Talk:Gavialosuchus

Latest comment: 1 year ago by Cabrochu in topic Gavialid vs gavialoid.
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Gavialosuchus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:47, 23 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Gavialid vs gavialoid.

edit

The Lee and Yates (2018) study should be treated cautiously here, as codings for any sort of Gavialosuchus and Thecachampsa were based on the literature and not first-hand observation of specimens. This is why we can acknowledge that G. eggenburgensis is a gavialoid, but not necessarily a gavialid.

Having seen all of the available material in North America and Europe, it's clear that G. eggenburgensis is either more closely related to Tomistoma or outside Tomistoma + Gavialis (Gavialidae sensu stricto). Cabrochu (talk) 16:59, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply