| Basic info | Taxonomic history | Classification | Included Taxa |
| Morphology | Ecology and taphonomy | External Literature Search | Age range and collections |
Olympicetus avitus
Taxonomy
Olympicetus avitus was named by Vélez-Juarbe (2017). Its type specimen is LACM 149156, a partial skull (partial skull of a juvenile individ- ual, including 15 teeth, part of the left mandibular ramus, a stylo- hyoid, cervical vertebrae 1–3; missing distal end of r), and it is a 3D body fossil. Its type locality is LACMVP 5412, which is in a Chattian offshore mudstone in the Pysht Formation of Washington. It is the type species of Olympicetus.
Synonymy list
| Year | Name and author |
|---|---|
| 2017 | Olympicetus avitus Vélez-Juarbe p. 2 |
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.
†Olympicetus avitus Vélez-Juarbe 2017
show all | hide all
Diagnosis
| Reference | Diagnosis | |
|---|---|---|
| J. Vélez-Juarbe 2017 | Small-bodied odontocete with bizy- gomatic width between 145 and 180 mm, symmetric skull, and heterodont dentition. Among other stem odontocetes, it is characterized by the following combination of plesio- morphic and derived characters: rostrum fairly wide at base (c. 7[1]; shared with Ashleycetus planicapitis, Simocetus rayi, and Agorophius pygmaeus [Mu€ller, 1849]); posterior wall of the antorbital notch formed by the maxilla (c.15[0]); a con- cave posterior end of the palatal surface (c. 18[0]; shared with Xenorophidae and Waipatia maerewhenua (Fordyce, 1994); posterior buccal teeth closely spaced (c. 25[0]; shared
with A. planicapitis and Ag. pygmaeus); ecto- and entocingu- lum present in buccal teeth (c. 31[1], 32[0]; shared with Xenorophus sloani Kellogg, 1923, Cotylocara macei Geisler et al., 2014, and Echovenator sandersi Churchill et al., 2016); orbit positioned relatively low (c. 47[2]; shared with A. planicapitis, Mirocetus riabinini, Xenorophus spp., and Albertocetus meffordorum Uhen, 2008); anterior edge of supraorbital process oriented anteromedially (c. 49[0]; shared with S. rayi); lacrimal restricted below supraorbital process of frontal (c. 51[0]; shared with A. planicapitis, S. rayi, and Patriocetus kazakhstanicus Dubrovo and Sanders, 2000); dor- solateral edge of internal opening of infraorbital foramen formed by maxilla and lacrimal (c. 57[1]); presence of a small maxillary infraorbital plate (c. 59[1]; shared with Archae- odelphis patrius Allen, 1921); presence of a postorbital ridge (c. 62[0]; shared with Xenorophidae and Ag. pygmaeus); long posterolateral sulcus (c. 72[2]; shared with A. planicapitis and S. rayi); posterior-most extension of premaxilla reaching only to the level of the anterior half of the supraorbital process (c. 74[1]; shared with Ar. patrius); absence of maxillary fora- men ( D posterior dorsal infraorbital foramen) (c. 75[0]; shared with Ar. patrius and Xenorophus sloani); maxilla only partially covering the supraorbital processes (c. 76[1]; shared with A. planicapitis, Ar. patrius, and S. rayi); maxilla reaching only to the level of the posterior half of the supraorbital pro- cesses (c. 77[1]; shared with A. planicapitis, Ar. patrius, and Ag. pymaeus); nasals reaching posteriorly to the level of the anterior half of the supraorbital processes (c. 122[0]; shared with A. planicapitis); frontals lower than nasals (c. 124[0]; shared with C. macei and S. rayi); frontals posterior to nasals wider than nasals (c. 125[0]; shared with A. planicapitis, Al. meffordorum, and E. sandersi); supraoccipitals at the same level as the frontals/nasals (c. 128[1]; shared with S. rayi); supraoccipital reaching anteriorly only to a level posterior to the anterior edge of the floor of the squamosal fossa (c. 139 [0]; shared with Xenorophidae); postglenoid process tapering ventrally (c. 151[0]; shared with Xenorophidae); having rela- tively thin palatines in the floor of the posterior part of the nasal cavity (c. 158[0]; shared with Xenorophidae and S. rayi); and absence of tympanosquamosal recess and presence of fossa for sigmoid process of tympanic (c. 178[1]; shared with Xenorophidae). It differs further from most other stem odontocetes, except Ar. patrius, by having broad dorsal expo- sure of parietals; a prominent intertemporal constriction formed by elongated, rounded parietals; absence of a sagittal crest; lack of roofing of the temporal fossa; and concave pos- terior border of the supraorbital process. |
Measurements
No measurements are available
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
| Source: subo = suborder, o = order | |||||
| Reference: Uhen 2004 | |||||