Allaeochelys libyca, a new carettochelyine turtle from the middle miocene (Langhian) of Libya

Fossil carettochelyine turtles are well known from the Paleogene of Europe (Allaeochelys), North America and Asia (Anosteira); however, the previously known Neogene fossil record is highly fragmentary and was therefore unsuitable for taxonomic analysis. In this work, we present a new carettochelyine taxon, Allaeochelys libyca, from the Middle Miocene (Langhian) of Gebel Zelten (Libya) based on an incomplete skull and disarticulated postcranial elements. The new taxon is diagnosed relative to the extant Carettochelys insculpta based on the placement of the foramen posterius canalis carotici interni close to the fenestra postotica, the horizontal orientation of the tubercula basioccipitalis, the substantial contribution of the opisthotic to the base of the tubercula basioccipitalis, the presence of a triangular pterygoid fossa, the arrangement of the mandibular condyles along a plane and the presence of an extremely well-developed fossa at the base of the processus mandibularis. A phylogenetic analysis of pancarettochelyids confirms the monophyly of Carettochelyidae and Carettochelyinae but resulted in a paraphyletic taxon, Allaeochelys. For the sake of nomenclatural stability, we provisionally retain the genus Allaeochelys as paraphyletic relative to the extant Carettochelys insculpta

A review of the fossil record of turtles of the clade Pan-Carettochelys

Turtles of the total clade Pan-Carettochelys have a relatively poor fossil record that extends from the Early Cretaceous. The clade is only found in Asia during the Cretaceous, but spreads to Europe and North America during the Eocene. Neogene finds are restricted to Europe, Africa and Australia, whereas the only surviving species, Carettochelys insculpta, lives in New Guinea and the Northern Territories of Australia. The ecology of fossil pan-carettochelyids appears similar to that of the extant C. insculpta, although more primitive representatives were likely less adapted to brackish water. Current phylogenies only recognize three internested clades: Pan- Carettochelys, Carettochelyidae and Carettochelyinae. A taxonomic review of the group concludes that of 25 named taxa, 13 are nomina valida, 7 are nomina invalida, 3 are nomina dubia, and 2 are nomina nuda

A Review of the fossil record of turtles of the clade Baenidae

The fossil record of the turtle clade Baenidae ranges from the Early Cretaceous (Aptian—Albian) to the Eocene. The group is present throughout North America during the Early Cretaceous, but is restricted to the western portions of the continents in the Late Cretaceous and Paleogene. No credible remains of the clade have been reported outside of North America to date. Baenids were warmadapted freshwater aquatic turtles that supported high levels of diversity at times through niche partitioning, particularly by adapting to a broad range of dietary preferences ranging from omnivorous to molluscivorous. Current phylogenies place Baenidae near the split of crown-group Testudines. Within Baenidae three more inclusive, named clades are recognized: Baenodda, Palatobaeninae and Eubaeninae. A taxonomic review of the group concludes that of 49 named taxa, 30 are nomina valida, 12 are nomina invalida and 7 are nomina dubia

A critical appraisal of appendage disparity and homology in fishes

Fishes are both extremely diverse and morphologically disparate. Part of this disparity can be observed in the numerous possible fin configurations that may differ in terms of the number of fins as well as fin shapes, sizes and relative positions on the body. Here, we thoroughly review the major patterns of disparity in fin configurations for each major group of fishes and discuss how median and paired fin homologies have been interpreted over time. When taking into account the entire span of fish diversity, including both extant and fossil taxa, the disparity in fin morphologies greatly complicates inferring homologies for individual fins. Given the phylogenetic scope of this review, structural and topological criteria appear to be the most useful indicators of fin identity. We further suggest that it may be advantageous to consider some of these fin homologies as nested within the larger framework of homologous fin‐forming morphogenetic fields. We also discuss scenarios of appendage evolution and suggest that modularity may have played a key role in appendage disparification. Fin modules re‐expressed within the boundaries of fin‐forming fields could explain how some fins may have evolved numerous times independently in separate lineages (e.g., adipose fin), or how new fins may have evolved over time (e.g., anterior and posterior dorsal fins, pectoral and pelvic fins). We favour an evolutionary scenario whereby median appendages appeared from a unique field of competence first positioned throughout the dorsal and ventral midlines, which was then redeployed laterally leading to paired appendages.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/151971/1/faf12402_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/151971/2/faf12402.pd