The dentary of Australovenator wintonensis (Theropoda, Megaraptoridae); Implications for megaraptorid dentition
PeerJ, ISSN: 2167-8359, Vol: 2015, Issue: 12, Page: e1512
2015
- 39Citations
- 38Captures
- 10Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations39
- Citation Indexes39
- 39
- CrossRef17
- Captures38
- Readers38
- 38
- Mentions10
- References10
- Wikipedia10
Article Description
Megaraptorid theropods were an enigmatic group of medium-sized predatory dinosaurs, infamous for the hypertrophied claw on the first manual digit. Megaraptorid dentition is largely restricted to isolated teeth found in association with skeletal parts; however, the in situ maxillary dentition of Megaraptor was recently described. A newly discovered right dentary pertaining to the Australovenator holotype preserves in situ dentition, permitting unambiguous characterisation of the dentary tooth morphology. The new jaw is virtually complete, with an overall elongate, shallow profile, and fifteen visible in situ teeth at varying stages of eruption. In situ teeth confirm Australovenator exhibited modest pseudoheterodonty, recurved lateral teeth with a serrate distal carina and reduced mesial carina, similar to other megaraptorids. Australovenator also combines of figure-of-eight basal cross-section with a lanceolate shape due to the presence of labial and lingual depressions and the lingual twist of the distal carina. Computed tomography and three-dimensional imagery provided superior characterisation of the dentary morphology and enabled an accurate reconstruction to a pre-fossilised state. The newly established dental morphology also afforded re-evaluation of isolated theropod teeth discovered at the Australovenator holotype locality and from several additional Winton Formation localities. The isolated Winton teeth are qualitatively and quantitatively similar to the in situ dentary teeth of Australovenator, but are also morphometrically similar to Abelisauridae, Allosauridae, Coelophysoidea, Megalosauridae and basal Tyrannosauroidea. Qualitative characters, however, clearly distinguish the teeth of Australovenator and the isolated Winton teeth from all other theropods. Evidence from teeth suggests megaraptorids were the dominant predators in the Winton Formation, which contrasts with other penecontemporaneous Gondwanan ecosystems.
Bibliographic Details
10.7717/peerj.1512; 10.7717/peerj.1512/fig-3; 10.7717/peerj.1512/fig-9; 10.7717/peerj.1512/table-3; 10.7717/peerj.1512/table-5
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84951112437&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1512; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26713256; https://peerj.com/articles/1512/fig-3; http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1512/fig-3; https://peerj.com/articles/1512/fig-9; http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1512/fig-9; https://peerj.com/articles/1512/table-3; http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1512/table-3; https://peerj.com/articles/1512; https://peerj.com/articles/1512/table-5; http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1512/table-5; https://peerj.com/articles/1512/#fig-3; https://peerj.com/articles/1512/#fig-9; https://peerj.com/articles/1512/#table-5; https://peerj.com/articles/1512/; https://peerj.com/articles/1512/#table-3
PeerJ
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know