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

Annemys latiens

Reptilia - Testudines - Xinjiangchelyidae

Taxonomy
Annemys latiens was named by Sukhanov and Narmandakh (2006). Its type specimen is GIN (without number), a partial shell, and it is a 3D body fossil. Its type locality is Shar Teg (Ulan Malgait Fm.) [HMNS-GIN], which is in a Tithonian terrestrial horizon in the Ulan Malgait Formation of Mongolia. It is the type species of Annemys, Annemys.

It was recombined as Xinjiangchelys latiens by Matzke et al. (2004) and Rabi et al. (2013); it was corrected as Annemys latiens by Sukhanov and Narmandakh (2006) and Rabi et al. (2014).

Synonymy list
YearName and author
2000Annemys latiens Sukhanov and Narmandakh
2004Xinjiangchelys latiens Matzke et al. p. 1295
2006Annemys latiens Sukhanov and Narmandakh p. 120
2013Xinjiangchelys latiens Rabi et al. p. 17
2014Annemys latiens Rabi et al.
2019Annemys latiens Evers et al.
2022Annemys latiens Obraztsova et al.

Is something missing? Join the Paleobiology Database and enter the data

RankNameAuthor
kingdomAnimalia()
Bilateria
EubilateriaAx 1987
Deuterostomia
phylumChordataHaeckel 1874
subphylumVertebrata
superclassGnathostomata
Osteichthyes()
subclassSarcopterygii()
subclassDipnotetrapodomorpha(Nelson 2006)
subclassTetrapodomorpha()
Tetrapoda
Reptiliomorpha
RankNameAuthor
Anthracosauria
subclassAmphibiosauriaKuhn 1967
Cotylosauria()
Amniota
Sauropsida
classReptilia
Testudinata(Oppel 1811)
orderTestudinesBatsch 1788
suborderCryptodira
Eucryptodira
familyXinjiangchelyidaeNessov 1990
genusAnnemys
specieslatiens

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.

Annemys latiens Sukhanov and Narmandakh 2006
show all | hide all
Diagnosis
ReferenceDiagnosis
V. B. Sukhanov and P. Narmandakh 2006Plates of the shell are relatively thinner than in A. levensis. The neural 1 is hexagonal with very short posterolateral border. The neural 2 is quadrangular. The neural 7 is reduced posteriorly allowing contact of the costals 7 at midline. The neural 8 may be absent. The vertebrals 2 and 3 are relatively narrow, whereas the vertebrals 4 and 5 are more wide, the vertebral 5 being wider than the vertebral 1. The posterior plastral lobe is relatively wide. The anterior projection of the anals is wide, reaching 55% of the lobe width at the basement.
E. M. Obraztsova et al. 2022The shell of Annemys differs from that of other xinjiangchelyids by a combination of the following characters: nuchal emargination present (unlike Phunoichelys thirakhupti); anterior border of the carapace thickened (unlike Brodiechelys spp., Phunoichelys thirakhupti and Protoxinjiangchelys salis); cervical trapezoid or rectangular (unlike Siamochelys peninsularis), with a width/ length ratio >4 (unlike Shartegemys laticentralis, Siamochelys peninsularis and Tienfuchelys spp.); vertebral 1 is distant from the anterior carapace margin (unlike Phunoichelys thirakhupti), and wider than or as wide as the nuchal (unlike Siamochelys peninsularis and Tienfuchelys spp); vertebrals 2 and 3 as wide as or narrower than vertebral 1 (unlike some Xinjiangchelys spp.); vertebral 2 is not wider than more posterior vertebrals (unlike Brodiechelys spp. and Xinjiangchelys qiguensis); vertebral 2 length/width ratio in adults of 0.8–1.1 (unlike Brodiechelys spp., Protoxinjiangchelys salis, Shartegemys laticentralis, Siamochelys peninsularis and Xinjiangchelys spp.); ligamentous plastron-carapace Chengyuchelys spp., Phunoichelys thirakhupti, Protoxinjiangchelys salis, Tienfuchelys spp. and Yanduchelys delicatus); relatively narrow plastral lobes (unlike Siamochelys peninsularis); epiplastra relatively small (unlike Siamochelys peninsularis) and directed perpendicular from midline in adults (unlike Kalasinemys prasarttongosothi, Phunoichelys thirakhupti, Shartegemys laticentralis and some Tienfuchelys spp.); entoplastron placed between hyoplastra (unlike Yanduchelys delicatus), rhomboid, oval or hexagonal in shape (unlike Yanduchelys delicatus), longer than wide or as wide as long (unlike Siamochelys peninsularis and Yanduchelys delicatus); extension of the gulars onto the entoplastron weak or absent (unlike Brodiechelys spp.); middle part of the humeral-pectoral sulcus lying at the level of the axillary notch (unlike Protoxinjiangchelys salis); pectoral not much longer than abdominal (unlike Protoxinjiangchelys salis); four pairs of inframarginals (unlike Siamochelys peninsularis and Tienfuchelys spp.). For a detailed comparison of xinjiangchelyids in terms of shell characters see Table 1. The skull of Annemys differs from Xinjiangchelys radiplicatoides in having a deeper upper temporal emargination, a longer supraoccipital crest, and reduced basioccipital tubera; and from Kalasinemys prasarttongosothi by the presence of scales on the skull surface, a smaller prefrontal, a frontal with longer main body and larger contribution to the orbital margin, deeper upper temporal emargination, larger foramen palatinum posterius, basipterygoid process isosceles triangular in shape, longer basioccipital ventral surface, narrower triturating surface, and narrower incisura columellae auris. Cervical vertebrae of Annemys differ from those of other xinjiangchelyids with known cervical morphology (Xinjiangchelys qiguensis, Xinjiangchelys tianshanensis) in being short with a cervical formula (known only in Annemys variabilis sp. nov.) of 2((3()4()5()6()7()8) or 2((3()4()5()6()7()8(.