Table of Content

15 June 1994, Volume 32 Issue 02

Previous Issue    Next Issue

TWO NEW SHREWS FROM THE PLIOCENE OF YUSHE BASIN, SHANXI PROVINCE, CHINA

Lawrence J. Flynn, WU Wenyu

1994, 32(02):  73-86. 

Asbtract ( )   PDF (1170KB) ( )  

Related Articles | Metrics

THE ENAMEL ULTRASTRUCTURE IN GIGANTOPITHECUS BLACKI FROM GUANGXI, CHINA

Zhao Zikui, Zhang Wending

1994, 32(02):  87-97. 

Asbtract ( )   PDF (1211KB) ( )  

Related Articles | Metrics

Summary can be seen in PDF.

BIOMECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF DINOSAUR EGGSHELLS (1) —THE STRESS ANALYSIS OF THE DINOSAUR EGGSHELLS UNDER EXTERNAL PRESSURE

Zhao Zikui, Ma Hezhong, Yang Yongqi

1994, 32(02):  98-106. 

Asbtract ( )   PDF (559KB) ( )  

Related Articles | Metrics

Summary can be seen in PDF.

NEW MATERIAL OF HSISOSUCHUS CHUNGKINGENSIS FROM SICHUAN, CHINA

Li Jinling, wu Xiaochun, Li Xuanmin

1994, 32(02):  107-126. 

Asbtract ( )   PDF (1568KB) ( )  

Related Articles | Metrics

Hsisosuchus chungkingensis was described by Young and Chow (1953) on the basis of a cranium and some caudal osteoderms of an old individual from the Late Jurassic Shangshaximiao Formation, near Chongqing (Chungking) city, Sichuan proVince, China. A new family, the Hsisosuchidae, was then erected for this species on the basis of a number of peculiar features, such as the closure of the suborbital fenestra, the closure of the external mandibular fenestra and the presence of a pronounced transverse ridge of the pterygoid across the palate. H. chungkingensis is as yet a poorly known taxa, because certain aspects of the cranial anatomy are obscured by extensive fusions among elements and the lack of its postcranium. A new specimen of Hsisosuchus chungkingensis, including the cranium and most of the postcranium, was collected by one of us (X.-M. Li) in early 1960s from the Jurassic sandstone of the Sangqiao area, Yongchuan county, about 60 km southwest of Chongqing. This specimen probably represents a young adult or a subadult, as indicated by its small size (less than 2/3 length of the type, based on the skull proportion) and open sutures between palatal elements. In the present paper we will redescribe H. chungkingensis in detail based on both the type and newly discovered specimens in order to clarify anatomical uncertainties, establish a suite of diagnostic features and discuss age variations of certain aspects between the type and new specimens. The close affinity of Hsisoswchus chungkingensis to the Sebecidae suggested by Young and Chow on the basis of the tooth morphology and later supported by others such as Langston (1956), Berg (1966), Kuhn (1968) has been challenged by Buffetaut (1979, 1982). A cladistic analysis on the phylogenetic relationship of H. chungkingensis within the Crocodyliformes (Clark, 1986) will be discussed in a following paper. The new material used in this study is housed in Chongqing Natural Museum (CNM V1090), Sichuan, China.

NEW MATERIAL OF HELICOPRIONID SHARK FROM LIANYUAN OF HUNAN

Liu Zuhan

1994, 32(02):  127-133. 

Asbtract ( )   PDF (587KB) ( )  

Related Articles | Metrics

The tooth-row fragment of a helicoprionid shark described in this paper wes collected in 1991 from Qixia Formation of Lower Permian in Xiandong, Lianyuan, Hunan. The specimen was found in a limestone intercalation of a set of black shales bearing Pseudohalorites (ammonites). The new material represents a new genus and new species.

A NEW PADDLEFISH FROM THE UPPER JURASSIC OF NORTHEAST CHINA

Lu Liwu

1994, 32(02):  134-142. 

Asbtract ( )   PDF (801KB) ( )  

Related Articles | Metrics

This paper describes a new fossil paddlefish, associated with Lycoptera, Peipiaosteus, from the Upper Jurassic Yixian Formation, Lingyuan County, Liaoning Province, northeastern China. It is the earliest and most primitive paddlefish discovered in the world.

HOW TO USE LATIN NAMES OF TAXA ANF THEIR ENGLISH EQUIVALENTS

Tong Haowen, Zhang Yonglu

1994, 32(02):  143-148. 

Asbtract ( )   PDF (402KB) ( )  

Related Articles | Metrics

The Latin names of taxa above the rank of genus always have to be transformed into English. This transfozmation is very simple, only the endings of the Latin names need to be changed. In usage there is a subtle difference between Latin names and their English equivalents. 1 .The Latin names of taxa are mainly used in classification and nomenclature. They are always written with a capital initial letter. But the English equivalents are usually written with a small initial letter, unless they appear at the beginning of a sentence. 2. The Latin names of taxa are used far from frequent as their English equivalents. In some situations, it is not appropriate to use Latin names, especially when we describe the characters and ecological features as well as geological ranges etc. in these cases, the English names are preferable, such as follows. "As in many primitive ornithopods" (don`t use "Ornithopoda"); "The skulls of hadrosaurs" (not prefer "Hadrosauridae"); "Thecodonts (not prefer "Thecodontia")appeared at the end of the Permian and diversiffied throughout the Triassic Period". "The earliest fossil cyprinids" (not prefer "Cyprinidae") "The oldest known diapsid" (not prefer "Diapsida"). 3. The generic names are used as singular common nouns as English words, but they are always written with a capital initial letter and printed in italic type.