| Basic info | Taxonomic history | Classification | Relationships |
| Morphology | Ecology and taphonomy | External Literature Search | Age range and collections |
Mosasaurinae
Reptilia - Squamata - Mosasauridae
Taxonomy
Mosasaurinae was named by Gervais (1853). It is not extant. It was considered monophyletic by Karl and Nyhuis (2012).
It was assigned to Natantia by Bardet et al. (2005); and to Mosasauridae by Antunes (1964), Thurmond (1969), Russell (1970), Thurmond and Jones (1981), Lingham-Soliar (1995), Nicholls and Meckert (2002), Bell and Polcyn (2005), Schulp et al. (2008), Mateus et al. (2012), Karl and Nyhuis (2012) and Bell et al. (2013).
It was assigned to Natantia by Bardet et al. (2005); and to Mosasauridae by Antunes (1964), Thurmond (1969), Russell (1970), Thurmond and Jones (1981), Lingham-Soliar (1995), Nicholls and Meckert (2002), Bell and Polcyn (2005), Schulp et al. (2008), Mateus et al. (2012), Karl and Nyhuis (2012) and Bell et al. (2013).
Synonyms
|
Synonymy list
| Year | Name and author |
|---|---|
| 1853 | Mosasaurinae Gervais |
| 1894 | Clidastes liodontus Merriam p. 35 figs. Text-figs. 26, 32-34, 43, 60, 72, 73, 75B, 76B, 98A; Pl. 1, fig. 1 |
| 1964 | Mosasaurinae Antunes p. 137 |
| 1969 | Mosasaurinae Thurmond p. 76 |
| 1970 | Mosasaurinae Russell p. 371 |
| 1981 | Mosasaurinae Thurmond and Jones p. 153 |
| 1995 | Mosasaurinae Lingham-Soliar |
| 2002 | Mosasaurinae Nicholls and Meckert p. 1593 |
| 2005 | Mosasaurinae Bardet et al. |
| 2005 | Mosasaurinae Bell and Polcyn p. 178 |
| 2008 | Mosasaurinae Schulp et al. p. 1 |
| 2012 | Clidastes liodontus Karl and Nyhuis |
| 2012 | Clidastes moorevillensis Karl and Nyhuis |
| 2012 | Mosasaurinae Karl and Nyhuis |
| 2012 | Mosasaurinae Mateus et al. |
| 2013 | Mosasaurinae Bell Jr. et al. |
| 2014 | Clidastes liodontus Fanti et al. |
| 2014 | Clidastes moorevillensis Fanti et al. |
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.
Diagnosis
No diagnoses are available