Advertisement

Paläontologische Zeitschrift

, Volume 89, Issue 4, pp 901–923 | Cite as

New insights into the anatomy and systematic of ‘Papoulemyslaurenti, a representative of Neochelys (Chelonii, Podocnemididae) from the early Eocene of the south of France

  • Adán Pérez-García
  • France de Lapparent de Broin
Research Paper

Abstract

Neochelys is a European Eocene genus of turtles well represented by various species. It is one of the few members of Pleurodira identified during the Cenozoic of this continent. However, it has generally been recognized only by shells, and too few skulls are known to provide useful data for comparative diagnosis and relationships. The European Eocene ‘Papoulemys’ had been proposed as a junior synonym of Neochelys, the species ‘P.’ laurenti becoming N. laurenti, but this hypothesis was insufficiently justified. A second skull of this species, from its type locality (the French locality of Saint-Papoul), is analysed here together with several unpublished skulls of other Neochelys spp. from various countries and ages, providing new arguments to refute the validity of the characters used to diagnose ‘Papoulemys’ as a genus distinct from Neochelys. They are exclusively cranial characters since only its holotype (a skull) was known. Several shells from the type locality, on which the reattribution to N. laurenti had been proposed (but only synthetically), are also studied in detail here, as well as other unpublished Neochelys spp. shells. We propose a new diagnosis for ‘Papoulemyslaurenti, reallocating the species to Neochelys. We also expand the available information on this genus and on several of its representatives.

Keywords

Pleurodira Podocnemididae Erymnochelyinae Neochelys Early Eocene Europe 

Kurzfassung

Neochelys war eine im Eozän Europas weit verbreitete und vielfältige Schildkrötengattung, wobei sie eines der wenigen Mitglieder der Pleurodira darstellt, die im Känozoikum dieses Kontinents identifiziert worden sind. Allerdings wurde sie im Allgemeinen anhand des Panzers erkannt, da ihre kraniale Information begrenzt ist. Einige Autoren legten ‘Papoulemys’ aus dem europäischen Eozän als jüngeres Synonym von Neochelys nahe, so dass die Spezies ‘P.’ laurenti zu N. laurenti wurde. Diese Hypothese wurde nur unzureichend begründet. Die Untersuchung eines zweiten Schädels in Hinblick auf die Zuordnung des Fundes sowie die Analyse weiterer nicht veröffentlichter Schädel anderer Neochelys-Arten aus unterschiedlichen Ländern und Zeitaltern bietet neue Argumente, die es ermöglichen die Gültigkeit der Figuren, die ‘Papoulemys’ als von Neochelys verschiedene Gattung zu widerlegen. Diese entsprachen ausschließlich kranialen Figuren, da nur ihr Holotypus, ein Schädel, bekannt war. Mehrere Panzer dieser Fundzuordnung, in der die Wiederzuschreibung zu N. laurenti stattfand, allerdings nur auf eine eine synthetische Weise, werden hier ebenfalls im Detail untersucht, ebenso wie weitere unveröffentlichte Panzer von Neochelys-Arten. Dies ermöglicht es, die Gültigkeit der Art ‘Papoulemyslaurenti zu bestätigen, für die eine neue Diagnose vorgestellt wird. Die Neuzuordnung dieser Art zu Neochelys ist begründet, da sich Kenntnisse von dieser Gattung und mehreren ihrer Vertreter verbessert haben.

Schlüsselwörter

Pleurodira Podocnemididae Erymnochelyinae Neochelys Unteres Eozän Europa 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Ronan Allain and Nour Eddine Jalil (MNHN.F), Salvador Bailon (MNHN.ZA.AC), Roger Bour and Laure Pierre (MNHN.RA), Alain Galoyer (Issy-les-Moulineaux, France), Rupert Wild and Boettcher (SMNS), the Curator of the Messel collections at Senckenberg Naturmuseum Frankfurt, and, especially, Emiliano Jiménez Fuentes (University of Salamanca, Spain) for access to the specimens; H.-P. Labarrère (Montargis, France) for shell material donation and geological information; Dominique Teodori for the vertebra donation and for access to his unpublished material; Mr. Rico for a shell donation; Eric Lopez and Régis Liria for their assistance in the Grès d’Aigne area; Gérard Boucher (SAGA) and Philippe Richir (MNHN, Paleontology) for preparation of several specimens; Hanna Nohe for the German translation of the abstract; Christine Laurin for revising the English text; and Oliver W. M. Rauhut (Ludwig-Maximilian University) and two anonymous reviewers for comments and suggestions. This research received support from the SYNTHESYS Project http://www.synthesys.info/, which is financed by the European Community Research Infrastructure Action under the FP7 Integrating Activities Programme; and from the research proyect CGL2012-35199 of the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación.

References

  1. Andrews, C.W. 1900. On a new species of chelonian (Podocnemis aegyptica) from the lower miocene of Egypt. Geological Magazine 7: 1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrews, C.W. 1901. Preliminary note on some recently discovered extinct vertebrates from Egypt (Part II). Geological Magazine 4: 436–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andrews, C.W. 1903. On some pleurodiran chelonians from the Eocene of the Fayum, Egypt. Annals and Magazine of Natural History Series 11: 115–122.Google Scholar
  4. Andrews, C.W. 1906. A descriptive catalog of the tertiary vertebrata of the Fayum, Egypt. Order Chelonia. London: Trustees of the British Museum (Natural History).Google Scholar
  5. Baur, G. 1888. Osteologische Notizen über Reptilien. Zoologischer Anzeiger 2(269–296): 417–424.Google Scholar
  6. Bergounioux, F.-M. 1935. Contribution à l’étude paléontologique des Chéloniens. Chéloniens fossiles du Bassin d’Aquitaine. Mémoires de la Société géologique de France 25: 1–216.Google Scholar
  7. Bergounioux, F.-M. 1936. Monographie des Chéloniens fossiles conservés au laboratoire de Géologie de la Faculté des Sciences de Lyon. Travaux du laboratoire de Géologie de la Faculté des Sciences de Lyon 31: 1–40.Google Scholar
  8. Bergounioux, F.-M. 1954. Les Ché1oniens fossiles des terrains tertiaires de la Vénétie. Memorie degli Istituti di Geologia e Mineralogia dell’Universita di Padova 18: 1–115.Google Scholar
  9. Cadena, E.A., J.I. Bloch, and C.A. Jaramillo. 2010. New podocnemidid turtle (Testudines: Pleurodira) from the middle-upper Paleocene of South America. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 30: 367–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cadena, E.A., D.T. Ksepka, C.A. Jaramillo, and J.I. Bloch. 2012. New pelomedusoid turtles from the late Palaeocene Cerrejón Formation of Colombia and their implications for phylogeny and body size evolution. Journal of Systematic Palaeontology 10: 313–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carvalho, P., J. Bocquentin, and F. de Lapparent de Broin. 2002. Une nouvelle espèce de Podocnemis (Pleurodira, Podocnemididae) provenant du Néogène de la formation Solimões, Acre, Brésil. Geobios 35: 677–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cattoi, N., and M.A. Freiburg. 1958. Una nueva especie de “Podocnemis” del cretaceo argentino. Physis 21: 58–67.Google Scholar
  13. Claude, J., and H. Tong. 2004. Early Eocene testudinoid turtles from Saint-Papoul, France, with comments on the early evolution of modern Testudinoidea. Oryctos 5: 3–45.Google Scholar
  14. Cope, E.D. 1864. On the limits and relations of the Raniformes. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 16: 181–183.Google Scholar
  15. Cope, E.D. 1868. On the origin of genera. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 20: 242–300.Google Scholar
  16. Cornalia, E. 1849. Vertebratorum synopsis in Museo Mediolanense extantium quae per novum Orbem Cajetanas Osculati collegit Annis 1846-47-48. Speciebus novis vel minus cognitus adjectis, nec non Descriptionibus atque Iconibus Illustratis, curante Aemilio Cornalia. Italy: Mediolani.Google Scholar
  17. Dacqué, E. 1912. Die fossilen Schildkröten Aegyptens. Geologische und Palaeontologische Abhandlungen 14: 275–337.Google Scholar
  18. Danilo, L., J.A. Remy, M. Vianey-Liaud, B. Marandat, J. Sudre, and F. Lihoreau. 2013. A new Eocene locality in Southern France sheds light on the basal radiation of Palaeotheriidae (Mammalia, Perissodactyla, Equoidea). Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 33: 195–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. de Broin, F. 1971. Une espèce nouvelle de tortue pleurodire (?Roxochelys vilavilensis n. sp.) dans le Crétacé supérieur de Bolivie. Bulletin de la Société Géologique de France 7: 445–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. de Broin, F. 1977. Contribution à l’étude des Chéloniens. Chéloniens continentaux du Crétacé et du Tertiaire de France. Mémoires du Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle 38: 1–366.Google Scholar
  21. de Broin, F. 1980. Les Tortues de Gadoufaoua (Aptien du Niger); aperçu sur la paléobiogéographie des Pelomedusidae (Pleurodira). Mémoires de la Société géologique de France 139: 39–46.Google Scholar
  22. de Broin, F. 1988. Les tortues et le Gondwana. Examen des rapports entre le fractionnement du Gondawana et la dispersion géographique des tortues pleurodires à partir du Crétacé. Studia Geologica Salmanticensia Studia Palaeocheloniologica 2: 103–142.Google Scholar
  23. de Broin, F. 1991. Fossil turtles from Bolivia. Revista Técnica YPFB 12: 509–527.Google Scholar
  24. de Broin, F., and M.S. de la Fuente. 1993. Les tortues fossiles d’Argentine. Annales de Paléontologie 79: 169–231.Google Scholar
  25. de Lapparent de Broin, F. 2000. The oldest pre-Podocnemidid turtle (Chelonii, Pleurodira), from the early Cretaceous, Ceará state, Brasil, and its environment. Treballs del Museu de Geologia de Barcelona 9: 43–95.Google Scholar
  26. de Lapparent de Broin, F. 2001. The European turtle fauna from the Triassic to the Present. Dumerilia 4: 155–216.Google Scholar
  27. de Lapparent de Broin, F. 2003. Neochelys sp. (Chelonii, Erymnochelyinae), from Silveirinha, early Eocene. Portugal. Ciências da Terra 15: 117–132.Google Scholar
  28. de Lapparent de Broin, F., J. Bocquentin, and F.R. Negri. 1993. Gigantic turtles (Pleurodira, Podocnemididae) from the Late Miocene-Early Pliocene of South Western Amazon. Bulletin de l’Institut français d’études andines 23: 657–670.Google Scholar
  29. de Lapparent de Broin, F., M.S. de la Fuente, and M.S. Fernández. 2007. Notoemys laticentralis (Chelonii, Pleurodira), Late Jurassic of Argentina: new examination of the anatomical structures and comparisons. Revue de Paléobiologie 26: 99–136.Google Scholar
  30. de Lapparent de Broin, F., and X. Murelaga. 1999. Turtles from the Upper Cretaceous of Laño (Iberian Peninsula). Estudios del Museo de Ciencias Naturales de Álava 14: 135–211.Google Scholar
  31. de Lapparent de Broin, F., X. Murelaga, and V. Codrea. 2004. Presence of Dortokidae (Chelonii, Pleurodira) in the earliest Tertiary of the Jibou Formation, Romania: Paleobiogeographical implications. Acta Palaeontologica Romaniae 4: 203–215.Google Scholar
  32. de Lapparent de Broin, F., X. Murelaga, F. Farrés, and J. Altimiras. 2014. An exceptional chelonid turtle, Osonachelus decorata gen. et sp. nov., from the Bartonian of Catalonia (Spain). Geobios 47: 11–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. de la Fuente, M.S., F. de Lapparent de Broin, and T. Manera de Bianco. 2001. The oldest and first nearly complete skeleton of a chelid, of the Hydromedusa sub-group (Chelidae, Pleurodira), from the Upper Cretaceous of Patagonia. Bulletin de la Societe Geologique de France 172: 237–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. de la Fuente, M.S. 2003. Two new pleurodiran turtles from the Portezuelo Formation (Upper Cretaceous) of Northern Patagonia, Argentina. Journal of Paleontology 77: 559–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. De Stefano, G. 1902. Cheloniani fossili cenozoici. Bollettino della Società Geologica Italiana 21: 263–304.Google Scholar
  36. De Stefano, G. 1906. Sopre una tartarugha fossile della Francia meridionale. Bollettino della Società Geologica Italiana 25: 535–542.Google Scholar
  37. de Zigno, A. 1889. Chelonii scoperti nei terreni cenozoici delle prealpi Venete. Memorie del Reale Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti 23: 119–129.Google Scholar
  38. de Zigno, A. 1890. Chelonii terziari del Veneto. Memoria seconda: chelonio scoperto nel calcare nummulitico di Avesa presso Verona. Letta al Reale Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti 1: 1–13.Google Scholar
  39. Fourteau, R. 1920. Contribution à l’étude des vertébrés miocènes de l’Egypte. Cairo: Government Press.Google Scholar
  40. Gaffney, E.S., and R.C. Wood. 2002. Bairdemys, a new side-necked turtle (Pelomedusoides: Podocnemididae) from the Miocene of the Caribbean. American Museum Novitates 3359: 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Gaffney, E.S., T.M. Scheyer, K.G. Johnson, J. Bocquentin Villanueva, and O.A. Aguilera. 2008. Two new species of the side necked turtle genus Bairdemys (Pleurodira, Podocnemididae), from the Miocene of Venezuela. Palaeontologische Zeitzschrift 82: 209–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Gaffney, E.S., P.A. Meylan, R.G. Wood, E. Simons, and D. de Almeida Campos. 2011. Evolution of the side-necked turtles: the family Podocnemididae. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 350: 1–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Gaffney, E.S., H. Tong, and P.A. Meylan. 2006. Evolution of the side-necked turtles: The families Bothremydidae, Euraxemydidae, and Araripemydidae. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 300: 1–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Grandidier, A. 1867. Liste des reptiles nouveaux découverts, en 1866, sur la côte sud-ouest de Madagascar. Revue Magazine Zoologique de Paris 19: 232–234.Google Scholar
  45. Haughton, S.H. 1928. On some reptilian remains from the dinosaur beds of Nyasaland. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa 16: 67–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hervet, S. 2003. Deux nouvelles tortues de l’Éocène inférieur de Saint-Papoul (Aude, France). Comptes Rendus Palevol 2: 617–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hervet, S. 2004. Systématique du groupe « Palaeochelys sensu lato–Mauremys » (Chelonii, Testudinoidea) du tertiaire d’Europe occidentale: principaux résultats. Annales de Paléontologie 90: 13–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hirayama, R. 1992. Fossil Turtles from the Neogene Strata in the Sinda Basin, Eastern Zaire. African Study Monographs 17: 49–65.Google Scholar
  49. Hutchison, J.H., and D.M. Bramble. 1981. Homology of the plastral scales of the Kinosternidae and related turtles. Herpetologica 37: 73–85.Google Scholar
  50. Jain, S.L. 1977. A new fossil pelomedusid turtle from the Upper Cretaceous Pisdura sediments, central India. Journal of the Palaeontological Society of India 20: 360–365.Google Scholar
  51. Jiménez Fuentes, E. 1968. Stereogenys salmanticensis nov. sp., quelonio eocénico del Valle del Duero. Estudios Geológicos 24: 191–203.Google Scholar
  52. Jiménez Fuentes, E. 1992. Quelonios fósiles de Castilla y León. In Vertebrados fósiles de Castilla y León, ed. E. Jiménez Fuentes, 71–100. Salamanca: Museo de Salamanca.Google Scholar
  53. Jiménez Fuentes, E. 1993. Aclaraciones sobre el status de Neochelys zamorensis, pelomedúsido (Reptilia, Chelonii) de pequeña talla del Eoceno de Zamora (España). Stvdia Geologica Salmanticensia 28: 141–153.Google Scholar
  54. Jiménez Fuentes, E. 2003. Quelonios fósiles en la cuenca del Duero. In Los vertebrados fósiles en la historia de la vida. Excavación, estudio y patrimonio, ed. E. Jiménez Fuentes, and J. Civis Llovera, 177–195. Salamanca: Aquilafuente.Google Scholar
  55. Jiménez Fuentes, E., S. Martín de Jesús, E. Mulas Alonso, E. Pérez Ramos, and S. Jiménez García. 1988. Guía de la Sala de las Tortugas. Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca.Google Scholar
  56. Latreille, P.A. 1800. Histoire naturelle des Salamandres de France, précédée d’un tableau méthodique des autres reptiles indigènes. Paris: Villier.Google Scholar
  57. Laurent, Y., S. Adnet, E. Bourdon, D. Corbalan, L. Danilo, S. Duffaud, G. Fleury, G. Garcia, M. Godinot, G. Le Roux, C. Maisonnave, G. Métais, C. Mourer-Chauviré, B. Presseq, B. Sigé, and F. Solé. 2010. La Borie. (Saint-Papoul, Aude): un gisement exceptionnel dans l’Eocène basal du Sud de la France. Bulletin de la Société d’Histoire naturelle de Toulouse et de Midi-Pyrénées 146: 89–103.Google Scholar
  58. Merle, D. 2008. Stratotype Lutétien. Paris: Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle.Google Scholar
  59. Meylan, P.A., E.S. Gaffney, and D. de A. Campos. 2009. Caninemys, a new side-necked turtle (Pelomedusoides: Podocnemididae) from the Miocene of Brazil. American Museum Novitates 3639: 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Müller, L. 1935. Über eine neue Podocnemis-Art (Podocnemis vogli) aus Venezuela nebst ergänzenden Bemerkungen über die systematischen Merkmale der ihr nächstverwandten Arten. Zoologischer Anzeiger 110: 97–109.Google Scholar
  61. Pérez-García, A., and F. de Lapparent de Broin. 2013. A new species of Neochelys (Chelonii, Podocnemididae) from the Ypresian (early Eocene) of the south of France. Comptes Rendus Palevol 12: 269–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Price, L.I. 1953. Os quelônios da formaçâo Bauru, Cretáceo terrestre do Brasil meridional. Boletín Divisao de Geologica e Mineralogia, Departamento Nacional da Produção Mineral 147: 1–34.Google Scholar
  63. Righi D., and M. Delfino M. 2003. Erymnochelys sp.: una tartaruga “malgascia” nel Paleogene della Sardegna. In Riassunti e Programma delle Giornate di Paleontologia 2003, ed. M. Pavia, and D. Violanti. (Eds.), 44. Alessandria.Google Scholar
  64. Schleich, H.-H. 1993. New reptile material from the German Tertiary. 11. Neochelys franzeni n. sp., the first pleurodiran turtle from Messel. Kaupia 3: 15–21.Google Scholar
  65. Schweigger, A.F. 1812. Prodromus monographiae Cheloniorum, Pt. 1. Königsberger Archiv für Naturwissenschaft und Mathematik 1812: 271–458.Google Scholar
  66. Siebenrock, F. 1902. Zur Systematik der Schildkröten-Gattung Podocnemis Wagl. Anzeiger der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Classe 111: 157–170.Google Scholar
  67. Staesche, K. 1937. Podocnemis brasiliensis n. sp. aus der Obern Kreide Brasiliens. Neues Jahrbuch der Mineralogie, Geologie und Paläeontologie B 77: 291–309.Google Scholar
  68. Suárez, J.M. 1969. Um quelônio da Formação Baurú. In Anais do XXIII Congresso Brasileiro de Geologia, 167–176. Salvador: [no publisher given].Google Scholar
  69. Swinton, W.E. 1939. A new fresh-water tortoise from Burma. Records of the Geological Survey of India 74: 548–551.Google Scholar
  70. Tong, H. 1998. Pleurodiran turtles from the Eocene of Saint-Papoul (Aude), Southern France. Oryctos 1: 43–53.Google Scholar
  71. Troschel, F.H. 1848. Amphibien. In Reisen in Britisch-Guiana in den Jahren 184044. Im Auftrage Majestät des Königs von Preussen ausgeführt. Versuch einer Zusammenstellung der Fauna und Flora von Britisch-Guiana, ed. M.R. Schomburgk, 645–661. Leipzig: Weber.Google Scholar
  72. von ReinachA, A. 1903. Schildkrötenreste aus dem ägyptischen Tertiär. Abhandlungen der Senckenbergischen Naturforschenden Gesellschaft 29: 1–64.Google Scholar
  73. von Spix, J.B. 1824. Animalia nova sive species novae Testudinarum et Ranarum, quas in itinere per Brasiliam annis MDCCCXVII-MDCCCXX jussu et auspicius Maximiliani Josephi I Bavariae Regis. Munich: Hübschman.Google Scholar
  74. Wagler, J. 1830. Natürliches System der Amphibien, mit Vorangehender Classification der Säugethiere und Vögel. Munich: Cotta.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wagner, A. 1853. Beschreibung einer fossilen Schildkröte und etlicher anderer Reptilien-Ueberreste aus den lithographischen Schiefern und dem Grünsandsteine von Kelheim. Abhandlungen der Königlich Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Mathematisch-Physikalische 7: 239–264.Google Scholar
  76. Weems, R.E., and J.L. Knight. 2013. A new species of Bairdemys (Pelomedusoides: Podocnemididae) from the Oligocene (Early Chattian) Chandler Bridge Formation of South Carolina, USA, and its paleobiogeographic implications for the genus. In Morphology and Evolution of Turtles, ed. D. Brinkman, P. Holroyd, and J. Gardner. Germany: Springer.Google Scholar
  77. Williams, E.E. 1950. Variation and selection in the cervical central articulations of living turtles. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 94: 505–562.Google Scholar
  78. Williams, E.E. 1954. New or redescribed pelomedusid skulls from the Tertiary of Africa and Asia (Testudines, Pelomedusidae) 1. Dacquemys paleomorpha, new genus, new species from the Lower Oligocene of the Fayum. Egypt. Breviora 35: 1–9.Google Scholar
  79. Williams, E.E. 1956. Podocnemis bassleri, a new species of pelomedusid turtle from the Late Tertiary of Peru. American Museum Novitates 1782: 1–10.Google Scholar
  80. Wood, R.C. 1970. A review of the fossil Pelomedusidae (Testudines, Pleurodira) of Asia. Breviora 357: 1–24.Google Scholar
  81. Wood, R.C. 1983. Kenyemys williamsi, a fossil pelomedusid turtle from the Pliocene of Kenya. In Advances in herpetology and evolutionary biology, ed. G.J. Rhodin, and K. Miyata, 74–85. Cambridge: Museum of Comparative Zoology.Google Scholar
  82. Wood, R.C. 1997. Turtles. In Vertebrate paleontology in the Neotropics, ed. R.F. Kay, R.H. Madden, R.L. Cifelli, and J.J. Flynn, 155–170. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.Google Scholar
  83. Wood, R.C. 2003. Fossil turtles from Lothagam. In Lothagam: the dawn of humanity in eastern Africa, ed. M.G. Leakey, and J.M. Harris, 115–136. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  84. Wood, R.C., and M.L. Díaz de Gamero. 1971. Podocnemis venezuelensis, a new fossil pelomedusid (Testudines, Pleurodira) from the Pliocene of Venezuela and a review of the history of Podocnemis in South America. Breviora 376: 1–23.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Paläontologische Gesellschaft 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adán Pérez-García
    • 1
    • 2
  • France de Lapparent de Broin
    • 3
  1. 1.Centro de GeologiaFaculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa (FCUL)LisbonPortugal
  2. 2.Grupo de Biología Evolutiva, Facultad de CienciasUNEDMadridSpain
  3. 3.Sorbonne Universités, CR2P, MNHN, CNRSUPMC-Paris6Paris Cedex 05France

Personalised recommendations