PBDB Taxon

Basic info	Taxonomic history	Classification	Included Taxa
Morphology	Ecology and taphonomy	External Literature Search	Age range and collections

Inbecetenanura ragei

Amphibia - Temnospondyli

Taxonomy

Inbecetenanura ragei was named by Lemierre et al. (2023). Its type specimen is MNHN.F.IBC 1602, a partial skull (braincase with otic capsules), and it is a 3D body fossil. Its type locality is In Becetèn, which is in a Coniacian/Santonian fluvial-lacustrine shale/sandstone in the Inbeceten Formation of Niger. It is the type species of Inbecetenanura.

Year	Name and author
2023	Inbecetenanura ragei Lemierre et al.

Diagnosis

Reference	Diagnosis
A. Lemierre et al. 2023	Pipid frog that differs from all Xenopodinae in (1) having the parasphenoid posteromedial extent ending well anterior to the ventral margin of the foramen magnum (ending near the ventral margin of the foramen magnum in Xenopodinae); (2) having olfactory foramina completely bound in bone (bound in cartilage in Xenopodinae); and (3) having its orbitonasal foramina completely bound in bone (incompletely bound in bone in Xenopodinae, except in Xenopus laevis). Differs from all other pipinomorphs in (1) having the floor of the braincase rounded in the orbital region (dis- tinctly angled in all other pipinomorphs) and (2) in having the anterior margin of the fenestra frontoparietalis of the sphenethmoid completely delimited by bone (not delimited in bone in all other pipinomorphs, except Eoxenopoides). Differs also from Pachycentrata taqueti in (1) lacking a vermicular ornamentation on the cranial bones (present in Pachycentrata); (2) lacking a posterior bony expansion of the prooticoccipital, located posterolaterally to the occipital condyles (present in Pachycentrata); and (3) having ovoid occipital condyles (crescentic in Pachycentrata). Differs from Oumtkoutia anae in (1) having wider and larger optic and oculomotor foramina (small circular foramina in Oumtkoutia; Rage & Dutheil, 2008, fig. 6); (2) having lateral expansion of the parasphenoid at mid-length (absent in Oumtkoutia); (3) having ovoid occipital condyles (crescentic in Oumtkoutia); and (4) having a wider orbitonasal foramen (small and circular in Oumtkoutia; Rage & Dutheil, 2008, fig. 4). Differs from Eoxenopoides in (1) having a slight orbital constriction (absent in Eoxenopoides); (2) the posterior end of the frontoparietal lacking a posterior process (small posterior process is present on posterior edge of frontoparietal Eoxenopoides); (3) extensive fusion of the bones of the braincase (frontoparietal, sphenethmoid, parasphenoid, exoccipitals) with sutures barely visible; (4) having lateral expansion of the parasphenoid present midlength (absent in Eoxenopoides); and (5) in having the parasphenoid ending posteriorly well anterior to the foramen magnum (almost at the level of the foramen magnum in Eoxenopoides). Differs also from Hymenochirus and Pseudhymenochirus in (1) having a rounded braincase in lateral view (wedge-shaped in Hymenochirus and Pseudhymenochirus); (2) having frontoparietal lacking anterolateral processes; and (3) lacking a medial ramus of the pterygoid fused to the otic region of the braincase. Differs additionally from Pseudhymenochirus in having frontoparietal and nasals not fused to each other (fused in Pseudhymenochirus). Differs from Pipa in (1) having a rounded braincase in lateral view (wedge-shaped in Pipa); (2) lacking anterolateral processes of the frontoparietal; (3) having the floor of the braincase in the orbital region rounded (distinctly angled in Pipa); (4) having occipital condyles ovoid (flat and circular in Pipa); (5) occipital condyles narrowly separated (well separated in Pipa); and (6) having the anterior margin of the frontoparietal rounded (acuminated in Pipa).

Measurements

No measurements are available