Hubbry Logo
ProcolophonidaeProcolophonidaeMain
Open search
Procolophonidae
Community hub
Procolophonidae
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Procolophonidae
Procolophonidae
Procolophonidae
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Procolophonids
Temporal range: 265–201.3 Ma Middle Permian - Late Triassic
Skeleton (top) and life restoration (bottom) of Kapes bentoni (Procolophoninae) scale bar = 1cm
Scientific classification Edit this classification
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Reptilia
Subclass: †Parareptilia
Order: †Procolophonomorpha
Superfamily: †Procolophonoidea
Family: †Procolophonidae
Seeley, 1888
Subgroups and Genera
Synonyms
  • Sclerosauridae Nopcsa, 1923[1][2]
Skull of Kapes bentoni

Procolophonidae is an extinct family of small, lizard-like parareptiles known from the Late Permian to Late Triassic that were distributed across Pangaea, having been reported from Europe, North America, China, South Africa, South America, Antarctica and Australia. The most primitive procolophonids were likely insectivorous or omnivorous, more derived members of the clade developed bicusped molars, and were likely herbivorous feeding on high fiber vegetation or durophagous omnivores.[3] Many members of the group are noted for spines projecting from the quadratojugal bone of the skull, which likely served a defensive purpose as well as possibly also for display.[4] At least some taxa were likely fossorial burrowers.[5] While diverse during the Early and Middle Triassic, they had very low diversity during the Late Triassic, and were extinct by the beginning of the Jurassic.[6]

Phylogeny

[edit]

The family is defined as all taxa more closely related to Procolophon trigoniceps than to Owenetta rubidgei.[1] Below is a cladogram from Ruta et al. (2011):[7]

Procolophonidae

Below are three cladograms that follow phylogenetic analyses by Butler et al. (2023). Analysis 1: Strict consensus of 760 most parsimonious trees (MPTs):[8]

Procolophonidae

Analysis 2: Single MPT:[8]

Procolophonidae

Analysis 3: Strict consensus of 18 MPTs:[8]

Procolophonidae

References

[edit]

Sources

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Procolophonidae

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Procolophonidae is an extinct family of small to medium-sized parareptilian reptiles, characterized by robust skulls, specialized , and lizard-like bodies, that flourished from the Late Permian to the across . Members of Procolophonidae first appeared in the Late Permian (Vyatkian regional stage) of , with the earliest unequivocal records including the Suchonosaurus, and they survived the end-Permian mass extinction to diversify widely during the Early to . Their fossils are known from diverse localities, including (Karoo Basin), ( basins in the eastern U.S. and ), (), (Paraná Basin), and (e.g., and the ), reflecting a global distribution during the . Taxonomically, Procolophonidae belongs to the superfamily Procolophonoidea within and includes several subfamilies, such as Procolophoninae (e.g., Procolophon trigoniceps, Sauropareion anoplus) and Leptopleuroninae (e.g., Hypsognathus fenneri, Leptopleuron lacertinum, Libognathus sheddi). Recent discoveries as of 2024 have described additional genera, such as Threordatoth chasmatos from and Cornualbus primus from , highlighting ongoing revelations in their diversity. Key synapomorphies defining the family include a splint-like postfrontal , a small or absent postparietal, a maxillary depression posterior to the external naris, and often transversely widened molariform teeth adapted for crushing or grinding. Body sizes typically ranged from 20 to 50 cm in length, with heavy, triangular skulls featuring enlarged temporal openings and, in some taxa, prominent spines on the quadratojugal or squamosal . Paleobiological inferences suggest that procolophonids were primarily herbivorous or durophagous, feeding on tough vegetation or hard-shelled , as indicated by their and mechanics; some taxa, like Teratophon spinigenis, show evidence of a lifestyle through robust limb s and bone microstructure lacking growth rings, potentially aiding their through the Permian-Triassic via burrowing. Their evolutionary success is attributed to specialized feeding adaptations that allowed exploitation of post-extinction niches, though the family declined in the , possibly due to competition from emerging archosauromorphs.

Description

General Morphology

Procolophonids were small parareptiles, typically ranging from 15 to 50 cm in total length, exhibiting a stocky, quadrupedal that closely resembled modern in overall proportions. Their bodies were characterized by a short, squat with a broad , nearly as wide (about 90%) as the glenoid-acetabular length, supporting a compact and robust build adapted for terrestrial environments. The limbs of procolophonids were robust and well-suited for , with short but sturdy forelimbs and hindlimbs that provided stability on land. In derived forms, such as those within the , adaptations are evident, including large, sharp ungual phalanges interpreted as elongated claws for digging and burrowing activities. Skin impressions in procolophonids are rare but have been documented in certain specimens, revealing a tuberculated or pustular texture consistent with a scaly similar to that of , and there is no evidence of dermal armor plating such as osteoderms. may have been present in overall size variation, though this remains unconfirmed due to limited evidence.

Cranial and Dental Features

The skulls of procolophonids are characteristically triangular in dorsal view, robust, and relatively broad compared to their length, typically measuring 5-10 cm in adults. This morphology reflects adaptations for a terrestrial lifestyle, with a low and flat profile in many taxa. The temporal region features large orbitotemporal fenestrae that are dorsally oriented and greatly expanded, often occupying a significant portion of the . Prominent quadratojugal bones contribute to this expansion, frequently bearing one or more spine-like processes that project posterolaterally, potentially serving defensive or display functions; these spines are more pronounced in derived forms, adding up to 30% to the 's overall length. Dentition in procolophonids varies from primitive to highly specialized, indicating shifts in feeding . Basal taxa exhibit conical, monocuspid teeth suited for piercing and suggesting insectivorous or omnivorous diets. In contrast, derived members developed bicuspid or bulbous molariform teeth with labiolingually expanded crowns, deep occlusal basins, and wear facets, enabling grinding of fibrous plant material or durophagous crushing of hard-shelled . Premaxillary teeth are typically reduced to 2-4 per side, while maxillary and dentary rows include 4-6 robust posterior teeth inset from the jaw margins, implying the presence of cheeks to retain food. The palate in advanced procolophonids often includes transverse ridges on the and pterygoids, facilitating through enhanced occlusion and . Palatal ranges from denticles in primitive forms to absent or tooth-like structures in derived ones, with no vomerine or pterygoid teeth in some taxa like Hypsognathus. Jaw articulation is positioned below the row, permitting a hinge-like vertical motion with limited lateral flexibility, which supports a wide gape and powerful bite for handling tough or armored prey. Representative examples illustrate these features: in Procolophon trigoniceps, the temporal region is notably inflated with elongated orbits and a single pair of quadratojugal spines, alongside bicuspid posterior teeth adapted for omnivory. Teratophon, a procolophonine, exhibits exaggerated multiple spines on the quadratojugal, enhancing presumed defensive capabilities, paired with bulbous indicative of durophagy. Similarly, the recently described leptopleuronine Hwiccewyrm trispiculum exhibits multiple quadratojugal spines and size variation among specimens.

Taxonomy

Definition and Synonyms

Procolophonidae is an extinct family of parareptilian reptiles first established by H. G. Seeley in 1888 as a subfamily within the suborder Procolophonia, later elevated to full rank by Lydekker in Nicholson and Lydekker in 1889. Initially recognized based on cranial features of the type genus Procolophon, the group was subject to historical taxonomic revisions, including early misclassifications of some members as therapsids or lacertilian due to superficial resemblances in shape and . The modern cladistic definition of Procolophonidae, as proposed by Modesto and Damiani in 2007, encompasses all taxa more closely related to Procolophon trigoniceps Owen, 1876, than to Owenetta rubidgei Broom, 1939, or to outgroups such as Nyctiphruretus acudens. This node-based definition emphasizes the family's position within Procolophonoidea and excludes basal procolophonoids like owenettids. A synonymous name is Sclerosauridae Nopcsa, 1923, erected for the genus Sclerosaurus, which subsequent phylogenetic analyses have placed firmly within Procolophonidae, rendering the family name a junior synonym. Diagnostic traits of Procolophonidae include the development of prominent spines on the quadratojugal bone in many taxa, serving possibly as defensive structures, and a specialized characterized by bulbous, labiolingually expanded marginal teeth adapted for crushing . These features distinguish procolophonids from other procolophonoids and are evident in exemplar genera such as Procolophon and Thelerpeton.

Recognized Genera

The Procolophonidae family encompasses approximately 10–12 valid genera, though taxonomic revisions continue to refine this number based on new phylogenetic analyses and fossil discoveries. Recent discoveries include genera such as Oryporan insolitus (2021) from and Hwiccewyrm trispiculum (2023) from the , increasing the recognized diversity. The , Procolophon, is known primarily from the Assemblage Zone of , characterized by a small body size (up to 30 cm in length), a triangular with prominent temporal fenestrae, and marginal featuring conical teeth adapted for grasping. Multiple are assigned to this genus, including the P. trigoniceps, with records also from and , reflecting its Gondwanan distribution during the stage. Other recognized genera exhibit a range of distinguishing traits and span Early to Middle Triassic horizons across . Sauropareion anoplus, a basal form from the () Lystrosaurus Assemblage Zone of the Beaufort Group, , is notable for its primitive cranial morphology, including a long snout and simple, acrodont teeth, suggesting an early-diverging position within the family. Kapes, represented by species such as K. bentoni, occurs in () deposits of , including the and , and is distinguished by a robust with thickened bones and bulbous posterior teeth indicative of durophagous feeding. Teratophon spinigenis from the () Fremouw Formation of features a heavily ornamented with prominent spines on the temporal , likely for display or defense, and a compact body adapted to polar margins of . Additional valid genera include Libognathus sheddi from the Late Triassic (Norian) Dockum Group of Texas, USA, which displays specialized durophagous dentition with robust, crushing marginal teeth and a reinforced jaw, marking it as a derived leptopleuronine. Coletta seca (formerly under Collettia), from the Early Triassic Lystrosaurus Assemblage Zone of South Africa, is a small, basal taxon with a slender build, elongated orbits, and simple marginal teeth, highlighting early post-extinction recovery forms. The genus Thelegnathus, initially described from Early-Middle Triassic (Cynognathus Assemblage Zone) sites in South Africa, includes species like T. browni with fluted molariform teeth, though recent analyses suggest it may be polyphyletic and partially reassigned to taxa such as Theledectes, Thelephon, or Thelerpeton. Several genera have been synonymized or deemed invalid through cladistic revisions. For instance, Sclerosaurus armatus from European sites is a valid member of Procolophonidae with distinct traits including cranial armor and reduced marginal dentition. Basal genera such as Sauropareion and Coletta dominate Early Triassic records, while more derived forms like Kapes and Libognathus appear in Middle to strata, indicating a temporal progression from primitive omnivores to specialized feeders amid Pangaean fragmentation.

Phylogeny

Cladistic Analyses

Cladistic analyses of Procolophonidae have primarily focused on resolving internal relationships within the family, using morphological character matrices derived from cranial and dental features. A seminal study by Cisneros (2008) conducted a comprehensive phylogenetic analysis of procolophonids, incorporating a with 21 taxa scored for 58 characters, primarily from skull morphology. The analysis recovers Procolophoninae as a derived including Procolophon trigoniceps, Teratophon spinigenis, and Thelerpeton oppressus in a trichotomy, supported by features such as a high and palatal structures; Kapes forms a with Thelephon contritus, characterized by expanded temporal regions and specialized . More recent analyses have refined these relationships while confirming the of Procolophonidae. et al. (2023) performed a cladistic analysis using a modified matrix of 32 taxa and 66 characters, drawn from prior studies on procolophonoid postcrania and . Their results support Procolophonidae with robust metrics, including a consistency index exceeding 0.6 across multiple parsimony analyses, indicating low and strong phylogenetic signal; the strict consensus tree shows a basal resolving into subclades, with leptopleuronines (e.g., Leptopleuron and Hypsognathus) as derived. Subsequent studies, such as Santana et al. (2024) describing Cornualbus primus within Procolophoninae and Jones et al. (2024) placing Threordatoth chasmatos as sister to Hwiccewyrm among derived leptopleuronines, further resolve internal polytomies using expanded datasets. Key synapomorphies defining the crown group Procolophonidae include an inflated squamosal bone contributing to cranial armor and bicuspid or multicuspid teeth adapted for grinding , as identified in matrices emphasizing dental evolution. These features underscore the family's specialization for herbivory and are consistently scored across analyses with approximately 15 dental and cranial characters dedicated to them. Ongoing debates center on the placement of taxa with limited material, such as reassigned Thelegnathus species (e.g., Thelephon contritus), which some analyses position as basal due to primitive tooth morphology and small size, while others recover them as derived within a Procolophon-inclusive based on shared temporal fenestration and jaw robusticity; this uncertainty arises from limited material and variable character scoring in matrices.

Position Within Parareptilia

Procolophonidae represents a derived family within the clade Procolophonoidea, which itself forms part of the larger , a monophyletic group of basal sauropsids defined as the most inclusive containing Milleretta rubidgei and Procolophon trigoniceps but excluding Captorhinus aguti. Procolophonoidea is characterized by two primary families, with Procolophonidae as the more specialized sister group to the more basal Owenettidae, supported by shared synapomorphies such as a relatively high and specific palatal structures. This positioning implies a Permian origin for the Procolophonidae-Owenettidae divergence, with Procolophonidae radiating prominently in the . Parareptilia encompasses a diverse array of anapsid reptiles that branched early from the sauropsid lineage, often interpreted as a clade sister to Eureptilia within Reptilia, though some analyses suggest it functions as a paraphyletic grade of primitive reptiles leading to diapsids. Procolophonids exhibit temporal fenestration in some taxa, such as an infratemporal fenestra in Procolophon trigoniceps, a trait that parallels variations seen in basal amniotes and challenges traditional categorizations by indicating evolutionary experimentation with skull architecture. This fenestration, absent in more basal parareptiles, underscores Procolophonidae's derived status within the group. Certain cladistic analyses propose a close evolutionary link between Procolophonoidea and Diadectidae, positioning the latter as a potential to procolophonids among basal amniotes, though this relationship remains debated and is not universally supported. Procolophonidae does not represent direct ancestors to (Testudines) or squamates, with phylogenetic studies refuting earlier hypotheses of turtle-procolophonid affinity in favor of nesting within diapsids as sister to . Historically, Procolophonidae faced misclassifications, with early workers like Watson (1917) allying them to therapsids based on cranial resemblances, and others such as Kuhn (1969) placing them among proganosaurs as primitive reptiles. Cladistic revisions in the , including et al. (1988) and Laurin & Reisz (1995), firmly established their position within a monophyletic , resolving prior uncertainties and integrating them as a key sauropsid lineage.

Distribution and Stratigraphy

Temporal Range

Procolophonidae originated in the Late Permian, specifically during the stage approximately 254–252 million years ago (Ma), with unequivocal fossil records including the genus Suchonosaurus from (Vyatkian regional stage). Possible precursors within the broader Procolophonoidea clade may extend back to the Middle Permian ( to Wuchiapingian stages, ~259–254 Ma), based on minimum divergence estimates from related families like Owenettidae, though definitive Procolophonidae remains are confined to the latest Permian. The family achieved its peak diversity in the Early Triassic, spanning the Induan and Olenekian stages (~252–247 Ma), during the recovery phase following the end-Permian mass extinction. This radiation is evidenced by numerous genera such as Procolophon in and Sauropareion in the Karoo Basin, marking a global expansion across with high taxonomic richness in post-extinction assemblages. Procolophonidae persisted into the (Anisian–Ladinian stages, ~247–237 Ma), represented by taxa like Kapes from , before experiencing a notable decline. Records become rare in the (Carnian–Norian stages, ~237–201 Ma), limited to relict populations such as Hypsognathus in and leptopleuronines in the of the southwestern United States. The group went extinct by the end of the (~201 Ma) at the Triassic–Jurassic boundary, with no known Jurassic fossils, likely succumbing to environmental pressures during this mass .

Geographic Distribution

Procolophonids exhibited a widespread distribution across the from the Late Permian to the , with fossil occurrences spanning both southern and northern landmasses. In southern , the richest derive from Gondwanan localities, particularly the Basin of , where the Procolophon trigoniceps is documented from the Assemblage Zone within the Katberg Formation; the type locality is at Donnybrook in the Province. Fossils of this species also occur in the Lower Triassic Fremouw Formation of , underscoring an early Gondwanan range. In , procolophonids are known from the Lower Triassic Sanga do Cabral Formation (part of the Santa Maria Supersequence) in southern , including Procolophon brasiliensis, as well as sparse Upper Triassic such as Soturnia caliodon from the . Australian are limited to indeterminate procolophonid material from the Knocklofty Formation of . Northern Pangaea yielded procolophonid fossils primarily from Late Triassic sediments. In Europe, specimens include Sclerosaurus armatus from the Lower Triassic Buntsandstein facies of and Kapes bentoni from the Middle Triassic Otter Sandstone Formation in the . North American finds encompass Hypsognathus from the in the eastern United States, along with isolated material from the Late Triassic in and the Dockum Group in . In Asia, Neoprocolophon asiaticus represents the family from the Middle Triassic Ermaying Formation in north-central . Biogeographically, the earliest known procolophonids are from northern Pangaea (European Russia), though possible precursors suggest a Gondwanan origin via related Owenettidae; they achieved high diversity in Gondwana during the Early Triassic, with subsequent dispersal to Laurasian regions facilitated by contiguous land bridges across Pangaea in the aftermath of the Permian-Triassic mass extinction. This pattern reflects their adaptability to post-extinction recovery ecosystems while maintaining Gondwanan endemism in basal forms.

Paleoecology

Diet and Feeding Adaptations

Primitive procolophonids, such as Phaanthosaurus, exhibited diets inferred to be primarily insectivorous or omnivorous, based on their simple, conical, non-occluding marginal teeth suitable for piercing and grasping soft-bodied prey or mixed food items. Jaw mechanics in these basal forms were relatively unspecialized, with slender dentaries and limited occlusal complexity, supporting efficient capture and initial processing of or opportunistic plant matter. In contrast, more derived procolophonids like Procolophon trigoniceps and Libognathus sheddi shifted toward herbivorous or durophagous diets, evidenced by the development of robust, bicuspid molariform teeth with transverse ridges for grinding tough vegetation or crushing hard-shelled and seeds. These taxa possessed deep dentaries and prominent coronoid processes that enhanced stability and adductor muscle leverage, facilitating powerful occlusion adapted for processing high-fiber or abrasive foods. In Libognathus, the reduced number of expanded, tricuspid maxillary teeth and anteriorly curved cusps on the dentary further indicate specialized oral processing for durophagous omnivory. Their supports consumption of gritty plant material in derived procolophonids. mechanics indicate forces sufficient for cracking tough items without requiring extreme reinforcement. Through these dietary specializations, procolophonids occupied rodent-like niches in ecosystems, partitioning resources via variations in occlusion and strength to exploit underutilized high-fiber or hard-object foods unavailable to contemporaneous faunas.

Habitat and Behavior

Procolophonids inhabited primarily terrestrial environments characterized by semi-arid floodplains and river valleys within the Karoo Basin of during the Early to . These settings featured meandering rivers and seasonal aridity, as evidenced by sedimentary deposits in the Burgersdorp Formation, which indicate warm, arid to semi-arid climatic conditions with episodic flooding. evidence, including associated casts at South African localities, suggests that some taxa, such as Procolophon trigoniceps and Teratophon spinigenis, engaged in burrowing behaviors, likely for refuge during climatic instability or flash floods in these dynamic fluvial landscapes. Inferred behaviors point to procolophonids as likely diurnal herbivores adapted to these open terrains, with bone histology showing continuous growth patterns and no lines of arrested growth in Early Triassic taxa such as Procolophon, consistent with stable, non-seasonally stressed activity cycles, whereas Middle Triassic forms like Teratophon exhibit growth rings indicating periodic stress. Quadratojugal spines present in several taxa, including Kapes bentoni and Teratophon spinigenis, probably served defensive roles against predators by enlarging the apparent body size or for intra-specific display during interactions. Burrowing likely facilitated , predator avoidance, or nesting, supported by robust limb morphology enabling scratch-digging with forelimbs and head. Locomotion was quadrupedal, with strong digging capabilities indicated by sturdy limbs and large ungual phalanges, but lacking any arboreal specializations such as elongated digits or grasping adaptations. Sociality was likely gregarious in some taxa; high-density fossil accumulations, including multi-individual communal burrow complexes at sites like those in the Formation, imply possible colonial living and shelter-sharing in response to environmental pressures, as evidenced by a 2025 study on Procolophon trigoniceps skeletons preserved in s. These behaviors may have been constrained by dietary needs for accessible low vegetation in settings.

Evolutionary History

Origins and Diversification

Procolophonidae originated in the Late Permian, evolving from basal procolophonian ancestors such as owenettids, with the earliest records dating to the Wuchiapingian stage approximately 259–254 million years ago. Definitive procolophonid fossils are scarce prior to the Late Permian. These forms represent a divergence within Procolophonoidea, which began diversifying by the Middle Permian around 265 million years ago. The family survived the end-Permian mass extinction event around 252 million years ago with notably high survivorship, as four of six procolophonoid lineages from the Permian extended into the , positioning them as "disaster taxa" in the immediate post-extinction biota. This resilience is evidenced by fossils such as Sauropareion anoplus from the Lystrosaurus Assemblage Zone in , which serves as a sister to more derived procolophonids. In the aftermath of the extinction, Procolophonidae underwent rapid diversification during the stage, radiating to approximately eight genera that filled ecological niches vacated by extinct synapsids and other herbivores. This radiation featured a significant increase in diversification rates, as indicated by phylogenetic analyses showing a shift post-boundary. Key clades like Procolophoninae and the monophyletic Leptopleuroninae emerged, with basal forms such as Theledectes and Eumetabolodon anchoring the phylogeny. Ecological opportunism drove this expansion in recovering ecosystems, where procolophonids exploited post-extinction bottlenecks through adaptations like high-fiber herbivory and omnivory, enabling them to consume emerging vegetation such as the Dicroidium flora. Dental innovations, including bicuspid and bulbous teeth in early forms like Kitchingnathus, facilitated diverse feeding strategies amid reduced competition. A post-extinction bottleneck promoted global dispersal across , with fossils appearing in Gondwanan and Laurasian assemblages by the .

Decline and Extinction

The diversity of Procolophonidae declined markedly during the Middle and Late Triassic, following a peak of over 30 genera primarily in the Early Triassic. A global hiatus in the fossil record lasting more than 15 million years occurred from the Ladinian stage of the Middle Triassic to the lower Carnian of the Late Triassic, after which only a low-diversity assemblage persisted, represented by 2–3 genera within the derived clade Leptopleuroninae. By the Carnian, procolophonids were largely restricted to refugia in Gondwana, with sparse occurrences in Laurasia. Several factors likely contributed to this decline, including biotic competition from the rising dominance of archosauromorphs, which diversified rapidly in the and occupied overlapping ecological niches as small herbivores and omnivores. Environmental shifts, such as widespread aridification and changes in patterns during the and , may have further stressed procolophonid populations adapted to more mesic conditions earlier in the . Notably, their shows no direct causal link to the major perturbations of the end- mass , such as Central Atlantic Magmatic Province , suggesting a more gradual terminal decline. The last known records of Procolophonidae date to the (Carnian–Norian stages, ~237–201 Ma) in , including the leptopleuronine genus Soturnia caliodon from the Norian Caturrita Formation in and Cornualbus primus from the Carnian Passo das Tropas Member of the Santa Maria Supersequence. The group achieved full by the Rhaetian stage (~201 Ma), with no Jurassic survivors. Procolophonidae contributed to the structure of early communities by filling herbivorous and omnivorous roles during the post-Permian recovery, but they left no direct descendants, representing the final chapter in parareptilian evolution.

References

  1. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1631068312000735
  2. https://www.app.pan.pl/archive/published/app54/app20090017.pdf
  3. https://www.depts.ttu.edu/museumttu/collections/paleontology/2023_Muelleretal_Libognathus.pdf
  4. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259471950_Taxonomic_status_of_the_reptile_genus_Procolophon_from_the_Gondwanan_Triassic
  5. https://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/~polsen/nbcp/sues.olsen.etal.00.pdf
  6. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/spp2.1605
  7. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14772019.2024.2373116
  8. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267643253_Procolophonids_from_the_early_triassic_of_Poland
  9. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237169086_The_postcranial_skeleton_phylogenetic_position_and_probable_lifestyle_of_the_Early_Triassic_reptile_Procolophon_trigoniceps
  10. https://www.academia.edu/46952436/Body_Size_Evolution_in_Procolophonoid_Parareptiles
  11. https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/csp/cjes/article/40/4/527/53629/The-postcranial-skeleton-phylogenetic-position-and
  12. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/345684738_A_procolophonid_reptile_from_the_Lower_Triassic_of_Australia
  13. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391135646_Skeletal_accumulations_of_the_parareptile_Procolophon_trigoniceps_reflect_fossorial_response_to_early_Triassic_climatic_instability_across_southern_Gondwana
  14. https://anatomypubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ar.25316
  15. https://palaeo-electronica.org/2005_1/fraser13/fraser13.pdf
  16. https://www.stuartsumida.com/BIOL622/Cisneros2008.pdf
  17. https://www.palaeontologia.pan.pl/PP65/PP65_107-144.pdf
  18. https://www.mindat.org/taxon-3238968.html
  19. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1671/0272-4634%282007%2927%255B337%253ATPRSAF%255D2.0.CO%253B2
  20. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232687993_Anatomy_and_Phylogenetic_Relationships_of_Sclerosaurus_armatus_Amniota_Parareptilia_from_the_Buntsandstein_Triassic_of_Europe
  21. https://datadryad.org/dataset/doi:10.5061/dryad.2z34tmpk8
  22. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313799725_The_procolophonoid_reptile_Sauropareion_anoplus_from_the_lowermost_Triassic_of_South_Africa
  23. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02724634.1997.10011016
  24. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229959344_A_Reappraisal_Of_Coletta_Seca_A_Basal_Procolophonoid_Reptile_From_The_Lower_Triassic_Of_South_Africa
  25. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289895921_Taxonomic_status_of_Thelegnathus_browni_broom_a_procolophonid_reptile_from_the_South_African_triassic
  26. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14772010802172198
  27. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14772019.2024.2373116
  28. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228668525_Phylogenetic_relationships_of_procolophonid_parareptiles_with_remarks_on_their_geological_record
  29. https://fr.copernicus.org/articles/12/71/2009/fr-12-71-2009.pdf
  30. https://anatomypubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ar.25354
  31. https://www.reptileevolution.com/diadectes.htm
  32. https://iucn-tftsg.org/wp-content/uploads/file/Articles/deBraga_and_Rieppel_1997.pdf
  33. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S163106831200070X
  34. https://paleobiodb.org/classic/basicTaxonInfo?taxon_no=162299
  35. https://digitallibrary.amnh.org/items/c9f7e013-c166-4f82-932f-de786905baea
  36. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289176166_Procolophon_brasiliensis_n_sp_a_new_procolophonid_reptile_from_the_Lower_Triassic_of_southern_Brazil
  37. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03115518.2023.2228367
  38. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232669373_The_Osteology_and_Affinities_of_Anomoiodon_liliensterni_A_Procolophonid_Reptile_from_the_Lower_Triassic_Bundsandstein_of_Germany
  39. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/spp2.1232
  40. https://anatomypubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ar.25364
  41. https://www.mindat.org/taxon-4823677.html
  42. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724631003758003
  43. https://doi.org/10.1080/14772010802135157
  44. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222442317_Changing_fluvial_environments_across_the_Permian-Triassic_boundary_in_the_Karoo_Basin_South_Africa_and_possible_causes_of_tetrapod_extinctions
  45. https://wiredspace.wits.ac.za/server/api/core/bitstreams/e6695b05-6688-4ab5-badc-51ec1dd04917/content
  46. https://cdnsciencepub.com/doi/10.1139/e02-082
  47. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0031018225002639
  48. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2001.1766
  49. https://web.lemoyne.edu/~tannerlh/Tanner%20et%20al%202004.pdf
  50. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095383615000218
  51. https://bioone.org/journals/acta-palaeontologica-polonica/volume-54/issue-4/app.2008.0047/Tooth-Histology-of-the-Parareptile-Soturnia-caliodon-from-the-Upper/10.4202/app.2008.0047.full
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.