The vomer is disarticulated in nearly all known individuals jir.2014.0001 and, even in MB.Am.821 and MB.Am.838, the region where the vomer should contact the premaxilla is not well-preserved and the contrateral vomer is missing. With the material available, it not possible to reconstruct the relationship between the premaxillae and the palate with complete confidence.PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0128333 June 17,16 /Skeletal Morphogenesis of Microbrachis and HyloplesionFig 10. Palate of M. pelikani, MB.Am.821, showing complete pterygoid. Specimen is an bmjopen-2015-010112 impression, but the angle of the lightening causes a 3D effect. Art, articular; At, atlas; Den, dentary; Ep, ectopterygoid; In, internal naris; Iv, interpterygoid DS5565MedChemExpress DS5565 vacuity; Pl, palatine; Ps, parasphenoid; Pt, pterygoid; Qd, quadrate; Vo, vomer. Scale bar = 1mm. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0128333.gSpecimen CGH727 preserves a disarticulated palatine (Fig 11A). That element is relatively elongate and narrow, more similar to reconstructions by Carroll and Gaskill [1] than to those of Vallin and Laurin [9]. The vomerine (medial) order Cibinetide process of the palatine is robust and projects relatively far medially. The largest denticles on the palatine are located at the base of the maxillary process, posterior to the smooth, U-shaped anterior edge that forms the posterior margin of the choana. Additionally, the disarticulated palatine appears to be in contact with anPLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0128333 June 17,17 /Skeletal Morphogenesis of Microbrachis and HyloplesionFig 11. Palate elements, M. pelikani. A. CGH727 (Narodini Museum, (now National Museum Prague), Prague, Czech Republic); isolated right palatine and ectopterygoid. Ventral view, anterior up, lateral to the right. B. CGH727; displaced right epipterygoid. Ventral view, anterior up. Specimen is impression, but the angle of the lighting causes a 3D effect. C. CGH251; `epipterygoid’ figured by Carroll and Gaskill [1]. Probably a circumorbital. D. M1689. Potential isolated epipterygoid. C?, circumorbital?; Ep, ectopterygoid; Epi, epipterygoid; Iv, interpterygoid vacuity; Pl, palatine; Ps, parasphenoid. Scale bars = 1mm. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0128333.gectopterygoid, a much shorter and rounder bone. Both elements exhibit a straight lateral margin for contact with the maxilla. The base of an epipterygoid, with the dorsal stem broken and missing, appears to be preserved underneath the ectopterygoid. Previously, an articulated epipterygoid was identified and figured by Steen ([46] reference figure 16C’). That particular specimen (Plze Museum 676?77) was unavailable to me, but I located an additional specimen exhibiting the epipterygoid in semi-articulation (Fig 11B). A proposed isolated epipterygoid also was identified previously ([1] reference figure 79D). The skull of the specimen in question, CGH251, is badly preserved and the identified `epipterygoid,’PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0128333 June 17,18 /Skeletal Morphogenesis of Microbrachis and Hyloplesionapproximately the same size as the tabular, is preserved along with a group of disarticulated circumorbital, cheek, and posterior roofing elements. However, a disarticulated pterygoid also is located next to the `epipterygoid’, supporting the identification by Carroll and Gaskill [1]. If the element is not an epipterygoid, then it is likely a circumorbital element, specifically a broken lacrimal, because that is the only bone from that region not represented among the disarticulated elements. Iden.The vomer is disarticulated in nearly all known individuals jir.2014.0001 and, even in MB.Am.821 and MB.Am.838, the region where the vomer should contact the premaxilla is not well-preserved and the contrateral vomer is missing. With the material available, it not possible to reconstruct the relationship between the premaxillae and the palate with complete confidence.PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0128333 June 17,16 /Skeletal Morphogenesis of Microbrachis and HyloplesionFig 10. Palate of M. pelikani, MB.Am.821, showing complete pterygoid. Specimen is an bmjopen-2015-010112 impression, but the angle of the lightening causes a 3D effect. Art, articular; At, atlas; Den, dentary; Ep, ectopterygoid; In, internal naris; Iv, interpterygoid vacuity; Pl, palatine; Ps, parasphenoid; Pt, pterygoid; Qd, quadrate; Vo, vomer. Scale bar = 1mm. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0128333.gSpecimen CGH727 preserves a disarticulated palatine (Fig 11A). That element is relatively elongate and narrow, more similar to reconstructions by Carroll and Gaskill [1] than to those of Vallin and Laurin [9]. The vomerine (medial) process of the palatine is robust and projects relatively far medially. The largest denticles on the palatine are located at the base of the maxillary process, posterior to the smooth, U-shaped anterior edge that forms the posterior margin of the choana. Additionally, the disarticulated palatine appears to be in contact with anPLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0128333 June 17,17 /Skeletal Morphogenesis of Microbrachis and HyloplesionFig 11. Palate elements, M. pelikani. A. CGH727 (Narodini Museum, (now National Museum Prague), Prague, Czech Republic); isolated right palatine and ectopterygoid. Ventral view, anterior up, lateral to the right. B. CGH727; displaced right epipterygoid. Ventral view, anterior up. Specimen is impression, but the angle of the lighting causes a 3D effect. C. CGH251; `epipterygoid’ figured by Carroll and Gaskill [1]. Probably a circumorbital. D. M1689. Potential isolated epipterygoid. C?, circumorbital?; Ep, ectopterygoid; Epi, epipterygoid; Iv, interpterygoid vacuity; Pl, palatine; Ps, parasphenoid. Scale bars = 1mm. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0128333.gectopterygoid, a much shorter and rounder bone. Both elements exhibit a straight lateral margin for contact with the maxilla. The base of an epipterygoid, with the dorsal stem broken and missing, appears to be preserved underneath the ectopterygoid. Previously, an articulated epipterygoid was identified and figured by Steen ([46] reference figure 16C’). That particular specimen (Plze Museum 676?77) was unavailable to me, but I located an additional specimen exhibiting the epipterygoid in semi-articulation (Fig 11B). A proposed isolated epipterygoid also was identified previously ([1] reference figure 79D). The skull of the specimen in question, CGH251, is badly preserved and the identified `epipterygoid,’PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0128333 June 17,18 /Skeletal Morphogenesis of Microbrachis and Hyloplesionapproximately the same size as the tabular, is preserved along with a group of disarticulated circumorbital, cheek, and posterior roofing elements. However, a disarticulated pterygoid also is located next to the `epipterygoid’, supporting the identification by Carroll and Gaskill [1]. If the element is not an epipterygoid, then it is likely a circumorbital element, specifically a broken lacrimal, because that is the only bone from that region not represented among the disarticulated elements. Iden.
