| Basic info | Taxonomic history | Classification | Included Taxa |
| Morphology | Ecology and taphonomy | External Literature Search | Age range and collections |
Arboroharamiya allinhopsoni
Taxonomy
Arboroharamiya allinhopsoni was named by Han et al. (2017). Its type specimen is HG-M017, a skeleton, and it is a 3D fossil preserving soft parts. Its type locality is Nanshimen [Tiaojishan Fm.], which is in an Oxfordian terrestrial shale in the Tiaojishan Formation of China.
Synonymy list
| Year | Name and author |
|---|---|
| 2017 | Arboroharamiya allinhopsoni Han et al. p. 451 figs. Figs. 1-3 |
Is something missing? Join the Paleobiology Database and enter the data
|
|
If no rank is listed, the taxon is considered an unranked clade in modern classifications. Ranks may be repeated or presented in the wrong order because authors working on different parts of the classification may disagree about how to rank taxa.
†Arboroharamiya allinhopsoni Han et al. 2017
show all | hide all
Diagnosis
| Reference | Diagnosis | |
|---|---|---|
| G. Han et al. 2017 | Dental formula I1-C0-P2-M2/I1-C0-P1-M2 (I, incisor; C, canine; P, premolar; M, molar; superscript, upper teeth; subscript, lower teeth) (Extended Data Fig. 4). Similar to Arboroharamiya jenkinsi1 but differing from other euharamiyidans2 in having a hypertrophic mesiolingual cusp (a1) on p4, P4 being transversely the widest upper tooth, and having a strong posterior process on the stapes (unknown in other species). Differs from A. jenkinsi in being smaller in body size (Extended Data Table 1) and having upper incisors without ‘fluting’, molars with fewer cusps and ridges in the basin, A1 more distally extended than B1 on upper molars, and the stapes proportionally shorter. Further differs from Xianshou in having one pair of upper incisors that are smaller than the enlarged upper ones of Xianshou (upper incisors known only in Xianshou linglong) and in each incisor having a main mesial cusp and several distal cuspules, cusp a1 of p4 being more developed, and having molars with more cusps. Further differs from Shenshou in having enlarged cusp a1 on lower cheek teeth and more cusps on molars, and the promontorium
bearing the groove for the stapedial artery. Differs from Haramiyavia, Thomasia, and Megaconus in having only two upper and lower molars, basined upper premolars with enamel flutings, and larger a1 on the lower molars and A1 on the upper molars. Differs from eleutherodon- tids in having only two longitudinal rows of cusps and less extended cusp A1 on upper molars and more robust a1 on p4 and lower molars. Further differs from Megaconus in having basined cheek teeth instead of a trench-like longitudinal valley on molars, and a gracile skeleton for arboreal life. Differs from multituberculates, particularly the Mesozoic ones, in having two upper and one lower premolars and cusp a1 of m1 occluding in the valley of M1. Differences from Maiopatagium3 and Vilevolodon4 are given in Supplementary Information. |
Measurements
No measurements are available
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|||||
|
|
||||
| Source: c = class, subp = subphylum, p = phylum, uc = unranked clade | |||||
| References: Kiessling 2004, Carroll 1988, Luo et al. 2003, Hopson 1973 | |||||