The Cricotus issue is one that has captured the attention of many as of late. With its relevance in various areas, Cricotus has managed to establish itself as a point of interest and discussion in today's society. Whether due to its impact on daily life, its influence on popular culture or its importance in technological development, Cricotus has become a constant topic of conversation. In this article, we will explore different aspects related to Cricotus, from its origin to its possible consequences in the future.
This article needs additional citations for verification. (November 2015) |
Cricotus | |
---|---|
Scientific classification | |
Domain: | Eukaryota |
Kingdom: | Animalia |
Phylum: | Chordata |
Clade: | Sarcopterygii |
Clade: | Tetrapodomorpha |
Order: | †Embolomeri |
Family: | †Archeriidae |
Genus: | †Cricotus Cope, 1875 |
Type species | |
†Cricotus heteroclitus (nomen dubium) Cope, 1875
|
Cricotus is an extinct genus of Embolomeri. It was erected by Cope in 1875, on the basis of fragmentary, not clearly associated remains including caudal vertebrae, on which the name was established (in fact, based on a single intercentrum), as well as a few other postcranial bones. It was little-used in the subsequent literature, contrary to Archeria, which appears to be a junior synonym of Cricotus. However, given that the type species of Cricotus (C. heteroclitus) is a nomen dubium, the name Cricotus is unavailable. This led to Holmes suggesting using the name Archeria for this taxon, though he provided no evidence that he made a formal appeal to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature for this (and presumably did not do so).