IRMNG name details
original description
Archaeopteryx 7 page(s): 55 [details]
basis of record
Neave, S. A. and successors. (1939-2004). Nomenclator Zoologicus, vols. 1-10 online. [developed by uBio, hosted online at MBLWHOI Library]. Previously at http://ubio.org/NomenclatorZoologicus/ (URL no longer current). , available online at https://insecta.bio.spbu.ru/z/nomenclator_zoologicus_PDF.htm [details]
status source
Knaust, D. (2020). Invertebrate coprolites and cololites revised. <em>Papers in Palaeontology.</em> 2020: 1-39., available online at https://doi.org/10.1002/spp2.1297 [details]
verified source for family
Knaust, D. (2020). Invertebrate coprolites and cololites revised. <em>Papers in Palaeontology.</em> 2020: 1-39., available online at https://doi.org/10.1002/spp2.1297 [details]
name verified source
Neave, S. A. and successors. (1939-2004). Nomenclator Zoologicus, vols. 1-10 online. [developed by uBio, hosted online at MBLWHOI Library]. Previously at http://ubio.org/NomenclatorZoologicus/ (URL no longer current). , available online at https://insecta.bio.spbu.ru/z/nomenclator_zoologicus_PDF.htm [details]
extant flag source
Knaust, D. (2020). Invertebrate coprolites and cololites revised. <em>Papers in Palaeontology.</em> 2020: 1-39., available online at https://doi.org/10.1002/spp2.1297 [details]
habitat flag source
Knaust, D. (2020). Invertebrate coprolites and cololites revised. <em>Papers in Palaeontology.</em> 2020: 1-39., available online at https://doi.org/10.1002/spp2.1297 [details]
Unreviewed
Taxonomic remark From Knaust, 2020: This ichnotaxon was erected collectively for borings and coprolites in fossil wood, which is a problematic procedure because these are two contrasting categories of compound trace fossils. The holotype is lost, and its figure shows heavy decomposition by bioerosion with poorly characterized borings, whereas the original description mainly deals with the abundant and well-preserved coprolites. No single coprolite was selected as holotype, and the number of edges and enclosing areas remains uncertain from the figure. Some pellets appear with hexagonal cross-sections similar to Microcarpolithes hexagonalis, and it cannot be excluded that more than one coprolite taxon is figured. Palaeocerambichnius remains poorly understood and is regarded as nomen dubium. [details]
|