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

Archaeopteryx lithographica

Reptilia - Avetheropoda

Taxonomy
Archaeopteryx lithographica was named by Meyer (1861). Its type specimen is feather, an other (feather), and it is a compression preserving soft parts.

Synonyms
  • Pterodactylus crassipes was named by Meyer (1857) [Due to the poor preservation of the holotype, this species cannot be distinguished from other theropods strictly on apomorphic characters; only a differential diagnosis can be given. Ostromia crassipes differs from most theropods with the probable exception of Anchiornis and Eosinopteryx (as closest relatives) in the presence of longitudinal furrows on both sides of all preserved manual phalanges and at least metacarpal III. The taxon differs from other anchiornithids in an unusually small first manual ungual and other proportions. Measurements for an almost complete specimen of Anchiornis were given by Hu et al. [32], and this specimen differs from Ostromia in the relative length of metacarpal III in comparison to metacarpal I (2.46 versus 2.21), the length of the first manual ungual in comparison to metacarpal I (1.26 versus 0.9), and the length of the tibiotarsus in comparison to the metatarsus (1.93 versus 1.67) (Table 2). In contrast, only a few selected measurements were given for Eosinopteryx [27], so that the only comparable ratio is that between the tibiotarsus and the metatarsus, which is 1.96 in Eosinopteryx, as opposed to 1.67 in Ostromia. Furthermore, although no measurements are given, the photo of the manus of Eosinopteryx clearly shows that manual ungual I is longer than metacarpal I in this taxon, rather than shorter, as it is the case in Ostromia.]. Its type specimen is Teyler Museum 6928 and 6929, a partial skeleton (partial skeleton with left manus, gastralia, both femora, pubes, tibiae, fibulae, and wing feather impressions), and it is a compression preserving soft parts. Its type locality is Jachenhausen quarry, Kelheim, which is in a Tithonian lagoonal/restricted shallow subtidal limestone in the Solnhofen Formation of Germany. It is the type species of Ostromia.

    It was synonymized subjectively with Archaeopteryx lithographica by Ostrom (1970); it was recombined as Ostromia crassipes by Foth and Rauhut (2017).
  • Archaeopteryx bavarica was named by Wellnhofer (1993).

    It was synonymized subjectively with Archaeopteryx siemensii by Mayr et al. (2007); it was synonymized subjectively with Archaeopteryx lithographica by Senter and Robins (2003) and Bennett (2008).
  • Archaeopteryx recurva was named by Howgate (1984) [type is the Eichstätt specimen]. Its type specimen is JM 2257, a skeleton (complete skeleton), and it is a compression fossil. Its type locality is Workerszell, Eichstätt, which is in a Tithonian lagoonal/restricted shallow subtidal limestone in the Solnhofen Formation of Germany. It is the type species of Jurapteryx.

    It was recombined as Jurapteryx recurva by Howgate (1985); it was synonymized subjectively with Archaeopteryx lithographica by Paul (1988), Senter and Robins (2003) and Padian (2004).
  • Wellnhoferia grandis was named by Elzanowski (2001) [Solnhofen (6th) specimen (Bürgermeister-Müller Museum)]. Its type specimen is BSP 1999, a skeleton (nearly complete skeleton missing portions of the neck, tail, backbone, and head), and it is a compression fossil. Its type locality is Altmühl Valley Archaeopteryx (6th specimen), which is in a Tithonian lagoonal/restricted shallow subtidal lime mudstone in the Solnhofen Formation of Germany.

    It was synonymized subjectively with Archaeopteryx lithographica by Mayr et al. (2007) and Bennett (2008).
  • Griphosaurus problematicus was named by Woodward (1862). It is not extant.

    It was synonymized subjectively with Archaeopteryx lithographica by Padian (2004).
  • Archaeopteryx siemensii was named by Dames (1897). Its type specimen is HMN 1880 (Berlin specimen), a skeleton (complete skeleton with feathers), and it is a compression preserving soft parts. Its type locality is Blumenberg quarry, Eichstätt, which is in a Tithonian lagoonal/restricted shallow subtidal lime mudstone in the Solnhofen Formation of Germany.

    It was recombined as Archaeornis siemensii by Petronievics (1917) and Wetmore (1960); it was recombined as Archaeornis siemensi by Lambrecht (1933); it was misspelled as Archaeopteryx siemensi by Swinton (1934), Talent et al. (1966), Brodkorb (1971), Ellenberger (1974), Charig (1985) and Mayr et al. (2007); it was synonymized subjectively with Archaeopteryx lithographica by Padian (2004) and Bennett (2008).
  • Archaeopteryx oweni was named by Petronievics (1921). It is not extant.

    It was synonymized subjectively with Archaeopteryx lithographica by Padian (2004).
  • Archeopteryx macrurus was named by Owen (1862). Its type specimen is BMNH 37001 (London Specimen), a skeleton (complete skeleton with feathers and digestive contents), and it is a compression preserving soft parts. Its type locality is Langenaltheim quarry, which is in a Tithonian lagoonal/restricted shallow subtidal limestone in the Solnhofen Formation of Germany.

    It was recombined as Archaeopteryx macrura by Lambrecht (1933), Swinton (1934) and Ellenberger (1974); it was synonymized subjectively with Archaeopteryx lithographica by Padian (2004).
Synonymy list
YearName and author
1857Pterodactylus crassipes Meyer p. 535
1861Archaeopteryx lithographica Meyer p. 679
1862Archeopteryx macrurus Owen p. 273
1862Griphosaurus problematicus Woodward
1864Archeopteryx lithographica Owen p. 33
1868Archaeopteryx lithographica Huxley pp. 1-5
1879Archaeopteryx macroura Vogt p. 702
1882Archaeopteryx lithographica Quenstedt p. 133
1886Archaeopteryx lithographica Winkler
1886Pterodactylus crassipes Winkler p. 198
1890Pterodactylus crassipes Zittel p. 792
1890Archaeopteryx lithographica Zittel p. 821
1897Archaeopteryx siemensii Dames p. 829
1900Archeopteryx lithographicus Van Den Broeck p. 71
1917Archaeornis siemensii Petronievics
1921Archaeopteryx oweni Petronievics
1927Archaeopteryx lithographica Petronievics figs. Pl. 1-3
1933Archaeopteryx lithographica Lambrecht p. 80
1933Archaeopteryx macrura Lambrecht p. 80
1933Archaeornis siemensi Lambrecht p. 80
1934Archaeopteryx macrura Swinton figs. Pl. III
1934Archaeopteryx siemensi Swinton p. 14
1960Archaeopteryx lithographica Wetmore p. 2
1960Archaeornis siemensii Wetmore p. 2
1966Archaeopteryx lithographica Talent et al. p. 82
1966Archaeopteryx siemensii Talent et al. p. 82
1971Archaeopteryx siemensii Brodkorb p. 30
1971Archaeopteryx lithographica Brodkorb p. 32
1974Archaeopteryx macrura Ellenberger
1974Archaeornis siemensi Ellenberger
1978Archaeopteryx lithographica Brodkorb p. 218
1981Archaeopteryx lithographica Osmolska p. 88
1984Archaeopteryx recurva Howgate
1985Archaeornis siemensi Charig
1985Archaeopteryx lithographica Charig p. 27
1985Jurapteryx recurva Howgate p. 111
1985Archaeopteryx lithographica Ostrom p. 10
1988Archaeopteryx lithographica Paul p. 352
1988Archaeopteryx lithographica Wellnhofer p. 1791
1991Archaeopteryx lithographica Chatterjee p. 326
1993Archaeopteryx lithographica Perle et al. p. 623
1993Archaeopteryx bavarica Wellnhofer
1994Archaeopteryx lithographica Chiappe and Calvo p. 237
1996Archaeopteryx lithographica Novas p. 676
1997Archaeopteryx lithographica Ji and Ji p. 32
1997Archaeopteryx lithographica Norell and Makovicky p. 9
1998Archaeopteryx lithographica Makovicky and Norell p. 1
1999Archaeopteryx lithographica Norell and Makovicky p. 7
2000Archaeopteryx lithographica Burnham et al. p. 2
2000Archaeopteryx lithographica Norell et al. p. 9
2001Wellnhoferia grandis Elzanowski pp. 520-522 figs. 1-2
2002Archaeopteryx lithographica Chiappe p. 461
2002Archaeopteryx lithographica Maryanska et al. p. 101 fig. 1
2003Archaeopteryx lithographica Senter and Robins p. 964
2004Archaeopteryx lithographica Padian p. 211
2004Wellnhoferia grandis Padian p. 211
2004Archaeopteryx lithographica Senter et al. p. 3
2005Archaeopteryx lithographica Lü and Zhang p. 419
2005Archaeopteryx bavarica Wellnhofer and Röper p. 28
2005Archaeopteryx lithographica Wellnhofer and Röper p. 28
2007Archaeopteryx lithographica Gishlick and Gauthier p. 569
2007Archaeopteryx siemensii Mayr et al. p. 100
2007Archaeopteryx lithographica Mayr et al. p. 113
2007Archaeopteryx lithographica Turner et al. p. 3
2008Archaeopteryx lithographica Bennett p. 535
2009Archaeopteryx lithographica Bever and Norell p. 5
2009Archaeopteryx lithographica Norell et al. p. 49
2010Archaeopteryx lithographica Li et al. p. 83
2010Archaeopteryx lithographica Xu and Han p. 16
2013Archaeopteryx lithographica Zhou et al.
2017Ostromia crassipes Foth and Rauhut

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

RankNameAuthor
kingdomAnimalia()
Triploblastica
Nephrozoa
Deuterostomia
phylumChordataHaeckel 1847
subphylumVertebrata
superclassGnathostomata
Osteichthyes()
Sarcopterygii
subclassDipnotetrapodomorpha(Nelson 2006)
subclassTetrapodomorpha()
Tetrapoda()
Reptiliomorpha
Anthracosauria
Batrachosauria()
Cotylosauria()
Amniota
Sauropsida
classReptilia
subclassEureptilia()
Romeriida
Diapsida()
Eosuchia()
RankNameAuthor
Neodiapsida
SauriaGauthier 1984
Archosauromorpha(Huene 1946)
Crocopoda
ArchosauriformesGauthier 1986
Eucrocopoda
Archosauria()
informalAvemetatarsalia
Ornithodira
Dinosauromorpha
Dinosauriformes
Dinosauria()
Saurischia()
Theropoda()
Neotheropoda
AverostraPaul 2002
Tetanurae
orderAvetheropoda
suborderCoelurosauria
Maniraptora
Avialae
genusArchaeopteryx
specieslithographica

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
ReferenceDiagnosis
C. Foth and O. W. M. Rauhut 2017 (Ostromia crassipes)Due to the poor preservation of the holotype, this species cannot be distinguished from other theropods strictly on apomorphic characters; only a differential diagnosis can be given. Ostromia crassipes differs from most theropods with the probable exception of Anchiornis and Eosinopteryx (as closest relatives) in the presence of longitudinal furrows on both sides of all preserved manual phalanges and at least metacarpal III. The taxon differs from other anchiornithids in an unusually small first manual ungual and other proportions. Measurements for an almost complete specimen of Anchiornis were given by Hu et al. [32], and this specimen differs from Ostromia in the relative length of metacarpal III in comparison to metacarpal I (2.46 versus 2.21), the length of the first manual ungual in comparison to metacarpal I (1.26 versus 0.9), and the length of the tibiotarsus in comparison to the metatarsus (1.93 versus 1.67) (Table 2). In contrast, only a few selected measurements were given for Eosinopteryx [27], so that the only comparable ratio is that between the tibiotarsus and the metatarsus, which is 1.96 in Eosinopteryx, as opposed to 1.67 in Ostromia. Furthermore, although no measurements are given, the photo of the manus of Eosinopteryx clearly shows that manual ungual I is longer than metacarpal I in this taxon, rather than shorter, as it is the case in Ostromia.