PERSONAL DE APOYO
REGUERO Marcelo Alfredo
artículos
Título:
BIOSTRATIGRAPHIC CONSIDERATIONS OF THE DIVISADERAN FAUNAL ASSEMBLAGE
Autor/es:
CERDEÑO, E.; LÓPEZ, G.M.; REGUERO, M.A.
Revista:
JOURNAL OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY
Editorial:
SOC VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY
Referencias:
Lugar: Lawrence; Año: 2008 p. 574 - 577
ISSN:
0272-4634
Resumen:
Since the 1930s, a rich vertebrate fauna has been collected in
Cenozoic sediments of the Divisadero Largo Formation in the
Divisadero Largo area, 8 km West of Mendoza city, Mendoza
Province, Argentina (see Simpson et al., 1962 and references
therein; Fig. 1). This faunal assemblage was mainly based on
eight mammal species (Simpson et al., 1962), but also contained
several reptiles (turtles, crocodiles, and boas) and a running bird,
recently recognized as a crocodile (Agnolin and Pais, 2006). The
peculiarity of this association led to the establishment of the
Divisaderan Land Mammal Age (Pascual et al., 1965), corresponding
to late Eocene, partially filling the gap between the
Mustersan and Deseadan ages. The most outstanding feature of
this faunal assemblage was the coexistence of primitive, generalized
mammal taxa with two other species that presented advanced
characterssuch as hypsodontycomparable to those
observed in younger Deseadan (late Oligocene) and post-
Deseadan taxa. These two taxa are the notoungulates Ethegotherium
carettei (Minoprio, 1947) (Hegetotheriidae: Hegetotheriinae)
and Trachytherus? mendocensis Simpson and Minoprio,
1949 (Mesotheriidae: Trachytheriinae?). A third taxon, Acamana
ambiguus, very incompletely known, was also used to tie
the fauna to the Deseadan fauna of Salla, Bolivia (MacFadden et
al., 1985; Marshall et al., 1986); this species was later related to
the Henricosborniidae Simpsonotus from the Riochican age of
northwestern Argentina (Bond and Vucetich, 1983). The discovery
of mammal remains in the Mariño Formation (early Miocene)
of Divisadero Largo (Cerdeño et al., 2006; Cerdeño and
Vucetich, 2007) and the accuracy of the stratigraphic provenance
of the E. carettei remains (López and Manassero, 2006, 2008)
lead us to state that these aforementioned taxa do not correspond
to the Divisaderan levels. Therefore, doubts arose about
the validity of the Divisaderan land mammal age as firstly characterizedEthegotherium
carettei (Minoprio, 1947) (Hegetotheriidae: Hegetotheriinae)
and Trachytherus? mendocensis Simpson and Minoprio,
1949 (Mesotheriidae: Trachytheriinae?). A third taxon, Acamana
ambiguus, very incompletely known, was also used to tie
the fauna to the Deseadan fauna of Salla, Bolivia (MacFadden et
al., 1985; Marshall et al., 1986); this species was later related to
the Henricosborniidae Simpsonotus from the Riochican age of
northwestern Argentina (Bond and Vucetich, 1983). The discovery
of mammal remains in the Mariño Formation (early Miocene)
of Divisadero Largo (Cerdeño et al., 2006; Cerdeño and
Vucetich, 2007) and the accuracy of the stratigraphic provenance
of the E. carettei remains (López and Manassero, 2006, 2008)
lead us to state that these aforementioned taxa do not correspond
to the Divisaderan levels. Therefore, doubts arose about
the validity of the Divisaderan land mammal age as firstly characterized (Minoprio, 1947) (Hegetotheriidae: Hegetotheriinae)
and Trachytherus? mendocensis Simpson and Minoprio,
1949 (Mesotheriidae: Trachytheriinae?). A third taxon, Acamana
ambiguus, very incompletely known, was also used to tie
the fauna to the Deseadan fauna of Salla, Bolivia (MacFadden et
al., 1985; Marshall et al., 1986); this species was later related to
the Henricosborniidae Simpsonotus from the Riochican age of
northwestern Argentina (Bond and Vucetich, 1983). The discovery
of mammal remains in the Mariño Formation (early Miocene)
of Divisadero Largo (Cerdeño et al., 2006; Cerdeño and
Vucetich, 2007) and the accuracy of the stratigraphic provenance
of the E. carettei remains (López and Manassero, 2006, 2008)
lead us to state that these aforementioned taxa do not correspond
to the Divisaderan levels. Therefore, doubts arose about
the validity of the Divisaderan land mammal age as firstly characterizedTrachytherus? mendocensis Simpson and Minoprio,
1949 (Mesotheriidae: Trachytheriinae?). A third taxon, Acamana
ambiguus, very incompletely known, was also used to tie
the fauna to the Deseadan fauna of Salla, Bolivia (MacFadden et
al., 1985; Marshall et al., 1986); this species was later related to
the Henricosborniidae Simpsonotus from the Riochican age of
northwestern Argentina (Bond and Vucetich, 1983). The discovery
of mammal remains in the Mariño Formation (early Miocene)
of Divisadero Largo (Cerdeño et al., 2006; Cerdeño and
Vucetich, 2007) and the accuracy of the stratigraphic provenance
of the E. carettei remains (López and Manassero, 2006, 2008)
lead us to state that these aforementioned taxa do not correspond
to the Divisaderan levels. Therefore, doubts arose about
the validity of the Divisaderan land mammal age as firstly characterizedAcamana
ambiguus, very incompletely known, was also used to tie
the fauna to the Deseadan fauna of Salla, Bolivia (MacFadden et
al., 1985; Marshall et al., 1986); this species was later related to
the Henricosborniidae Simpsonotus from the Riochican age of
northwestern Argentina (Bond and Vucetich, 1983). The discovery
of mammal remains in the Mariño Formation (early Miocene)
of Divisadero Largo (Cerdeño et al., 2006; Cerdeño and
Vucetich, 2007) and the accuracy of the stratigraphic provenance
of the E. carettei remains (López and Manassero, 2006, 2008)
lead us to state that these aforementioned taxa do not correspond
to the Divisaderan levels. Therefore, doubts arose about
the validity of the Divisaderan land mammal age as firstly characterized, very incompletely known, was also used to tie
the fauna to the Deseadan fauna of Salla, Bolivia (MacFadden et
al., 1985; Marshall et al., 1986); this species was later related to
the Henricosborniidae Simpsonotus from the Riochican age of
northwestern Argentina (Bond and Vucetich, 1983). The discovery
of mammal remains in the Mariño Formation (early Miocene)
of Divisadero Largo (Cerdeño et al., 2006; Cerdeño and
Vucetich, 2007) and the accuracy of the stratigraphic provenance
of the E. carettei remains (López and Manassero, 2006, 2008)
lead us to state that these aforementioned taxa do not correspond
to the Divisaderan levels. Therefore, doubts arose about
the validity of the Divisaderan land mammal age as firstly characterizedSimpsonotus from the Riochican age of
northwestern Argentina (Bond and Vucetich, 1983). The discovery
of mammal remains in the Mariño Formation (early Miocene)
of Divisadero Largo (Cerdeño et al., 2006; Cerdeño and
Vucetich, 2007) and the accuracy of the stratigraphic provenance
of the E. carettei remains (López and Manassero, 2006, 2008)
lead us to state that these aforementioned taxa do not correspond
to the Divisaderan levels. Therefore, doubts arose about
the validity of the Divisaderan land mammal age as firstly characterizedE. carettei remains (López and Manassero, 2006, 2008)
lead us to state that these aforementioned taxa do not correspond
to the Divisaderan levels. Therefore, doubts arose about
the validity of the Divisaderan land mammal age as firstly characterized
