CR 125 (Gingerich, 1976: Pl. 8a-c), the Pellouin skull (Gingerich, 1976: Pl. 9a-c), and the frontal fragment from Berru (Gingerich, 1976: fig. 34). He used the reconstruction from Szalay (1971) as a basis for reconstruction of jaw musculature. Furthermore he used a lateral view of the brain “outline” based on Szalay’s reconstruction along with a dorsal “outline” to estimate brain volume (Gingerich, 1976: fig. 35a). Figure 33 of Gingerich (1976) is a redrawing of part of figure 19 of Russell (1964) and represents the orbitotemporal region of Plesiadapis. It is labeled with equivalent but different terms. The sutural patterns depicted are similar to those in Russell’s figure, but differ with respect to the relationship of the palatine/frontal suture to the postpalatine canal. Russell (1964) depicted the suture as entering the canal, while Gingerich showed the canal to be completely within the palatine. Finally, in plate 22
9c, Gingerich (1976) labeled a groove on the right promontorium of the Pellouin skull, which runs from posterolateral to anteromedial, as a “tympanic plexus groove.” This groove is not visible on MNHN CR 125, and thus was not among those originally interpreted as a promontorial or internal carotid arterial route by Russell. Gingerich et al. (1983) described a newly discovered crushed skull of Nannodectes intermedius, USNM 309902, from the Bangtail locality in south-central Montana. The description is brief, focusing on the teeth. The discussion focused on biostratigraphic implications of the specimen and the fauna with which it occurred. The authors interpreted USNM 309902 as having existed in the earliest Tiffanian (Ti) North American Land Mammal Age (NALMA). If this temporal attribution is correct, USNM 309902 is the geologically oldest known plesiadapid cranium. MacPhee et al. (1983) expanded on the description and discussion of the basicranium of this specimen, and reanalyzed the basicranium of Nannodectes gidleyi, AMNH 17388. They did not illustrate the actual specimens, but provided a schematic illustration of a generalized “plesiadapid” petrosal that shows unique morphologies of both specimens (MacPhee et al., 1983: fig. 1). There is an editorial mistake in the figure caption: two grooves are illustrated, “s1” and “s2.” In the figure caption, the “s1” groove alone is said to characterize N. intermedius, while the “s2” groove alone is said to characterize N. gidleyi. However, inspection of the actual specimens indicates that the opposite is true (specimen numbers were switched in the figure caption). Nonetheless, their conclusions stand regarding the evidence these specimens provide of “variability” in expression of grooves on promontoria of plesiadapids. The “s1” groove was interpreted as a possible tympanic nerve route by MacPhee et al. (1983). It was noted that this is located in a much different 23
- Page 1 and 2: NEW CRANIAL AND POSTCRANIAL REMAINS
- Page 3 and 4: Stony Brook University The Graduate
- Page 5 and 6: postcranial anatomy more accurately
- Page 7 and 8: Table of Contents List of Figures .
- Page 9 and 10: Zygomatic. . . . . . . . . . . . .
- Page 11 and 12: Zygomatic. . . . . . . . . . . . .
- Page 13 and 14: Humerus . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- Page 15 and 16: Description . . . . . . . . . . . .
- Page 17 and 18: Description . . . . . . . . . . . .
- Page 19 and 20: Craniodental material of Plesiadapi
- Page 21 and 22: Figure 2.25. MNHN CR 965 Plesiadapi
- Page 23 and 24: Figure 4.24. UM 87990 Plesiadapis c
- Page 25 and 26: Table List Chapter 2 Table 2.1. Num
- Page 27 and 28: Table 4.30. Caudal vertebrae measur
- Page 29 and 30: CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Plesiadapif
- Page 31 and 32: primates, sharing many dental featu
- Page 33 and 34: were acquired. Specifically, the
- Page 35 and 36: of the plesiadapiform skeleton. Ext
- Page 37 and 38: Gervais, M.P., 1877. Enumération d
- Page 39 and 40: Szalay, F.S., 1972. Cranial morphol
- Page 41 and 42: CHAPTER 2: A REEVALUATION OF CRANIA
- Page 43 and 44: Information on the cranium of basal
- Page 45 and 46: petrosal bulla predicts that a sutu
- Page 47 and 48: History of descriptive study of ple
- Page 49: Gingerich (1971) rebutted Szalay (1
- Page 53 and 54: portion of the bulla medial to the
- Page 55 and 56: Bloch and Silcox (2006) described t
- Page 57 and 58: MATERIALS AND METHODS Material exam
- Page 59 and 60: whitening, dark and light areas on
- Page 61 and 62: SYSTEMATIC PALEONTOLOGY Class MAMMA
- Page 63 and 64: efore meeting a large, anteroposter
- Page 65 and 66: The canine is a simple, single-root
- Page 67 and 68: existence and/or nature of contacts
- Page 69 and 70: outlined. This includes description
- Page 71 and 72: eneath it while also extending post
- Page 73 and 74: y a pair of parallel grooves (Fig.
- Page 75 and 76: the skull (Fig. 2.1). The length of
- Page 77 and 78: margin clearly had a posteriorly pr
- Page 79 and 80: groove measures about 0.29 mm in di
- Page 81 and 82: 2.13: 50). The suture with the supr
- Page 83 and 84: preserved (Fig. 2.15: 55). In fact,
- Page 85 and 86: the posterior septum, a deeply inci
- Page 87 and 88: Plesiadapis tricuspidens MNHN CR 12
- Page 89 and 90: is roughly 2.8 mm long. Medial to t
- Page 91 and 92: is not convoluted like many other s
- Page 93 and 94: 110) and the only squamosal/alisphe
- Page 95 and 96: two regions for the internal jugula
- Page 97 and 98: ventral to the sinuous suture (132)
- Page 99 and 100: provides measurements of these and
(1976: Pl. 9b) noted that the ectotympanic bone of the basicranium has a “suspended<br />
ring” for attachment of the tympanic membrane that looks euprimate-like, which he<br />
illustrated with stereophotographs of the P .tricuspidens Pellouin skull. He identified a<br />
vidian foramen in the Pellouin skull, but did not illustrate this morphology. He confirmed<br />
Russell’s previous suggestion that there is a laterally-positioned posterior carotid foramen<br />
and canal, noting their presence in the Pellouin skull. He provided the first and only<br />
photographic documentation of the course of the internal carotid plexus in P. tricuspidens<br />
with a close-up, annotated stereophotograph of the right petrosal (Gingerich, 1976: Pl.<br />
9c). He provided additional evidence that a stapedial artery was absent by observing (but<br />
not clearly illustrating) that there exists a bony ridge on the promontorium ventral to the<br />
fenestra ovalis that would have blocked the course of the artery. He also provided an<br />
illustration of the P. anceps specimen, showing premaxillary/frontal contact (Gingerich,<br />
1976: fig. 32), and overview stereophotographs of MNHN CR 125 (Gingerich, 1976: Pl.<br />
8a-c), the Pellouin skull (Gingerich, 1976: Pl. 9a-c), and the frontal fragment from Berru<br />
(Gingerich, 1976: fig. 34). He used the reconstruction from Szalay (1971) as a basis for<br />
reconstruction of jaw musculature. Furthermore he used a lateral view of the brain<br />
“outline” based on Szalay’s reconstruction along with a dorsal “outline” to estimate brain<br />
volume (Gingerich, 1976: fig. 35a). Figure 33 of Gingerich (1976) is a redrawing of part<br />
of figure 19 of Russell (1964) and represents the orbitotemporal region of Plesiadapis. It<br />
is labeled with equivalent but different terms. The sutural patterns depicted are similar to<br />
those in Russell’s figure, but differ with respect to the relationship of the palatine/frontal<br />
suture to the postpalatine canal. Russell (1964) depicted the suture as entering the canal,<br />
while Gingerich showed the canal to be completely within the palatine. Finally, in plate<br />
22
Change language