• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Maaqwi cascadensis gen. et sp. nov. (1 Viewer)

Fred Ruhe

Well-known member
Netherlands
Sandy M. S. McLachlan, Gary W. Kaiser, Nicholas R. Longrich, 2017

Maaqwi cascadensis: A large, marine diving bird (Avialae: Ornithurae) from the Upper Cretaceous of British Columbia, Canada

PLoS ONE. 12 (12): e0189473

Free pdf:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0189473&type=printable

Abstract:

Mesozoic bird fossils from the Pacific Coast of North America are rare, but small numbers are known from the Late Cretaceous aged sediments of Hornby Island, British Columbia. Most are unassociated fragments that offer little information, but additional preparation of a large coracoid has revealed more details of its structure, as well as three associated wing bones. Phylogenetic analysis suggests that Maaqwi cascadensis, gen. et sp. nov. represents a derived crown or near-crown member of Ornithurae, and specifically suggests affinities with Vegaviidae. M. cascadensis is characterized by large size, and regressions based on dimensions of the coracoid suggest a large bird, with an estimated body mass of approximately 1.5 kilograms. The bones are robust, with thick walls, suggesting that M. cascadensis was a bird adapted for diving, similar to modern loons and grebes. The wings are short, while the coracoid is unusually short and broad, similar to modern loons. Along with the
Ichthyornithes and Hesperornithes, M. cascadensis and Vegaviidae appear to represent a third clade of bird that evolved to exploit marine habitats in the Late Cretaceous, one specialized for foot-propelled diving and rapid cruising flight over water.

Enjoy,

Fred

dorsal face of right coracoid and partial humerus holotype RBCM.EH2008.011.01120 c = coracoid. h = humerus
 

Attachments

  • Maaqwi cascadensis.jpg
    Maaqwi cascadensis.jpg
    19.9 KB · Views: 9
Taxonomy:

Ornithuromorpha Chiappe and Walker 2002 [57]
Ornithurae Haeckel 1866 sensu Chiappe [58]
Vegaviidae Agnolin et al. 2017 [59]
Maaqwi cascadensis gen. et sp. nov.

Etymology
The generic name, Maaqwi, is derived from ªma'aqwiº, the Coast Salish word meaning ªwater
birdº. The specific name, cascadensis, reflects provenance in the Cascadia region of western
North America.

Holotype
RBCM.EH2008.011.01120 consists of a concretionary mudstone nodule containing a right
coracoid, as previously described by Dyke et al. [18]. However, at the time of initial description, the specimen had not been prepared and only the dorsal face of the coracoid was
visible [18, Fig 2A]. The acrocoracoid appeared to be missing and only the broken ends of the
three associated long bones were visible. Subsequent mechanical preparation of the coracoid
revealed that its head was everted ventrally and had been buried within the matrix. Further
preparation revealed central portions of three wing elements; a humerus, ulna and radius (Fig
2). The specimen is housed within the RBCM.

Fred
 
Dear Laurent,

I can not find a zoobank registration either. I think not all researchers recognize zoobank. The big question is of course: does it matter? In this paper vegaviidae Agnolin, Brissón Egli, Chatterjee, Garcia Marsà et Novas, 2017 is recognized, but Vegaviiformes Worthy, Desgrange, Handley & Lee, 2017 is ignored. We are working with different taxonomies and without any form of concensus these days.

Fred
 
Hi Fred,
I can not find a zoobank registration either. I think not all researchers recognize zoobank. The big question is of course: does it matter?
Well, adhesion to the Code is voluntary, thus anybody is in principle free to say that he doesn't want to comply--but this will be at the risk of having their work disregarded by others who have other views.
If you recognize the ICZN, then the current rule is that a work that is distributed electronically only must (among other things):
8.5.3. be registered in the Official Register of Zoological Nomenclature (ZooBank) (see Article 78.2.4) and contain evidence in the work itself that such registration has occurred.
...or it is not published.

The names in it have the same status as manuscript names and are all unavailable. The information in it cannot be considered published either. (A reference to this work can't be used to fulfil a nomenclatural requirement in a subsequent work.)
"In the work itself" means in the pdf. (I.e., not elsewhere on the journal website.)

L -
 
Last edited:
Dear Laurent,

I think formaly you are right and I do agree with you, but this is the theory, in practice I think it works different.

Fred
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top