1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

IMAGE imgs/I.I.20.web27.jpg IMAGE imgs/I.I.20.web28.jpg



Jim sent a message to the VP server:

Icould use some help distinguishing fossil dasyatid teeth from urolophid teeth." Only Jacques Herman et al.have published much on extant batoid teeth, and the dasyatoids weren't yet covered. Since those early attempts I've concentrated my efforts on getting dentitions from extant species. This quest has only been slightly more successful. I'm always interested in conversing with anyone who is directing time tothe study of fossil batoids. If you've seen my website, I've tried to share much of what I've learned. If you come across any collectors interested in batoids, I love to hear from them.


useful terminology from:
Rees, J. 1998. Early Jurassic selachians from the Hasle Formation on Bornholm, Denmark. Acta Palaeontological Polonica 43, 3, 439-452.

** * * * * * * * *
Rodrigo SOLER-GIJON, Paläontologisch- Geologisches Institut und Museum, für Naturkunde der Humboldt-Universität, Invalidenstr. 43, D-10115 Berlin, GERMANY

Paper of note:
Soler-Gijon, R. & Lopez-Martinez, N. 1998. Sharks and rays (chondrichthyes) from the Upper Cretaceous red beds of the south- central Pyrenees (Lleida, Spain): indices of an India-Eurasia connection. Palaeogeog., Palaeoclimatol., Palaeoecol. 141, 1-12.

*************************** Charles UNDERWOOD, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Liverpool, Brownlow St, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK
E-mail: cju@liv.ac.uk

Underwood, C.J. and Mitchell, S.F. 1999.
Albian and Cenomanian (Cretaceous)
selachian assemblages from north-east
England. Special Papers in Palaeontology,
60:9-56, 9pls.
Underwood, C.J., Mitchell, S.F. and Veltkamp,
C.J. 1999. Microborings in mid-Cretaceous
fish teeth. Proceedings of the
Yorkshire Geological Society, 52(3):269-274. Underwood, C.J., Mitchell, S.F. and Veltkamp,
K.J. 1999. Shark and ray teeth from the
Hauterivivan (Lower Cretaceous) of north-
east England. Palaeontology, 42(2):287-
302, 2pls.

Another paper of interest:
Borsuk-Bialynicka, M., Cook, E., Evans, S.E., &Marya_ska, T. 1999. A microvertebrate assemblage from the Early Triassic of Poland. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica44(2):167-188.

Living fossil gets cousin

In 1938, the first living coelacanth (Latimeria chalumnae) was caught off the east coast of South Africa. This major discovery revealed the existence of a "living fossil" thought to have become extinct 70ma and whose morphology had evolved very little since it appeared in the Devonian, over 400ma. About 200 other coelacanths recorded since the late 1930s have mostly been fished off the Comoros.
To date, all scientific investigation on the rare specimens found since have confirmed the assumption that the population of L. chalumnaewas restricted to the Mozambique Strait or even to just one or two of the Comoros islands (Grand Comoros and Anjouan). This long-held hypothesis was shaken with the discovery in July 1998 of a coelacanth more than 9000 km away, near Menadotua Island in the Celebes archipelago of Indonesia (see Geoscientist v8, 12, p18). Like the original specimen of L.chalumnae, the new specimen was found accidentally in a fish-market.
To find out if the Indonesian and Comoros coelacanths belong to distinct populations, a joint research team from IRD, Institut de rescherche pour le développement, LIPI (Division of Zoology Research and Development Centre for Biology, Indonesia) and CRIFI-RIFF (Central Research Institute for Fisheries, Indoniesia) have performed genetic sequence analysis and established a morphological description of the new specimen. The Indonesian specimens show significant genetic and morphological differences fromL. chalumnae, which normally shows very little morphological variation. The genetic differentiation is at a

***************** TERTIARY TITBITS

Jim BOURDON, Nordica Hudson, NY 10520, USA.