Nundasuchus

Nundasuchus Temporal range:Anisian ~
Pencil sketch ofNundasuchus songeaensis
Scientific classification
Domain:	Eukaryota
Kingdom:	Animalia
Phylum:	Chordata
Class:	Reptilia
Clade:	Archosauria
Clade:	Pseudosuchia
Genus:	†Nundasuchus Nesbittet al.,2014
Type species
†Nundasuchus songeaensis Nesbittet al.,2014

Nundasuchusis anextinctgenusofcrurotarsan,possibly asuchianarchosaurrelated toParacrocodylomorpha.Remains of this genus are known from theMiddle TriassicManda bedsof southwesternTanzania.It contains asingle species,Nundasuchus songeaensis,known from a single partially completeskeleton,including vertebrae, limb elements, osteoderms, andskullfragments.

Nundasuchuslived in what is nowTanzania,Africaaround 240 million years ago. Members of this genus were likelycarnivores,around 2.7 to 3 meters (9 feet) long, with ziphodont (steak knife-like) teeth and rows of bony plates (osteoderms) along their back.Phylogenetic analyses consistently place this genus within the group Crurotarsi based on features of the ankle. Most studies also consider it apseudosuchian,meaning that it was more closely related to moderncrocodiliansthan it was todinosaurs.However,Nundasuchushad an upright stance, with legs situated directly underneath the body, as with various other early pseudosuchians (such as "rauisuchians"andaetosaurs) but unlike modern crocodilians.

The classification ofNundasuchusrelative to other pseudosuchians is somewhat controversial. Somephylogenetic analysesplace it near or at the base of the group, sometimes along withphytosaurs,based on certain plesiomorphic (primitive) features such as teeth on the palate, a shortpubis,and characteristics of thecalcaneum(heel bone).Another hypothesis, supported by its original 2014 description, considers it to be somewhat more "advanced" than those groups, instead being closer toTicinosuchusand paracrocodylomorphs (the group containing "rauisuchians"and the ancestors of modern crocodilians). This classification scheme is justified by the presence of" staggered "osteoderms, heart-shaped" spine tables ", and a groove on thefemoral head.Regardless of these hypotheses, it is clear thatNundasuchusrepresents a previously unknown group of reptiles with a mixture of features both plesiomorphic and derived with respect to suchian archosaurs.

Discovery

Manda beds, Ruhuhu Basin, southwestern Tanzania, where theholotypeofNundasuchuswas found

Nundasuchusis known solely from theholotypeNMT RB48, a partially complete disassociated and mostly disarticulated individual housed at theNational Museum of Tanzania,Dar es Salaam ofTanzania.The holotype consists of a partial rightpterygoid,nearly complete rightdentary,the rightsplenial,the right surangular, and isolated teeth, as well as the followingpostcranialbones: a partialatlas,two articulated mid-neck vertebrae,two articulated mid-back vertebrae,the last back vertebrae, thesacrumwith sacralribs,front-mosttail vertebrae,dorsal ribs,gastralia,articulated and isolated paramedianosteoderms,partial shoulder girdle includinginterclavicle,parts of bothclavicles,complete left and rightscapulae,and the rightcoracoid,the lefthumerus,bothpubes,bothfemora,the leftfibula,inner and outer ends of the lefttibia,as well as the leftastragalus,leftcalcaneum,left fourthtarsaland all but fourthmetatarsals,and outer ends of right third-to-fifth metatarsals, numerous isolatedphalanges,a partialungualand many other fragments.

NMT RB48 was discovered byDr. Sterling Nesbittin 2007at an isolated outcrop approximately 100 square meters in area known as locality Z41, along with remains of otherarchosaursandrhynchosaurs.Another locality (Z42) occurs in the immediate vicinity, and yielded fourcynodontsincluding two unnamed forms,Scalenodon attridgeiandMandagomphodon hirschsoni,fourdicynodontsincludingTetragonias njalilus,Sangusaurus parringtonii,Angonisaurus cruickshanki,andRechnisaurus cristarhynchus,and thearchosauromorphsStenaulorhynchus stockleyiandAsilisaurus kongwe.These localities, located between the Ndatira and Njalila rivers, belong to the fluviolacustrinemudstone-sandstonesequence in the middle of theLifua Memberof theManda bedsofRuhuhu Basinin Tanzania. Based on comparison with the better studiedtetrapodfauna of Subzone C of theCynognathusAssemblage Zoneof South Africa, this member is considered to date to theAnisianstage of the earlyMiddle Triassic.

Description

Size ofNundasuchuscompared to a human

Skull

Skull material is very limited forNundasuchus;only a right lower jaw and a right pterygoid bone (which formed part of the roof of the mouth) were preserved in the holotype. However, even these fragments are informative. The pterygoid is convex when seen from above and concave from below. Thisventral(lower) concavity manifests in the form of a deep depression bounded byposterior(rear) andmedial(inner) ridges. The portion of the pterygoid which would have been positioned along the midline of thepalateis unusual compared to other archosaurs due to possessing teeth. These teeth were small and rounded, placed in three rows parallel to the midline of the mouth. Pterygoid teeth are typically absent in archosaurs, although a few avemetatarsalians (Eudimorphodon,Eoraptor,Eodromaeus) and another likely pseudosuchian (Turfanosuchus) are known to have possessed them.

The jaw is typical compared to that of most carnivorous archosaurs, being low and long, with serrated, knife-like teeth set in deep sockets. At least 14 teeth were present, with the teeth at the middle of the jaw (around tooth nine) being smaller than those at the front and rear of the jaw. The lower edge of thelateral(outer) side of the jaw was covered in small longitudinal grooves, a feature seemingly unique toNundasuchusamong early archosaurs. Less unusual is the presence of several rows of pits on the lateral surface and large grooves on the medial surface. Thesurangularbone at the back of the jaw forms a deeply concave jaw joint preceded by a longitudinal ridge (unique to the genus) and followed by a large, vertically-oriented plate of bone.

Vertebrae and osteoderms

The two incompletely preserved cervical (neck) vertebrae were amphicoelous (concave from both the front and the rear), with a large lateral pit near the base of theneural arch.The concave pleurapophyses (lower rib facets) were near the lower front edge of the vertebrae, while the convex diapophyses (upper rib facets) were positioned higher up. The lower edge of each vertebra possessed a large keel which was deepest towards the rear. Isolated cervical neural spines were similar to those ofBatrachotomus,being expanded towards their upper front tips into heart-shaped structures when seen from above.

Most of the dorsal (back) vertebrae were tall and amphicoelous, and possessed a pair of ventral keels adjacent to the midline, separated by a shallow groove. These ventral keels are similar to those of the unusual aquatic archosauriformVancleavea,although not as pronounced. Considering thatNundasuchusis not closely related toVancleavea,its ventral keels were probably an example of convergent evolution, and they can be considered a unique trait compared to other archosaurs. The rib facets were short, positioned high on the vertebrae at the base of the neural arches. Three ridges radiate outwards from each diapophysis; one connects to the parapophysis, another connects to the main body of the vertebra, and the last one reaches thepostzygapophyses(rear vertebral joints). One notable feature of the vertebrae ofNundasuchusis the possible presence ofhyposphene-hypantrum articulations,as reported by the original description.However, a 2018 study doubted this interpretation, arguing that the supposed articulations were actually misidentified components of the zygapophyses.As with the cervicals, the neural spines of the dorsal vertebrae expand outwards into flat structures sometimes called "spine tables". Some dorsals near the hip lose the characteristic ventral keel, instead acquiring additional pits near the rib facets.

Thesacrumwas probably formed by two unfused vertebrae, connected to massive sacral ribs. The rib facets are huge in conjunction with the sacral ribs, but not large enough to annihilate the pits at the base of the neural arch. Each rib facet of the first sacral vertebra had a distinct upper and lower connection to the trumpet-shaped first sacral rib. The second sacral rib is flatter, and tilts diagonally so that its tapering rear edge is positioned higher than its front edge. A groove is present along the outer edge of this rib, roughly where it would connect to theilium.The sacrum in general is similar to that of therauisuchidStagonosuchus,except for having thinner neural spines.

The caudals (tail vertebrae) near the hip were tall and generally similar to the dorsals, except that their zygapophyses were inclined upwards at a higher angle. Further down the tail, they acquirechevronsand fuse to the caudal ribs, as well as becoming smaller and simpler in general. The dorsal ribs were two-headed, with concave and convex joints corresponding to the convex and concave rib facets of the vertebrae. They were flattened near the vertebrae, and at their tips they had small facets for attachment to the densely packedgastralia(belly ribs).

Several groups of osteoderms (plate-like bony scutes) were also preserved inNundasuchus.Individual osteoderms were lightly ornamented and heart- or leaf-shaped, with rounded edges and tapering front tips. They are similar to those of most other pseudosuchians as well as archosaur relatives such asEuparkeria,but are less elongated than those of some of these taxa, instead being about as wide as they are long. Most of the osteoderms referred toNundasuchusare thin bones, with sharply pointed front tips, a thin longitudinal ridge, and a fair amount of overlap. A rare "thick" morphotype is also present, with less overlap, a small and mound-like ridge, and more rounded front tips. At least the "thin" -type osteoderms formed several longitudinal rows stretching along the backbone of the animal. When seen from above, these rows would not have been symmetrical on each side of the animal. Instead, they were "staggered", with the left and right rows slightly offset from each other. An estimated five osteoderms were present per every two vertebrae.

Pectoral girdle and forelimbs

Thescapula(shoulder blade) was paddle-like and somewhat small. The lower portion of the scapula is where the glenoid (shoulder socket) is located, pointing backwards from the rear edge of the bone. This general area is the widest part of the bone when seen head-on, and underlies the thinnest part when seen from the side. Directly above the glenoid lies a small pit, likely the origin point of thetricepsmuscle. Meanwhile, the front edge of the scapula has a distinct ridge, probably theacromionprocess. The scapula ofNundasuchusdiffers from advanced pseudosuchians due to its small triceps pit, but also from phytosaurs due to its distinct acromion. The lower edge of the scapula connects to the semicircularcoracoidbone. The rear portion of the coracoid extends back and curves upwards to form the lower half of the glenoid, but is not offset from the socket by a distinct notch. However, a wide groove is present below the glenoid when seen from the side, similar to the case inaetosaursandPostosuchus.In front of the glenoid, a hole known as the coracoid foramen pierces the coracoid, and, in a feature unique toNundasuchus,this hole is surrounded by several knob-like structures. Other fragments of the pectoral girdle, such as aninterclavicleandclavicles,are also preserved. They are covered in grooves, with thin, blade-like edges. The interclavicle is spoon-shaped, concave from above and convex from below, although its true shape is unknown due to the rear portion being broken off. Overall it is more similar to those of paracrocodylomorphs rather than phytosaurs.

The only portion of the forelimb known for this genus was thehumerus(upper arm bone). Its medial edge was concave while the lateral edge was almost straight as in phytosaurs. In conjunction with this, the deltopectoral crest (a large flattened structure near thehumeral head) is oriented more anteriorly than laterally. Both the humeral head and the tip of thelower extremityof the bone were covered with deep grooves. Just above the lower extremity was a depression, and just lateral to this depression was a distinctectepicondylargroove.

Pelvic girdle and hindlimbs

The only preserved part of the pelvic girdle (hip), not counting the sacrum, was the leftpubisbone. This bone was characteristically small inNundasuchus,only about 30% the length of the femur. This is comparable to phytosaurs, aetosaurs, and early avemetatarsalians, but in contrast to the condition in other archosaurs. The areas where the pubis would have contacted other bones of the hip are broken, but evidently the pubis did possess features such as an insetobturator foramenand an insertion for theambiensmuscle under theacetabulum(hip socket). The main shaft of the pubis is not strongly expanded in most directions, but the medial edge has a plate-like inner extension known as a pubic apron, which would have contacted the corresponding extension on the right pubis. This pubic apron is convex when seen from the front.

The femur (thigh bone) is sigmoidal (S-shaped), with thefemoral headbeing twisted slightly inwards and thedistal condylesbeing twisted slightly outwards. This creates an angle of 45 degrees between these two extremities of the bone, as with mosteucrocopodansapart from dinosaurs. As with other eucrocopodans, the femoral head has several distinct tubera (bumps), one on the anterolateral surface of the bone and another on the posteromedial surface.Nundasuchusalso may have had a third tuber on the medial surface of the head as inarchosaurs,but this portion of the bone is damaged so it cannot be assessed with certainty. The femoral head also has a groove on its upper surface, similar to paracrocodylomorphs. Further down the posteromedial face of the shaft is a long, sharp ridge known as thefourth trochanter.About 40% down the front part of the shaft is a tuber covered with grooves. This bump was likely an attachment point for theiliofemoralismuscle which helped to stabilize the hip. The distal part of the femur has a large crista tibiofibularis, an upper extension of thelateral condyle.Both the crista and themedial condyleare large, and taper into rounded apices. In addition, the lateral and medial condyles each have a small depression at their extemities, with that of the medial condyle likely corresponding to thefemorotibialismuscle.

The proximal part of thetibia(inner shin bone) is roughly diamond-shaped in cross section, with rounded lateral and medial tubera as well as a low and indistinct forward-pointing ridge known as a cnemial crest. The lateral tuber is larger and more concave, like that of ornithosuchids. Apart from these tubera, the proximal part of the tibia is mostly convex. However, a distinct notch is present behind the lateral tuber. This is probably an attachment point forflexor tibialis internusmuscle. The distal part is smooth and oval-shaped in cross section and 'flexed' when seen from behind. Thefibula(outer shin bone) is sigmoidal, with a flattened medial surface, a large crest for theiliofibularismuscle on the lateral surface, and a distal face which tilts forwards.

The foot consisted of fivemetatarsalsattached tophalanges(toe bones). The smallest metatarsal was the innermost one (I), with metatarsal II being longer and III being longer than either. Although metatarsal IV is incomplete, it has been estimated to be longer than III. This would be highly unusual among Triassic reptiles, of which onlyProterosuchusshares this characteristic. Metatarsal I is somewhat squashed diagonally, with the edge facing the rest of the foot being positioned higher than the inner edge. A crest is also present on the inner edge. The articulation with the ankle is convex and expanded towards the rest of the foot. Metatarsal II is parallelogram-shaped in cross section, with a 'lip' on its upper edge that accepts the first metatarsal. Metatarsal III has the largest distal joint while IV has the smallest, indicating that the third toe was more massive than the fourth. Metatarsal V is hook-shaped, with two distinct proximal articulations for the fibula and the fourth distal tarsal of the ankle. The phalanges are generally robust, but those of the fifth toe were longer and hourglass-shaped, attached to a rough-texturedungual(claw). In general, the foot bones resemble those ofPrestosuchusand phytosaurs.

Ankle

The left ankle ofNundasuchusseen inproximalview (i.e. with thetibialandfibularjoints facing the viewer), with the calcaneum in blue and the astragalus in pink.

The ankle was primarily formed by two bones, thecalcaneumon the outer side and theastragaluson the inner side. These bones and their joints clearly show distinguishing features of the group Crurotarsi, which includes suchians, phytosaurs, and probably avemetatarsalians. For example, the calcaneum's attachment with the astragalus is concave, and the calcaneum also has a cylindrical extension with flared edges, known as a calcaneal tuber. The calcaneal tuber is directed about 45 degrees between sideways and backwards, similar to phytosaurs and non-archosaurian eucrocopodans, but in contrast to most other suchians, which have calcaneal tubera oriented more backwards. On the other hand, the length of the calcaneal tuber is moderate, similar to that of typical pseudosuchians rather than the much more elongated structure of phytosaurs. The lateral side of the tuber has a noticeable 'pad', which is seemingly unique toNundasuchus.The upper surface for the calcaneum connects to the fibula with a convex, barrel-shaped joint. This is also similar to phytosaurs and suchians but in contrast to ornithosuchids, where this joint is more dome-like. Both the fibular and astragalar facets of the calcaneum are a continuous surface, a condition unlike suchians.

The upper surface of the astragalus has a triangular facet for the fibula as well as a larger, oval-shaped facet for the tibia. The tibial facet is divided into two basins by a low convexity, although this flexion is somewhat indistinct compared to that of suchians and avemetatarsalians. The calcaneal facet comes in the form of a flat surface overlying a convex 'peg', a feature characteristic of crurotarsal joints. The peg is poorly developed, more similar to that of phytosaurs rather than other suchians. The front edge of the astragalus has a large concave surface (astragalar hollow) overlying a small convexity (astragalar ball). The astragalar ball is approximately as well developed as that of the aetosaurLongosuchus.

Etymology

Nundasuchuswas first described and named by Sterling J. Nesbitt, Christian A. Sidor, Kenneth D. Angielczyk, Roger M. H. Smith and Linda A. Tsuji in2014and thetype speciesisNundasuchus songeaensis.Thegeneric nameis derived fromSwahili Languagenundameaning "predator",plussuchusfromGreeksoukhos,an Egyptian crocodile god. The newspecific namerefers to the provincial capital ofSongea,located near to the collection locality of the remains, as indicated by the Latin suffix-ensis,meaning "from".

Classification

The original description ofNundasuchus,Nesbittet al.(2014), tested its phylogenetic position using the two most comprehensive earlyarchosaurphylogenetic datasets available. The first dataset used was a version ofBrusatteet al.'s2010 archosaur phylogenywhich had been updated by Butleret al.(2011) during a study on the anatomy ofCtenosauriscus.The second dataset was a more comprehensive and widely accepted study on archosaur relationships created by Nesbitt in 2011.Both analyses found thatNundasuchuswas apseudosuchian,meaning that it was an archosaur more closely related to crocodilians than it was to dinosaurs. This identification was primarily based on traits of the ankle which were shared betweenNundasuchusand pseudosuchians. The Brusatteet al.(2010) dataset placed it as the mostbasalpseudosuchian (although the name "Crurotarsi" was used for the group), lesscrownward(further from crocodilians) than even thephytosaurs.

Nesbittet al.(2014)'s application of the Nesbitt (2011) dataset placedNundasuchusmore crownward, compared to its position in Brusatteet al.'s results. Nesbitt (2011) consideredcrocodylomorphs(crocodilian ancestors) to have been descended from taxa traditionally identified as "rauisuchians".Since Rauisuchia typically omits crocodylomorphs and would therefore beparaphyleticwith his results, Nesbitt decided to scrap the name, replacing it with themonophyleticcladeParacrocodylomorpha.This clade itself is allied with theSwisssuchianTicinosuchusbased primarily on similarities of the ischium.WhenNundasuchuswas added into the dataset, it was placed as the sister taxon to theTicinosuchus+ Paracrocodylomorpha clade. This was justified by three traits: heart-shaped "spine tables", a groove on the proximal side of thefemoral head,and "staggered" osteoderms.

Nesbittet al.(2014) questioned these results due to the fact thatNundasuchuspossesses manyplesiomorphicarchosaurian traits (i.e. typical for very basal archosaurs) that appear to beautapomorphies(unique features), if it is truly a member ofPseudosuchia.These include palatal teeth, a short pubis, and a calcaneal tuber which is not as strongly deflected backwards. Thus, they performed further analyses under certain relationship constraints, such as forcingNundasuchusto be outside Archosauria or closer to Phytosauria. These analyses revealed little change in the relationships (apart from the constraints themselves), but major changes to the traits associated with these relationships, changing the traits that were considered to diagnose Pseudosuchia, Archosauria, and otherclades.Therefore, it is not clear whetherNundasuchusis a suchian that hasconvergenceswith far more basal archosaurs as the two phylogenetic analyses suggest, or anarchosauriformclosely related to Archosauria, with features convergent to the morphology of the more advanced paracrocodylomorphs. However, support for the placement ofNundasuchusdoes weaken the further away it is placed from Paracrocodylomorpha. The results of the unconstrained analysis of Nesbittet al.(2014) using the Nesbitt (2011) dataset are simplified below (the relations within boldedcladesare not shown).

Archosauriformes

Proterosuchus Erythrosuchus Vancleavea Proterochampsia Euparkeria Phytosauria Archosauria Avemetatarsalia Pseudosuchia Ornithosuchidae Suchia Gracilisuchus Turfanosuchus Revueltosaurus Aetosauria Nundasuchus Ticinosuchus Paracrocodylomorpha Poposauroidea Qianosuchus Ctenosauriscidae Poposaurus Lotosaurus Shuvosauridae Loricata Prestosuchus Saurosuchus Batrachotomus Fasolasuchus Rauisuchidae Crocodylomorpha

In 2016,Nundasuchuswas featured inMartin Ezcurra's study of archosauromorphs, and was placed into a phylogenetic analysis similar is size and scope to Nesbitt (2011). Contrary to the results of Nesbittet al.(2014), Ezcurra (2016) placedNundasuchusas a basal pseudosuchian, although not quite as basal as Phytosauria. He also discussed the three features which those authors used to justify placement ofNundasuchusnear Paracrocodylomorpha. Heart-shaped spine tables, for example, were considered to have had an erratic distribution within Pseudosuchia, with some taxa (such asgracilisuchids) lacking them and others (i.e. phytosaurs andBatrachotomus) having them in only certain vertebrae. Likewise, staggered dorsal osteoderms were only found to be present inNundasuchusandGracilisuchus,with none of the sampled paracrocodylomorphs sharing the trait. He did concede that a groove on the femoral head is consistent with the hypothesis ofNundasuchusbeing close to paracrocoylomorphs, as the trait is also found inPrestosuchusandBatrachotomus.

However, Ezcurra also admitted that his analysis was more focused on basalarchosauromorphsand archosauriforms rather than true archosaurs, and therefore it may not be completely accurate for crownward groups such as pseudosuchians. He noted that certain taxa crucial to Nesbitt (2011)'s results, such asTicinosuchusandSaurosuchus,were omitted from his study. These genera were paracrocodyomorphs which possessed staggered osteoderms, heart-shaped spine tables, and a groove on the femoral head, therefore justifying a close relationship toNundasuchus.In 2018, another early paracrocodylomorph,Mandasuchus,received a long-awaited formal description. This genus also had these three features identified by Nesbittet al.(2014). A phylogenetic analysis was included in the description, based primarily on Nesbitt (2011) but also including new data from theNundasuchusdescription as well as a recent study on gracilisuchids. The results found that eitherNundasuchusor gracilisuchids were the sister taxa to Paracrocodylomorpha+Ticinosuchus,although it could not precisely determine which one was closer.

An updated version of the Nesbitt (2011) dataset published by Da-Silvaet al.(2018) placedNundasuchusat the base of Pseudosuchia. This study incorporated many recent revisions and additions to Nesbitt's methodology, though its results more closely resembled those of Ezcurra (2016) rather than Nesbitt (2014).