4.7 Editorial Material

An island of dwarfs - Reconstructing the Late Cretaceous Hateg palaeoecosystem Preface

期刊

PALAEOGEOGRAPHY PALAEOCLIMATOLOGY PALAEOECOLOGY
卷 293, 期 3-4, 页码 265-270

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.palaeo.2010.05.032

关键词

Cretaceous; Tetrapods; Dinosaurs; Island dwarfing; Island rule; Maastrichtian

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Cretaceous was a special time in the evolution of terrestrial ecosystems, and yet the record from Europe in particular is patchy. This special issue brings together results of multidisciplinary investigations on the Late Cretaceous Hateg area in southwestern Romania, and its continental fossil assemblage, with the aim of exploring an exceptional palaeoecosystem from the European Late Cretaceous. The Hateg dinosaurs, which seem unusually small, have become especially well known as some of the few latest Cretaceous dinosaurs from Europe, comparable with faunas from the south of France and Spain, and preserved at a time when most of Europe was under the Chalk Seas. Eastern Europe then, at a time of exceptionally high sea level, was an archipelago of islands, some of them inhabited, but none so extraordinary as Hateg. If Hateg truly was an island (and this is debated), the apparently small dinosaurs might well be dwarfs, as enunciated over 100 years ago by the colourful Baron Franz Nopcsa, discoverer of the faunas. The dwarfing of dinosaurs, and other taxa, is explored in this volume. The Hateg dinosaurs appear to be very latest Cretaceous (Maastrichtian) in age, and they provide unique evidence, at a time when there are few dinosaurs known from Europe, about some of the last faunas before the KT mass extinction. Further, the flora and fauna (ostracods, fishes, frogs, turtles, lizards, crocodilians, pterosaurs, dinosaurs, and mammals) have never been reviewed comprehensively, and we provide here the current best evidence of what was there, and how the taxa fit in a global context. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据