| Basic info | Taxonomic history | Classification | Included Taxa |
| Morphology | Ecology and taphonomy | External Literature Search | Age range and collections |
Enantiostylops
Taxonomy
Enantiostylops was named by Averianov (2020). It is not extant.
It was assigned to Arctostylopidae by Averianov (2020).
It was assigned to Arctostylopidae by Averianov (2020).
Species
Synonymy list
| Year | Name and author |
|---|---|
| 2020 | Enantiostylops Averianov |
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
| Reference | Diagnosis | |
|---|---|---|
| A. O. Averianov 2020 | Differs from all arctostylopid genera by having internal invagination on M1–3 parastyle and narrow, cleft-like ectoflexid on m1–3. Differs from Asiostylops Zheng, 1979 by high crown molars, by M1–3 lingual cingulum present, p3 metaconid present, p4 metaconid distal to protoconid, p4 talonid curved, m1–3 paraconid rib prominent, m1–3 entoconid connected with ectolophid by entolophid, m2 wider than m1 and m3, and m3 hypoconulid as wide as the rest of talonid. Differs from Allostylops Zheng, 1979 by high crown molars and M1–3 pseudohypocone absent. Differs from Bothriostylops Zheng and Huang, 1986 by high crown molars, M1–3 metaconule absent, M1–3 lingual cingulum present, m1–3 entoconid connected with ectolophid by entolophid, and m2 wider than m1 and m2. Differs from Wanostylops Huang and Zheng, 1997 by high crown molars and M1–3 metaconule absent. Differs from Kazachostylops Nesov, 1987b by M1–3 lingual cingulum present, m1–3 mesiolabial cristid absent, and m1 entoconid present. Differs from Stenostylops Huang et al., 2001 by M1–3 lingual cingulum present. Differs from Anatolostylops Zhai, 1978 by M1–3 pseudohypocone absent, m1–3 labial and lingual cingulids absent, and m2 wider than m1 and m3. Differs from Arctostylops Matthew, 1915 by M1–3 pseudohypocone absent, m1–3 trigonid length about one-third of the crown length, m1–3 ectolophid attached lingual on trigonid, with long ectoflexid, m1–3 labial and lingual cingulids absent, and m3 longer than m2. Differs from Migrostylops Tong and Wang, 2006 by M1–3 pseudohypocone absent, m1–3 trigonid length about one-third of the crown length, m1–3 mesiolabial cristid absent, m1–3 ectolophid attached lingual on trigonid, with long ectoflexid, and m2 wider than m1 and m2. Differs from Palaeostylops Matthew and Granger, 1925 by M1–3 pseudohypocone absent, m1–3 trigonid length about one-third of the crown length, m1–3 mesiolabial cristid absent, m1–3 ectolophid attached lingual on trigonid, with long ectoflexid, and m3 longer than m2. |
Measurements
No measurements are available
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
| Source: f = family, subc = subclass, c = class, subp = subphylum | |||||
| References: Hendy et al. 2009, Ji et al. 2002, Carroll 1988, Archibald 1998, Lillegraven 1979 | |||||
Collections
No collection or age range data are available