Archaeologists have long believed that snakes evolved from lizards sometime in the distant past and gradually lost limbs. Therefore, there must be an evolutionary inductor with four limbs. This prediction was confirmed in 2006 by the discovery of a transitional, serpent-like fossil (Nagash rongrina) with two hind limbs dating back about 95 million years. There is also an ongoing debate about whether snakes originated in the marine or terrestrial environment, and a 2006 fossil supported the second hypothesis. Then, in 2015, David Martell of the University of Portsmouth and Nicholas Langrich, a University of Bath co-author, published a description of a four-legged fossil, claiming that it was It was the first known example of a four-legged snake with front and hind limbs in the fossil record. Martell found the fossil in the Solnehofen Museum in Germany, part of a larger exhibition of Cretaceous fossils, and it's small. The arms and legs each have odd fingers and long toes that can be useful for digging - additional evidence that reinforces the terrestrial origin. It had 160 spinal vertebrae and another 112 in a cylindrical tail (as opposed to a flat one). There were also scales extending across the abdomen, an elongated body, sharp hooked teeth, and a skull (about the size of a human fingernail) with a short nose and a long brainstem. Bones from another animal in the gut indicate that the creature may have been a Canadian carnivore. One of the authors of this latter article pointed out at the time that most known snakes and lizards had vertebrae with concave anterior surfaces and convex dorsal surfaces, but this does not appear to be the case with tetrapods. The vertebrae of the specimen appear to lack a small bone called the intercentrum. Caldwell suggested that the tetrapod probably belonged to another large group of amphibians that became extinct about 251 million years ago. "https://safirsoft.com/picsbody/". 2111/11989-1.jpg "alt=" https://safirsoft.com rejects 2015 controversial new fossil discovery study: Incidentally, this is not a four-legged snake "srcset=" https://cdn.arstechnica net/wp- content/uploads/2021/11/fossil2ROTATE-CROP.jpg 2x">enlarge/Tetrapodophis partner and partner SVP), based on additional observations of a naturally formed fossilized stone slab, gave it the clearest view of the skull, retaining many features that could be traced back to the original study. As science reported at the time, "In the snake's skull, there is a bone called the long quadrant which allows snakes to open their jaws very wide." A quarter of the bone of this fossil is mostly C-shaped and surrounds the animal's hearing organ - a distinctive feature. A group of lizards called squamates. " p>
There was an extra wrinkle in the story which led to more controversy. Some limestone mines occurred in Brazil, most of which occurred in the second half of the twentieth century, however, the Brazilian law passed in The 1940s required the restoration of any fossils from state property, and it was not clear how the specimen had found its way to the Solnehofen Museum.
When Caldwell contacted the museum to get it to the museum, Fossil refused his request for further study, which turned out to be It belongs to a group.The owner of the fossil was removed after it was damaged during a tomography at the European Center for Synchrotron Radiation in Germany, and some researchers believe that this may lead to further study in the case of Tetrapodophis scientifically impossible, because if the fossil remains unavailable, any discovery It will be untestable. p>
A new study rejects 2015's controversial fossil discovery: After all, this isn't a four-legged snake