This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
Chimaerasuchus is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an effort to make Wikipedia a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource for amphibians and reptiles. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Amphibians and ReptilesWikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and ReptilesTemplate:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptilesamphibian and reptile articles
I removed the image of Chimaerasuchus from the page because it is inaccurate. Crocodylomorphs had already lost the ungual phalanges of digits IV and V. Furthermore, the forelimbs are too beefy. I have also removed some unsupported and bizarre statements from the article. 76.26.82.249 (talk) 18:58, 19 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
There are no described post-cranial remains for Chimaerasuchus, so I find it odd that you consider the forelimbs to be "too beefy". Can you please provide a reference that shows notosuchians lost the ungual phalanges on digits IV and V. Cheers Venatico (talk) 19:04, 19 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
You are misinformed. Please refer to Wu and Sues (1996). The postcranial remains of Chimaerasuchus are described therein. Even if the forelimbs were not known, drawing comparisons with other known crocodylomorphs, and especially other ziphosuchians/notosuchians would be sufficient to assess the inaccuracy of the drawing in question. Furthermore, all crocodylomorphs lost ungual phalanges on digits IV and V. See any number of descriptive papers on these taxa, when the material is preserved, you'll notice that the digits terminate without unguals. 76.26.82.249 (talk) 19:08, 19 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
Wu and Sues (1996) clearly illustrates the absence of the ungual phalanges on the manus of Chimaerasuchus (Figure 7C, p. 696). 76.26.82.249 (talk) 19:10, 19 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
Cheers, I don't have a copy of Wu & Sues (1996), I'll need to look it out again. The loss of the unguals (or "claw phalange" in plantigrade forms) could very easily be taphonomic, as I'm sure you are aware. However, the ungals are not lost on digit IV (as far as I am aware). I've seen complete limbs of many thalattosuchians, and I'm afraid they have a "claw phalange"/ungual on digit IV. As does Baurusuchus. Although, I do agree that having a functional fifth digit figured is clearly wrong. Venatico (talk) 19:22, 19 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
Can I get a copy of the Wu and Sues paper so I can make the necessary corrections to my reconstruction?--Mr Fink (talk) 20:22, 19 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
