<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:creator>Villa, Andrea</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Tschopp, Emanuel</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Georgalis, Georgios L.</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Delfino, Massimo</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2017-02-15</dc:date>
  <dc:description xmlns:ns0="xml" ns0:lang="en">he capability of palaeontologists to identify fossil remains of a particular group of  vertebrates strongly depends on the knowledge they have of its comparative  osteology and on the actual presence of diagnostic differences among the considered  taxa. This could have a relevant influence on the study of palaeodiversity, since a low  recognisability causes a loss of data when trying to reconstruct the history of taxa that  lived on Earth in the past. Currently, more than 6000 extant species of lizards and  worm lizards are known, and new ones continue to be discovered, mainly based on  molecular data. But are we able to recognise this high diversity using osteology? As  far as European taxa are concerned, the osteological recognisability of non-snake  squamates is very low: only 31% of the extant European taxa can be identified based  on their skeletal morphology. This is balanced partially by the fact that most  recognisable taxa have been actually recognised in the fossil record, suggesting that  the lost data are mainly due to the scarce knowledge of the comparative osteology of  these reptiles and less influenced by other biases, such as taphonomic or collection  biases. In this context, specimen-level phylogenetic analysis has proved to be a useful  tool to identify diagnostic combinations of osteological features, at least for lacertid  species, as evidenced by a case study focused on the genus Lacerta.</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>https://folia.unifr.ch/global/documents/305397</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>https://folia.unifr.ch/documents/305397/files/geo_ofr.pdf</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
  <dc:relation>info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1163/15685381-00003085</dc:relation>
  <dc:rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</dc:rights>
  <dc:rights>License undefined</dc:rights>
  <dc:source>Amphibia-Reptilia. - 2017, vol. 38, no. 1, p. 79–88</dc:source>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns1="xml" ns1:lang="en">reptiles</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns2="xml" ns2:lang="en">palaeontology</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns3="xml" ns3:lang="en">biodiversity</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns4="xml" ns4:lang="en">identification</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns5="xml" ns5:lang="en">squamates</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>info:eu-repo/classification/udc/56</dc:subject>
  <dc:title xmlns:ns6="xml" ns6:lang="en">Osteology, fossil record and palaeodiversity of the European lizards</dc:title>
  <dc:type>http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>
