Some 2020 dino papers not yet mentioned:
Emanuel Tschopp (2020)
Paleontology: The Smallest of the Giants
Current Biology 30(24): R1496-R1499
doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2020.10.023
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S096098222031527X
Paleontology: The Smallest of the Giants
Current Biology 30(24): R1496-R1499
doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2020.10.023
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S096098222031527X
The first three-dimensionally preserved sauropod dinosaur embryo surprises paleontologists. A member of the gigantic titanosaurs, its peculiar morphology shows how much these animals changed during growth and has implications for ecology and skull development that go beyond paleontology.
====
Tyler Greenfield, Gunnar Bivens & Andrà Fonseca (2020)
The correct authorship of Coloradisaurus (Dinosauria, Sauropodomorpha): Galton, 1990, not Lambert, 1983.
The Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 77(1):153-155
doi: https://doi.org/10.21805/bzn.v77.a050
https://bioone.org/journals/the-bulletin-of-zoological-nomenclature/volume-77/issue-1/bzn.v77.a050/The-correct-authorship-of-Coloradisaurus-Dinosauria-Sauropodomorpha--Galton-1990/10.21805/bzn.v77.a050.short
Until now, authorship of the sauropodomorph dinosaur genus Coloradisaurus has been attributed to Lambert, 1983. Here we demonstrate that Lambert's work does not meet the requirements of Articles 13.1 and 13.3 of the Code for availability of this name, therefore it is a nomen nudum in that publication. Instead, it was inadvertently made available a few years later by another worker, as Coloradisaurus Galton, 1990.
The correct authorship of Coloradisaurus (Dinosauria, Sauropodomorpha): Galton, 1990, not Lambert, 1983.
The Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 77(1):153-155
doi: https://doi.org/10.21805/bzn.v77.a050
https://bioone.org/journals/the-bulletin-of-zoological-nomenclature/volume-77/issue-1/bzn.v77.a050/The-correct-authorship-of-Coloradisaurus-Dinosauria-Sauropodomorpha--Galton-1990/10.21805/bzn.v77.a050.short
Until now, authorship of the sauropodomorph dinosaur genus Coloradisaurus has been attributed to Lambert, 1983. Here we demonstrate that Lambert's work does not meet the requirements of Articles 13.1 and 13.3 of the Code for availability of this name, therefore it is a nomen nudum in that publication. Instead, it was inadvertently made available a few years later by another worker, as Coloradisaurus Galton, 1990.
===
Free pdf:
Eric Buffetaut & Bernard Sauvadet (2020)
Un dinosaure sauropodomorphe de grande taille dans le Trias supÃrieur du Cotentin (Normandie, France).
[A large sauropodomorph dinosaur from the Upper Triassic of the Cotentin peninsula (Normandy, France)]
Actes du 1er Colloque PalÃontologie et ArchÃologie en Normandie de Villers-sur-Mer 5-6 octobre 2019. Bulletin de l'Association palÃontologique de Villers-sur-Mer: 2020: 49-57 (in French)
Un dinosaure sauropodomorphe de grande taille dans le Trias supÃrieur du Cotentin (Normandie, France).
[A large sauropodomorph dinosaur from the Upper Triassic of the Cotentin peninsula (Normandy, France)]
Actes du 1er Colloque PalÃontologie et ArchÃologie en Normandie de Villers-sur-Mer 5-6 octobre 2019. Bulletin de l'Association palÃontologique de Villers-sur-Mer: 2020: 49-57 (in French)
Free pdf link:
Sauropodomorph dinosaur bones, including cervical vertebrae, ribs, a possible humerus fragment and an incomplete left femur are described from Triassic silicified conglomerates (designated as arkose by local geologists) at La Pernelle (Cotentin peninsula, Manche, Normandy, France). The femur, with a straight, craniocaudally compressed shaft and a fourth trochanter located caudomedially, shows strong similarities with that of Camelotia borealis, Galton, 1985, a possible basal sauropod from the Rhaetian of England. The dinosaur from La Pernelle, referred to here as cf. Camelotia, may have reached a length of about 8 metres. Together with other stratigraphic evidence, its occurrence supports a Rhaetian age for the arkose of La Pernelle and it is currently the oldest known dinosaur from Normandy.
======
Recent book not yet mentioned:
Late Cretaceous Dinosaur Eggs and Eggshells of Peninsular India.
Topics in Geobiology 51: 280 pp.
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-56454-4
https://www.springer.com/us/book/9783030564537
eBook ISBN 978-3-030-56454-4
Hardcover ISBN 978-3-030-56453-7
Series ISSN 0275-0120
This book documents analyses of the Late Cretaceous dinosaur nesting sites of the Lameta Formation at Jabalpur, Districts Dhar and Jhabua, Madhya Pradesh; Districts Kheda and Panchmahal (Gujarat); and the Pisdura, Dongargaon and Pavna sectors in the Chandrapur Districts of Maharashtra, which are exposed in India along an east-west and central axis. In this work, special emphasis has been given to the dinosaur nesting sites of the east-central Narbada River region, including its regional geology. The work was undertaken to provide detailed information concerning dinosaur eggs, eggshell fragments, nests and clutches found in the Lameta Formation of peninsular India. Prior to the present work there had been no detailed review of systematic work on the taxonomy, and of micro- and ultrastructural studies of dinosaur eggs and eggshells from the Lameta Formation.
The study documents the field and laboratory investigations that facilitated the reconstruction of the morphotaxonomy, models for the burial pattern of eggs and eggshells, taphonomic implications,and the palaeoenvironmental context and palaeoecological conditions during the Late Cretaceous at the time of the extrusion of the Deccan traps, which may have been partly responsible for the extinction of the dinosaurs. The need to follow a parataxonomic classification for Indian dinosaur eggs and eggshell types is very apparent, and this book addresses this aspect in some detail. The emphasis on the application of parataxonomic schemes is based on the description of new oospecies and their comparison with previously known forms. The present work has led to the recovery of numerous nests, many collapsed eggs and hundreds of dinosaur eggshell fragments from the localities situated near the east, west and central Narbada River regions. It will be of interest to academics and professional palaeontologists, and all students of dinosaurs.
===
Khosla A., Lucas S.G. (2020)
Introduction of Indian Late Cretaceous Dinosaur Eggs and Eggshells of Peninsular India.
In: Late Cretaceous Dinosaur Eggs and Eggshells of Peninsular India. Topics in Geobiology 51: 1-30 Springer, Cham.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56454-4_1
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-56454-4_1
Indian Late Cretaceous dinosaur nests, eggs and eggshell fragments have been widely recorded from the infra- and intertrappean sediments, which are distributed along the eastern, northeastern, northwestern margins, southern and southeastern margins of the Deccan Traps. This work was undertaken to bring detailed information for the first detailed descriptions of dinosaur nesting sites of peninsular India. This chapter records field and laboratory studies of dinosaurian eggs embedded in Lameta Formation and eggshells in intertrappean beds intercalated between the Deccan traps. The dinosaur eggs and eggshell-bearing localities have been divided into seven sectors (Jabalpur, Dhar, Jhabua in Madhya Pradesh; Anjar, Kheda and Panchmahal in Gujarat; and Pisdura in Maharashtra). The dinosaur-egg-rich Lameta Formation is variable and shows its thickest development (45 m) at Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh. It is 20 m thick in the Panchmahal and Kheda Districts of the Gujarat, 4â5 m thick in the Jhabua and Dhar Districts of Madhya Pradesh and 1â11 m thick at Pisdura and Nand-Dongargaon (Chandrapur District, Maharashtra). Fossil collections were made during 19 field trips from 1991 through 2020, and a total of 22 stratigraphic successions containing dinosaur nests have been selected for the present study. Detailed investigations were carried out to elucidate the morphotaxonomy, taphonomy and petrography, and the palaeoenvironmental, palaeoecological, biostratigraphical and palaeobiogeographical implications of the dinosaur-bearing Lameta Formation.
===
Ashu Khosla & Spencer G. Lucas (2020)
Historical Background of Late Cretaceous Dinosaur Studies and Associated Biota in India.
In: Late Cretaceous Dinosaur Eggs and Eggshells of Peninsular India. Topics in Geobiology 51: 31-56
Springer, Cham.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56454-4_2
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-56454-4_2
This chapter summarizes the record of dinosaur (skeletal and nests) studies in India from 1828 to 2020. For the last 180 years, strata of the Lameta Formation have been extensively studied for fossil dinosaurs. The first dinosaur skeletal remains were excavated by Captain Sleeman from the Jabalpur area (in Matley, Rec Geol Surv India 53:142â164, 1921) and, subsequently, fragmentary remains of Titanosaurus were recorded by Lydekker (Rec Geol Surv India: 10:30â43, 1877; Rec Geol Surv India XXIII(1):20â24, 1890a; Proc Zool Soc 1890:602â604, 1890b). Medlicott (Mem. Geol Surv India 2:1â95, 1860) introduced the term Lameta Formation for the rocks lying on the right bank of the Narbada River, 15 km south-west of the Jabalpur at Lameta Ghat. British (Matley, Rec Geol Surv India 53:142â164, 1921; Huene and Matley, Mem Geol Surv India Palaeontol Indica 21(1):1â72, 1933) and American geologists (Wilson et al. Contrib Mus Paleontol Univ Michigan 33(1):1â27, 2019) discovered numerous sauropod skeletal remains from the Bara Simla Hill and Chhota Simla Hill areas at Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh). The Indian Late Cretaceous theropods are largely typified by fragmentary skeletal remains of coelurosaurs, abelisaurids and allosaurids (Huene and Matley, Mem Geol Surv India Palaeontol Indica 21(1):1â72, 1933; Chatterjee, J Paleontol 52(3):570â580, 1978; Wilson et al., Univ Michigan 31:1â42, 2003; Novas et al. 2010). Chatterjee (J Paleontol 52(3):570â580, 1978) reported a megalosaurid (Indosaurus) and a very primitive tyrannosaurid (Indosuchus) at Bara Simla Hill, Jabalpur. Dinosaur eggs were first reported from the Lameta Formation of Gujarat (Mohabey 1983), and subsequently numerous discoveries were made from Jabalpur, Districts Dhar and Jhabua, Madhya Pradesh, and the Kheda-Panchmahal area and Chandrapur districts of Maharashtra (Srivastava et al. 1986; Sahni and Tripathi, Cretaceous event stratigraphy and the correlation of the Indian nonmarine strata. A Seminar cum Workshop IGCP 216 and 245, Chandigarh, pp 35â37, 1990; Sahni and Khosla, Cretaceous System in East and SouthEast Asia. Research Summary, Newsletter Special Issue IGCP 350, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan, pp 53â61, 1994a; Aspects of Sauropod Palaeobiology GAIA, pp 215â223, 1994b, Curr Sci 67(6):456â460, 1994c; Khosla and Sahni, J Palaeont Soc India 45:57â78, 1995; J Asi Earth Sci 21(8):895â908, 2003; Vianey-Liaud et al., J Vert Paleontol 23(3):575â585, 2003; FernÃndez and Khosla, Hist Biol 27(2):158â180, 2015; Khosla, Acta Geol Pol 64(3):311â323, 2014; Khosla, Hist Biol:1â12, 2019, etc.). Apart from dinosaurs, the Lameta Formation and intertrappean beds have been extensively studied for other fossilized biotic elements such as crocodiles, turtles, lizards, frogs, mammals, coprolites, ostracods, charophytes, gastropods, pollens, phytoliths, diatoms, etc. (Matley, Rec Geol Surv India 74:535â547, 1939; Khosla and Sahni, J Asi Earth Sci 21(8):895â908, 2003; Ghosh et al., Cret Res 24:743â750, 2003; Vianey-Liaud et al., J Vert Paleontol 23(3):575â585, 2003; FernÃndez and Khosla, Hist Biol 27(2):158â180, 2015; Khosla, Hist Biol:1â12, 2019; Kapur and Khosla 2016, 2019, etc.). The presence of the above-mentioned biota indicates a Late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian) age, and the Lameta Formation has been considered as deposits of fluvial and pedogenically modified, semi-arid fan, palustrine flat deposits.
=====
Ashu Khosla & Spencer G. Lucas (2020)
Geology and Stratigraphy of Dinosaur Eggs and Eggshell-Bearing Infra- and Intertrappean Beds of Peninsular India.
In: Late Cretaceous Dinosaur Eggs and Eggshells of Peninsular India. Topics in Geobiology 51: 57-115 Springer, Cham.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56454-4_3
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-56454-4_3
The dinosaur-egg-rich Lameta Formation is widely distributed over 10,000 km and varies in thickness from 3 to 12 m and is well exposed in five inland basins: (1) Jabalpur; (2) Dhar and Jhabua Districts; (3) Salbardi-Belkhar, Betul district, Madhya Pradesh; (4) KhedaâPanchmahal district, Gujarat; and (5) Pisdura, NandâDongargaon, Chandrapur District in Maharashtra. The Lameta Formation represents the relict of an ancient soil cover formed on several old shield basements such as Archaeans, Aravalli metasediments, Godhra Granites, Bijawar metamorphics, Vindhyans, Gondwanas and Bagh Beds, ranging in age from Precambrian to Lower Cretaceous, in peninsular India along the Narbada River region. In the Jabalpur area, three sections, namely Chui Hill, Bara Simla Hill (including Pat Baba Mandir) and Lameta Ghat, were selected for dinosaur egg and eggshell studies. The Lameta Formation has been divided into five lithounits: (1) Green Sandstone, (2) Lower Limestone, (3) Mottled Nodular Bed, (4) Upper Limestone and (5) Upper Sandstone. Thickness of the Lameta Formation varies from 3 to 5 m in the Dhar-Jhabua area. Six lithostratigraphic sections (Bagh Caves, Padalya, Dholiya, Padiyal, Kadwal, Walpur and Kulwat) were selected for dinosaur eggshell morphotaxonomic studies. Stratigraphically, the oldest lithounit is represented by the Bijawar metamorphics of Archean age as a basement, which is overlain by the marine Bagh Beds such as the Nimar Sandstone, Nodular Limestone and Coralline Limestone. In the Kheda-Panchmahal area, six Lameta sections (Rahioli, Dhuvediya, Khempur, Balasinor, Paori, Dholidhanti/Wanawao) were studied for dinosaur eggshell oospecies diversity. The basement rocks are Aravalli metasediments and Godhra granitoids, which are unconformably overlain by the 3â5 m thick, dinosaur-nest-rich Lameta Formation. The uppermost part of the Lameta Formation is characterized by cherty limestone. Abundant ornithoid eggshells have been recorded from 2-m-thick third and fourth intertrappean levels of the Anjar area in Gujarat. In Pisdura, NandâDongargaon area, the thickness of the dinosaur-eggshell-rich Lameta Formation varies from 1to 11 m. The Lameta Formation rests unconformably on rocks of Precambrian age and the Gondwana Super Group. In all of the 22 investigated stratigraphic sections, the Lameta Formation is overlain by the Deccan traps. The dinosaur-egg-bearing pedogenic calcrete is characterized by features such as shrinkage cracks, rhizoconcretionary structures and nodular, prismatic, brecciated and autobrecciated structures. The petrographic study of these calcretes identifies fabrics with a high percentage of skeleton grains, micritic and spar rims, glaebules, voids, vugs, crystallaria and chalcedony spherulites that can be chiefly ascribed to pedogenic calcretization.
====
Khosla A., Lucas S.G. (2020)
Indian Late Cretaceous Dinosaur Nesting Sites and Their Systematic Studies.
In: Late Cretaceous Dinosaur Eggs and Eggshells of Peninsular India. Topics in Geobiology 51: 117-205
Springer, Cham.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56454-4_4
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-56454-4_4
Hundreds of Indian Late Cretaceous sauropod and theropod nests, eggs and eggshells have been recorded from a specific lithologic unit (Lameta Limestone) at Jabalpur, Bagh, KhedaâPanchmahal and in the Dongargaon-Pisdura areas of peninsular India. This chapter discusses in detail the current status and parataxonomic classification of Indian Late Cretaceous dinosaur eggshells. On the basis of morphological, micro- and ultrastructural studies, a total of 14 eggshell oospecies belonging to five different oofamilies and oogenera such as Megaloolithidae (Megaloolithus), Fusioolithidae (Fusioolithus), Elongatoolithidae (Ellipsoolithus), Laevisoolithidae (Subtiliolithus) and ?Spheroolithidae (Spheroolithus) have been chronicled from Indian infra- and intertrappean localities. The Indian eggshells have been revised, synonymized and described systematically. The majority of the Indian eggshells belong to the oofamilies Megaloolithidae (fan-shaped separated shell units) and Fusioolithidae (fused spheroliths and external nodes) of tubospherulitic morphotype. Three of the oofamiliesâMegaloolithidae, Fusioolithidae and Elongatoolithidaeâdominate the Indian eggshell assemblage and show distinct affinities with Peruvian, Romanian, French-Spanish, African and Argentinean localities. The oofamily Laevisoolithidae displays Mongolian and Argentinean affinities.
====
Ashu Khosla & Spencer G. Lucas (2020)
Discussion: Oospecies Diversity, Biomineralization Aspects, Taphonomical, Biostratigraphical, Palaeoenvironmental, Palaeoecological and Palaeobiogeographical Inferences of the Dinosaur-Bearing Lameta Formation of Peninsular India.
In: Late Cretaceous Dinosaur Eggs and Eggshells of Peninsular India. Topics in Geobiology 51: 207-271
Springer, Cham.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56454-4_5
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-56454-4_5
The morphostructural diversity of Indian, French and Argentinean eggshells has been compared and reviewed in great detail and a serious attempt has been made to evaluate their parataxonomy. Indian and French eggshell oospecies show a close resemblance between five Indian and four French oospecies (Megaloolithus khempurensis = M. siruguei; Megaloolithus jabalpurensis = M. mamillare; M. cylindricus = M. siruguei and M. microtuberculata; Fusioolithus padiyalensis = M. microtuberculata; F. baghensis = M. pseudomamillare). Examination of four oospecies from India and Argentina uncovers three groupings, which show similarity between megaloolithids and fusioolithids of the two continents (Fusioolithus baghensis = Patagoolithus salitralensis; Megaloolithus megadermus = Tipo 1e; M. cylindricus = Tipo 1d; M. jabalpurensis = Tipo 1e). The biomineralization aspects of Indian eggshells or any calcified tissue with dental enamel have been compared and studied at four levels (crystallite, unit, morphostructural and megascopic levels). The dinosaur nests, eggs and eggshell fragments are found to be diagenetically altered by calcite recrystallization (herringbone pattern) and chertified silica, which has been commonly noticed in the pores and pore canals.
Sauropod and theropod egg-bearing deposits of the Upper Cretaceous Lameta Limestone at Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh), KhedaâPanchmahal (Gujarat) and the Chandrapur districts of Maharashtra are interpreted as deposits of fluvial and pedogenically modified, semi-arid, fan-palustrine flat systems. These deposits were examined from the taphonomical and sedimentological point of view for depositional palaeoenvironments and preservational interpretation. Lameta dinosaur eggs are found preserved in a particular lithotype (Lower Limestone) and are often associated with a moderately higher sand content, which might be due to sheetwash events. Lameta dinosaurs nested along the raised margins of ponds and lakes. Entombment of eggs in calcic palaeosols or wet carbonate-rich, sandy soil would have produced a high fossilization potential. These calcic palaeosols further indicate that the palaeoclimatic conditions of the nesting sites were semi-arid. The presence of high carbonate content in the system and features like desiccation (drying up) and sheetwash (wetting) events would result in fast matrix cementation and perhaps bury a large amount of the eggs. Biostratigraphically, a Maastrichtian age has been assigned to the dinosaur-nest-bearing Lameta sections of peninsular India on the basis of biota such as dinosaur skeletal material, fishes, ostracods, charophytes, palynomorphs, etc. Palaeobiogeographically, Lameta dinosaurs show Gondwanan affinities that may reflect vicariance, and these large vertebrates ought to be seen within the context of a "Pan-Gondwanan" model.