Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T12:31:01.404Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

III.—On the Relationships of Certain Carboniferous Dipnoi; with Descriptions of Four New Forms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2012

Keith Stewart Thomson
Keith Stewart Thomson
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University College London.
Get access

Synopsis

The Lower Carboniferous genus Prosagenodus Romer and Smith 1934 is re-examined. The type species Prosagenodus interruptus is re-assigned to the genus Ctenodus and a new genus Tranodis named for the American species, of which new material is described. The new species Ctenodus romeri is described, the new genus Straitonia is described, and the bearings of all these discoveries upon consideration of the phylogenies of Ctenodus and Sagenodus is discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Section B: Biological Sciences , Volume 69 , Issue 3-4 , 1966 , pp. 221 - 245
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1966

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References to Literature

Barkas, T. P., 1869. “Ctenodus interruptus”, Scient.-Opinion, 2, 113.Google Scholar
Eastman, C. R., 1907. “Devonic Fishes of the New York Formations”, Mem. N.Y. St. Mus., 10, 1–235.Google Scholar
Graham-Smith, W. and Westoll, T. S., 1937. “On a New Long-headed Dipnoan Fish from the Upper Devonian of Scaumenac Bay, P.Q., Canada”, Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin., 59, 241–256.Google Scholar
Romer, A. S. and Smith, H. J., 1934. “American Carboniferous Dipnoans”, J. Geol., 42, 700–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traquair, R. H., 1890. “Notice of Some New and Little Known Fish-remains from the Blackband Ironstone of Borough Lee, near Edinburgh. No. VI”, Geol. Mag., 8, 249–252.Google Scholar
Traquair, R. H., 1903. “On the Distribution of Fossil Fish-remains in the Carboniferous Rocks of the Edinburgh District”, Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin., 40, 687–707.Google Scholar
Waterston, C. D., 1954. “Catalogue of the Type and Figured Specimens of Fossil Fishes and Amphibians in the Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh”, Trans. Edin. Geol. Soc., 16, 1–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, D. M. S. and Gill, E. S., 1923. “The Structure of Certain Palæozoic Dipnoi”, J. Linn. Soc. (Zool.), 25, 163–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westoll, T. S., 1949. “On the Evolution of the Dipnoi”, In Mayr, Jepsen and Simpson, (Ed.), Genetics, Palmontology and Evolution pp. 121–224. Princeton.Google Scholar
Weller, S., 1920. “The Chester Series in Illinois”, J. Geol., 28, 281–303, 395–416.Google Scholar
Weller, S. and Weller, J. M., 1939. “Preliminary Geologic Maps of the pre-Pennsylvanian Formations in Part of South-western Illinois”, Rep. Invest. III. Geol. Surv., 59.Google Scholar
Weller, S. et alia, 1948. “Correlation of the Mississippian Formations of North America”, Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer., 59 91–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodward, A. S., 1889. “On the Tooth of a Carboniferous Dipnoan Fish: Ctenodus interruptus”, Rep. Yorks. Phil. Soc., 1889, 1–5.Google Scholar
Woodward, A. S., 1891. Catalogue of the Fossil Fishes in the British Museum (Natural History). Vol.2. London.Google Scholar