Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-9prln Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T20:46:54.476Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The first report of Chelonioidea cf. Ctenochelys from the Late Cretaceous of the Maastrichtian type area

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2023

Jelle J.A. Heere Open the ORCID record for Jelle J.A. Heere [Opens in a new window] ,
Jonathan J.W. Wallaard ,
Eric W.A. Mulder ,
Jasper Ponstein  and
Anne S. Schulp
Jelle J.A. Heere*
Affiliation:
Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands Department of Earth Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
Jonathan J.W. Wallaard
Affiliation:
Oertijdmuseum, Boxtel, The Netherlands
Eric W.A. Mulder
Affiliation:
Museum Natura Docet, Denekamp, The Netherlands
Jasper Ponstein
Affiliation:
Oertijdmuseum, Boxtel, The Netherlands Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany Museum für Naturkunde Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Anne S. Schulp
Affiliation:
Naturalis Biodiversity Center, Leiden, The Netherlands Department of Earth Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
*
Author for correspondence: Jelle J.A. Heere, Email: jelle.heere@ziggo.nl

Abstract

A mandible of a Late Cretaceous sea turtle with affinities to Ctenochelys is reported from the Maastrichtian type area of the Netherlands. The triangular mandible has a well-developed symphyseal ridge surrounded on both sides by large, concave areas on the triturating surface. It represents the first potential occurrence of Ctenochelys from the Maastrichtian type area. This finding increases the diversity of the turtle fauna known from the Maastrichtian type area.

Keywords

CtenochelysMaastrichtianNetherlandsChelonioideadentary

Information

Type
Geo(im)pulse
Information
Netherlands Journal of Geosciences , Volume 102 , 2023 , e6
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Netherlands Journal of Geosciences Foundation

Introduction

The late Maastrichtian type area (Jagt & Jagt-Yazykova, Reference Jagt and Jagt-Yazykova2012; Vellekoop et al., Reference Vellekoop, Kaskes, Sinnesael, Huygh, Déhais, Jagt, Speijer and Claeys2022) (Late Cretaceous) is known for a high abundance of marine vertebrate fossils, especially mosasaurs, plesiosaurs, fishes and turtles (Mulder, Reference Mulder2003; Friedman, Reference Friedman2012; Schulp & Jagt, Reference Schulp and Jagt2015; Miedema et al., Reference Miedema, Schulp, Jagt and Mulder2019). This area represents a shallow (20–40 m), subtropical [19,7°C, as calculated by van Baal et al. (Reference van Baal, Janssen, van der Lubbe, Schulp, Jagt and Vonhof2013)] marine ecosystem, right before the K/Pg extinction event (Mulder, Reference Mulder2003; Vellekoop et al., Reference Vellekoop, Kaskes, Sinnesael, Huygh, Déhais, Jagt, Speijer and Claeys2022).

Currently, the turtle record from the Maastrichtian type area comprises the giant cheloniid sea turtle Allopleuron hofmanni, represented by several complete fossils (Mulder, Reference Mulder2003), and the much rarer Glyptochelone suyckerbuyki, represented only by carapacial material (Kruytzer, Reference Kruytzer1955). Allopleuron hofmanni was interpreted as a carnivore, based on δ13C values comparable to that of extant carnivorous chelonioids (van Baal et al., Reference van Baal, Janssen, van der Lubbe, Schulp, Jagt and Vonhof2013). It was a pelagic turtle, primarily represented by adult fossils with carapacial sizes between 1 and 2 m (Kruytzer, Reference Kruytzer1955; Janssen et al., Reference Janssen, van Baal and Schulp2011). Little is known about the ecology of Glyptochelone. Finally, Platychelone emarginata represents a single, large, undescribed carapace found in the Maastrichtian type area. It is considered a nomen nudum (Mulder, Reference Mulder2003, p. 160). This specimen was recently suggested to be a basal species of Dermochelyidae, but extensive formal description is still lacking (Hirayama et al., Reference Hirayama, Nakajima and Folie2017). Several undescribed, fragmentary specimens from the Maastrichtian type area are tentatively assigned to P. emarginata (Nolis et al., Reference Nolis, Hellemond and De Bock2018).

Here we describe an isolated dentary (MAB13689) from the ENCI-Heidelberg quarry of the type Maastrichtian area. The ENCI quarry is situated near Maastricht in the Netherlands (see Fig. 1). Strata exposed span the entire upper Maastrichtian and isolated fragments of the lower Maastrichtian (Jagt & Jagt-Yazykova, Reference Jagt and Jagt-Yazykova2012; Vellekoop et al., Reference Vellekoop, Kaskes, Sinnesael, Huygh, Déhais, Jagt, Speijer and Claeys2022). The fossil is identified as cf. Ctenochelys, providing the first potential documentation of Ctenochelys from the Maastrichtian type area.

Fig. 1.

The ENCI quarry south of Maastricht (the Netherlands) where MAB13689 was found. Adapted from Mulder et al. (Reference Mulder, Jagt, Kuypers, Peeters and Rompen1998).

Ctenochelys (Zangerl, Reference Zangerl1953), initially placed in Toxochelyidae, is now included in the family Ctenochelyidae, alongside Asmodochelys, Prionochelys and Peritresius (Gentry et al., Reference Gentry, Ebersole and Kiernan2019; Joyce et al., Reference Joyce, Anquetin, Cadena, Claude, Danilov, Evers, Ferreira, Gentry, Georgalis, Lyson, Pérez-García, Rabi, Sterli, Vitek and Parham2021). Placement of Ctenochelys with respect to crown-chelonioids remains contentious; several studies include this genus as a pan-cheloniid (e.g. Gentry, Reference Gentry2017; Evers et al., Reference Evers, Barrett and Benson2019), whereas other analyses recover it as a stem-chelonioid instead (e.g. Scavezzoni & Fischer, Reference Scavezzoni and Fischer2018; Gentry et al., Reference Gentry, Ebersole and Kiernan2019). Hirayama (Reference Hirayama, Callaway and Nicholls1997) synonymised all species of Ctenochelys based on postcranial material. The new material reported here, however, that there might be more variation in the otherwise poorly documented mandible of the genus.

The genus Ctenochelys is known from the late Cretaceous (Campanian-Maastrichtian) of the USA (Zangerl, Reference Zangerl1953; Nicholls & Russell, Reference Nicholls and Russell1990; Matzke, Reference Matzke2007) and Germany (Karl & Nyhuis, Reference Karl and Nyhuis2012), and potentially from the Paleocene of Denmark (Myrvold et al., Reference Myrvold, Milàn and Rasmussen2018). Two species are currently recognised within this genus (Hirayama, Reference Hirayama, Callaway and Nicholls1997): C. acris (Zangerl, Reference Zangerl1953) and the holotype of the genus C. stenoporus (Hay, Reference Hay1905). While C. acris occurs exclusively around the Western Interior seaway (Matzke, Reference Matzke2007), specimens of C. stenoporus including a lower jaw have been found in Germany (Karl & Nyhuis, Reference Karl and Nyhuis2012) and an isolated hyoplastron with a resemblance to C. stenoporus has been reported from the Paleocene of Denmark (Myrvold et al., Reference Myrvold, Milàn and Rasmussen2018). The present specimen shares most resemblance with the dentary of C. stenoporus as described in Karl & Nyhuis (Reference Karl and Nyhuis2012).

Institutional abbreviations

MAB: Oertijdmuseum, Boxtel, the Netherlands.

Systematic palaeontology

Order Testudines (Batsch, Reference Batsch1788)

Suborder Cryptodira (Cope, Reference Cope1868)

Superfamily Pan-Chelonioidea (Joyce et al., Reference Joyce, Parham and Gauthier2004)

Family Ctenochelyidae (Karl & Nyhuis, Reference Karl and Nyhuis2012)

Genus Ctenochelys (Zangerl, Reference Zangerl1953)

Type species

Ctenochelys stenoporus (Hay, Reference Hay1905)

cf. Ctenochelys

Material

An incomplete and fractured dentary (MAB13689) showing evidence of abrasion. An oblique anteroposterior fracture has displaced the right ramus over the triturating surface. The specimen was collected and prepared by Arno Savelkoul, who also donated it to the MAB collection.

Locality and stratigraphy

MAB13689 was found in the Emael member (Maastricht Formation) of the ENCI quarry (Fig. 1).

Description

In our description, we follow the updated anatomical nomenclature as defined by Evers et al. (Reference Evers, Ponstein, Jansen, Gray and Fröbisch2022). The ventral side of the dentary remains mostly embedded in the sediment, so that only the dorsal, medial and part of the lateral sides are clearly exposed. This was done due to the fragility of the material. Anteriorly, there is material missing and part of the right ramus was fractured during collection (Fig. 2). Traces of abrasion are microscopically visible at several locations.

Fig. 2.

(a) Dorsal view of MAB13689 (cf. Ctenochelys); (b) Left view of MAB13689; (c) Posterior view of the symphysis of MAB13689; (d) Anterior view of the symphysis of MAB13689.

The two largely complete dentaries are tightly fused at the symphysis. The width of the intact half of the dentary is 19.7 mm (measured between the apex of the symphyseal ridge and posterolateral extremity), and it has a length of 34.5 mm (measured between the most anterior and posterior parts). No remnant of the foramen dentofaciale majus is visible on either the lateral or mediolateral surface of the dentary, suggesting that it is completely reduced, as in Dermochelys (Evers et al., Reference Evers, Ponstein, Jansen, Gray and Fröbisch2022). The dentaries bear a sharp symphyseal ridge, which ends posteriorly in a triangular elevation. Most of the symphyseal ridge has been heavily abraded, suggesting it was much higher than was preserved in the present specimen. The triturating surfaces are gently concave, forming a bowl-shaped dentary. The triturating surface extends posteriorly past the triangular elevation of the symphyseal ridge to form an oval shape. The labial ridge extends dorsally in the posterior end of the dentary, but is abraded on the anterior side. As preserved, the material suggests that the dentary had a bowl-shaped symphyseal area. A lingual ridge could not be identified. The anterior part of the symphyseal area is missing, but the orientation of the mandibular rami suggests that the dentary had a triangular shape overall. In contrast to chelonioids, the surangular in MAB13689 does not bear an anterior process as no suture scar on the posterolateral surface of the dentary could be discerned.

Discussion

MAB13689 has large concave areas on the triturating surface and a tall symphyseal ridge. Figure 3 shows a comparison of MAB13689 with closely matching genera, including Argillochelys (Lydekker, Reference Lydekker1889), Allopleuron, Procolpochelys (Hay, Reference Hay1908) and Ctenochelys. MAB13689 differs from Argillochelys in the fact that Argillochelys has labial ridges that curve upwards anteriorly forming a more pinched jaw (Moody, Reference Moody1980; Tong & Hirayama, Reference Tong and Hirayama2008; Zvonok et al., Reference Zvonok, Udovichenko and Bratishko2015). Allopleuron also has a symphyseal ridge, but it is much shorter than in MAB13689 and the triangular elevation is much higher and longer (Mulder, Reference Mulder2003). It differs from Procolpochelys by having a much narrower triturating surface and in general a narrower dentary (Weems & Brown, Reference Weems and Brown2017).

Fig. 3.

Interpretative drawings of MAB13689 (cf. Ctenochelys) alongside dentaries of the genera that most closely resemble it (Mulder, Reference Mulder2003; Tong & Hirayama, Reference Tong and Hirayama2008; Karl & Nyhuis, Reference Karl and Nyhuis2012; Weems & Brown, Reference Weems and Brown2017). Dashed lines indicate missing material. Concavities and ridges on the triturating surfaces are marked with light grey and dark grey coloring respectively.

Two other turtle genera from the Maastrichtian deserve mentioning. The first is Euclastes (Cope, Reference Cope1867), which is known from the Maastrichtian of North America, South America and Africa (Foster, Reference Foster1980; Mateus et al., Reference Mateus, Polcyn, Jacobs, Araújo, Schulp, Marinheiro, Pereira and Vineyard2012; Parham et al., Reference Parham, Otero and Suárez2014). MAB13689 is easily differentiated from Euclastes by having a generally much narrower dentary and more prominent symphyseal ridge (Parham et al., Reference Parham, Otero and Suárez2014; Ullmann et al., Reference Ullmann, Boles and Knell2018). The second genus is Toxochelys (Cope, Reference Cope1873), where T. latiremis is described as having a narrow dentary, with a short symphysis and triturating surface of constant width across the dentary (Weems, Reference Weems1988; Matzke, Reference Matzke2008). This also differs from MAB13689, which has a longer symphysis and triturating surface that narrows slightly across its length.

The fossil shares the most similarities with Ctenochelys (Matzke, Reference Matzke2007; Gentry, Reference Gentry2017), in having a well-developed symphyseal ridge and large concave areas on the triturating surface, which extend posteriorly. The dentary of Ctenochelys typically has a modest hook anteriorly, this cannot be detected in the present specimen, however, as most of the anterior material of the dentary is missing. Specifically, MAB13689 most resembles the dentary of C. stenoporus as described by Karl & Nyhuis (Reference Karl and Nyhuis2012). An interesting note is that no remnants of the foramen dentofaciale could be identified in the present fossil, in contrast to the specimen described by Karl & Nyhuis (Reference Karl and Nyhuis2012).

The size of the dentary is quite small when compared to described adult individuals of Ctenochelys, with a length of 34.5 mm and some material missing anteriorly. Matzke (Reference Matzke2007) noted that the posteroventral part of the symphysis is visible in dorsal view in juvenile individuals of C. stenoporus. MAB13689 does not show this trait and is therefore not identified as a juvenile individual. There are no notable traits known in the dentary to identify subadult individuals of Ctenochelys.

Mandibular characters have received relatively little attention in most previous analyses of chelonioid phylogeny, and the placement of many basal taxa remains a topic of ongoing debate (e.g. Evers et al., Reference Evers, Barrett and Benson2019). The recent compendium of extant turtle mandibular anatomy by Evers et al. (Reference Evers, Ponstein, Jansen, Gray and Fröbisch2022) highlighted several synapomorphies for both Cheloniidae and Dermochelyidae, as well as Chelonioidea as a whole, which may prove useful for distinguishing members of respective stem lineages. However, the mandibular characters present in Ctenochelys do not unambiguously favour any placement. First, the absence of an anterior process of the surangular supports a position outside of crown-Chelonioidea. The reduced foramen dentofaciale majus in MAB13689 is more characteristic of Dermochelys, yet the hook development as described in other Ctenochelys specimens (Zangerl, Reference Zangerl1953; Matzke, Reference Matzke2007; Karl and Nyhuis, Reference Karl and Nyhuis2012; Gentry, Reference Gentry2017) is modest compared to the prominent spike-like symphyseal hook in Dermochelys (Evers et al., Reference Evers, Ponstein, Jansen, Gray and Fröbisch2022).

Conclusion

The dentary (MAB13689) found in the Emael Member of the ENCI quarry is identified as cf. Ctenochelys based on the shape of the dentary and traits such as the symphyseal ridge and a concave triturating surface. This specimen adds to the variation observed in mandibular anatomy within the genus Ctenochelys. Moreover, this provides the first potential occurrence of this genus from the Maastrichtian type area.

Acknowledgements

We want to thank reviewers Dr. Hans-Volker Karl and Dr. Andrew Gentry for their comments and insights. We would also like to thank Arno Savelkoul for making the specimen available for study. Finally, we would like to thank Lisa Egger and Thomas Wiese of the Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe for supplying extra figures of the mandible of Ctenochelys stenoporus described by Karl & Nyhuis (Reference Karl and Nyhuis2012). Jasper Ponstein was funded by an Elsa-Neumann scholarship.

References

Batsch, A.J.G.K., 1788. Versuch einer Anleitung, zur Kenntniß und Geschichte der Thiere und Mineralien, für akademische Vorlesungen entworfen und mit den nöthigsten Abbildungen versehen. Akademische Buchhandlung (Jena): 690 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cope, E.D., 1867. On Euclastes, a genus of extinct Cheloniidæ. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 19: 39–42.Google Scholar
Cope, E.D., 1868. On the origin of genera. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 20: 242–300.Google Scholar
Cope, E.D., 1873. Toxochelys latiremis. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 25: 10.Google Scholar
Evers, S.W., Barrett, P.M. & Benson, R.B.J., 2019. Anatomy of Rhinochelys pulchriceps (Protostegidae) and marine adaptation during the early evolution of chelonioids. PeerJ 7: e6811.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Evers, S.W., Ponstein, J., Jansen, M.A., Gray, J.A. & Fröbisch, J., 2022. A systematic compendium of turtle mandibular anatomy using digital dissections of soft tissue and osteology. Anatomical Record, 1–76. doi: 10.1002/ar.25037.Google ScholarPubMed
Foster, D.E., 1980. Osteopygis sp., a marine turtle from the Late Cretaceous Moreno Formation of California. PaleoBios 363: 1–15.Google Scholar
Friedman, M., 2012. Ray-finned fishes (Osteichthyes, Actinopterygii) from the type Maastrichtian, the Netherlands and Belgium. Scripta Geologica. Special Issue 08: 113–142.Google Scholar
Gentry, A.D., 2017. New material of the Late Cretaceous marine turtle Ctenochelys acris Zangerl, 1953 and a phylogenetic reassessment of the toxochelyid-grade taxa. Journal of Systematic Palaeontology 15: 675–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentry, A.D., Ebersole, J.A. & Kiernan, C.R., 2019. Asmodochelys parhami, a new fossil marine turtle from the Campanian Demopolis Chalk and the stratigraphic congruence of competing marine turtle phylogenies. Royal Society Open Science 6: 191950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hay, O.P., 1905. On the group of fossil turtles known as the Amphichelydia; with remarks on the origin and relationships of the suborders, superfamilies, and families of testudines. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 21: 137–175.Google Scholar
Hay, O.P., 1908. The fossil turtles of North America. Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication 75: 1–568.Google Scholar
Hirayama, R., 1997. Distribution and diversity of Cretaceous chelonioids. In: Callaway, J.M. & Nicholls, E.L. (eds): Ancient Marine Reptiles. Academic Press (San Diego): 225–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirayama, R., Nakajima, Y. & Folie, A., 2017. Platychelone emarginata, gigantic Cretaceous marine turtle from Belgium. In: Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, 77th Annual Meeting, Meeting Program and Abstracts, Calgary, Canada: 129.Google Scholar
Jagt, J.W.M. & Jagt-Yazykova, E.A., 2012. Stratigraphy of the type Maastrichtian – a synthesis. Scripta Geologica. Special Issue 8: 5–32.Google Scholar
Janssen, R., van Baal, R.R. & Schulp, A.S., 2011. On the taphonomy of the late Maastrichtian (Late Cretaceous) marine turtle Allopleuron hofmanni . Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 90: 187–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joyce, W.G., Anquetin, J., Cadena, E.-A., Claude, J., Danilov, I.G., Evers, S.W., Ferreira, G.S., Gentry, A.D., Georgalis, G.L., Lyson, T.R., Pérez-García, A., Rabi, M., Sterli, J., Vitek, N.S., Parham, J.F., 2021. A nomenclature for fossil and living turtles using phylogenetically defined clade names. Swiss Journal of Palaeontology 140: 1–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joyce, W.G., Parham, J.F. & Gauthier, J.A., 2004. Developing a protocol for the conversion of rank-based taxon names to phylogenetically defined clade names, as exemplified by turtles. Journal of Paleontology 78: 989–1013.Google Scholar
Karl, H.V. & Nyhuis, C.J., 2012. Ctenochelys stenoporus (Hay, 1905) (Testudines: Toxochelyidae) and Clidastes sp. (Squamata: Mosasauridae) from the Upper Cretaceous of NW-Germany. Studia Geologica Salmanticensia 9: 129–142.Google Scholar
Kruytzer, E.M., 1955. Glyptochelone suyckerbuyki (Ubaghs). Natuurhistorisch Maandblad 44: 93–95.Google Scholar
Lydekker, R., 1889. On remains of Eocene and Mesozoic Chelonia and a tooth of (?) Ornithopsis . Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London 45: 227–246.Google Scholar
Mateus, O., Polcyn, M.J., Jacobs, L.L., Araújo, R., Schulp, A.S., Marinheiro, J., Pereira, B. & Vineyard, D., 2012. Cretaceous amniotes from Angola: Dinosaurs, pterosaurs, mosasaurs, plesiosaurs, and turtles. In: V Jornadas Internacionales Sobre Paleontología de Dinosaurios y Su: Entorno: 71–105.Google Scholar
Matzke, A.T., 2007. An almost complete juvenile specimen of the Cheloniid Turtle Ctenochelys stenoporus (Hay, 1905) from the Upper Cretaceous Niobrara Formation of Kansas, USA. Palaeontology 50: 669–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matzke, A.T., 2008. A juvenile Toxochelys latiremis (Testudines, Cheloniidae) from the Upper Cretaceous Niobrara Formation of Kansas, USA. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie-Abhandlungen 249: 371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miedema, F., Schulp, A.S., Jagt, J.W.M. & Mulder, E.W.A., 2019. New plesiosaurid material from the Maastrichtian type area, the Netherlands. Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 98: E3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moody, R., 1980. Notes on some European Palaeogene Turtles. Tertiary Research Rotterdam 2: 161–168.Google Scholar
Mulder, E.W.A., 2003. On Latest Cretaceous Tetrapods from the Maastrichtian Type Area. Stichting Natuurpublicaties Limburg (Roermond): 188 pp.Google Scholar
Mulder, E.W.A., Jagt, J.W.M., Kuypers, M.M.M., Peeters, H.H.G. & Rompen, P., 1998. Stratigraphic distribution of Late Cretaceous marine and terrestrial reptiles from the Maastrichtian type area. Oryctos 1: 55–64.Google Scholar
Myrvold, K.S., Milàn, J.M. & Rasmussen, J., 2018. Two new finds of turtle remains from the Danian and Selandian (Paleocene) deposits of Denmark with evidence of predation by crocodilians and sharks. Bulletin of the Geological Society of Denmark 66: 211–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicholls, E.L. & Russell, A.P., 1990. Paleobiogeography of the Cretaceous Western Interior Seaway of North America: The vertebrate evidence. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 79: 149–169.Google Scholar
Nolis, K., Hellemond, A. & De Bock, F., 2018. Zeeschildpadden uit het Maastrichtiaan van Luik en Limburg. Deel 2. Overzicht van enkele relevante specimens. Spirifer 42: 2–9.Google Scholar
Parham, J.F., Otero, R.A. & Suárez, M.E., 2014. A sea turtle skull from the Cretaceous of Chile with comments on the taxonomy and biogeography of Euclastes (formerly Osteopygis). Cretaceous Research 49: 181–189.Google Scholar
Scavezzoni, I. & Fischer, V., 2018. Rhinochelys amaberti Moret, 1935, a protostegid turtle from the Early Cretaceous of France. PeerJ 6: e4594.Google ScholarPubMed
Schulp, A.S. & Jagt, J.W.M., 2015. New material of Prognathodon (Squamata, Mosasauridae) from the type Maastrichtian of the Netherlands. Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 94: 19–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tong, H. & Hirayama, R., 2008. A new species of Argillochelys (Testudines: Cryptodira: Cheloniidae) from the Ouled Abdoun phosphate basin. Morocco Bulletin de la Société Geologique de France 179: 623–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ullmann, P.V., Boles, Z.M. & Knell, M.J., 2018. Insights into cranial morphology and intraspecific variation from a new subadult specimen of the pan-cheloniid turtle Euclastes wielandi Hay, 1908. PaleoBios 35: 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Baal, R.R., Janssen, R., van der Lubbe, H.J.L., Schulp, A.S., Jagt, J.W.M. & Vonhof, H.B., 2013. Oxygen and carbon stable isotope records of marine vertebrates from the type Maastrichtian, The Netherlands and northeast Belgium (Late Cretaceous). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 392: 71–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vellekoop, J., Kaskes, P., Sinnesael, M., Huygh, J., Déhais, T., Jagt, J.W.M., Speijer, R.P. & Claeys, P., 2022. A new age model and chemostratigraphic framework for the Maastrichtian type area (southeastern Netherlands, northeastern Belgium). Newsletters on Stratigraphy 0703.Google Scholar
Weems, R.E., 1988. Paleocene turtles from the Aquia and Brightseat Formations, with a discussion of their bearing on sea turtle evolution and phylogeny. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 101: 109–145.Google Scholar
Weems, R.E. & Brown, K.M., 2017. More-complete remains of Procolpochelys charlestonensis (Oligocene, South Carolina), an occurrence of Euclastes (upper Eocene, South Carolina), and their bearing on Cenozoic pancheloniid sea turtle distribution and phylogeny. Journal of Paleontology 91: 1228–1243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zangerl, R., 1953. The vertebrate fauna of the Selma Formation of Alabama. Part 3. The turtles of the family Protostegidae. Part 4. The turtles of the family Toxochelyidae. Fieldiana: Geology Memoirs 3: 61–277.Google Scholar
Zvonok, E.A., Udovichenko, N.I. & Bratishko, A.V., 2015. New data on the morphology and systematic position of the sea turtle Allopleuron qazaqstanense, Karl, etal, from the Middle Eocene of Kazakhstan. Paleontological Journal 49: 176–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. The ENCI quarry south of Maastricht (the Netherlands) where MAB13689 was found. Adapted from Mulder et al. (1998).

Figure 1

Fig. 2. (a) Dorsal view of MAB13689 (cf. Ctenochelys); (b) Left view of MAB13689; (c) Posterior view of the symphysis of MAB13689; (d) Anterior view of the symphysis of MAB13689.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Interpretative drawings of MAB13689 (cf. Ctenochelys) alongside dentaries of the genera that most closely resemble it (Mulder, 2003; Tong & Hirayama, 2008; Karl & Nyhuis, 2012; Weems & Brown, 2017). Dashed lines indicate missing material. Concavities and ridges on the triturating surfaces are marked with light grey and dark grey coloring respectively.