identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
C55C87E7FFF9FF8C52AE0EDAFF34FA75.text	C55C87E7FFF9FF8C52AE0EDAFF34FA75.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Kokartus (Milner 2000)	<div><p>KOKARTUS LOCALITIES AND ASSOCIATED VERTEBRATE ASSEMBLAGES</p> <p>All Kokartus localities (Nichke 1, Kugart 1, and Kyzylsu 1, Fig. 1) are confined to the lower part of the Balabansai Svita, which is composed mostly by variegated (black, green, red) clays, shales, and claystones (for detailed geological setting see Kaznyshkin, 1988, 1990; Nesov &amp; Fedorov, 1989; Nesov et al., 1994, 1996; Averianov, Martin &amp; Bakirov, 2005). The Balabansai Svita has been dated as late Bathonian- Callovian based on plant assemblages and ostracods (Burakova &amp; Fedorov, 1989; Nesov et al., 1996). The lower part of the Balabansai Svita is composed mostly by grey to greenish deposits that were formed under a relatively humid climate (Kaznyshkin, 1988). The red coloured deposits of the upper part of the Balabansai Svita were deposited under conditions of increasing aridity (Kaznyshkin, 1988). The increasing aridity of the climate in Central Asia began in the Callovian (Vakhrameev, 1991) and the Callovian age of the upper part of the Balabansai Svita was corroborated by this palaeoclimatic evidence, which is clearly expressed in the rocks of this unit (Nesov &amp; Fedorov, 1989). The lower part of the Balabansai Svita outcrops in the Kugart River Basin has been dated as Bathonian (Burakova &amp; Fedorov, 1989; Nesov &amp; Fedorov, 1989) and was deposited partly in shallow water and partly under terrestrial conditions with soil horizons and plant roots (Nesov et al., 1994). Vertebrate assemblages in the Kokartus localities indicate a freshwater rather than an estuarine environment.</p> <p>Apart from Kokartus, the Nichke 1 locality has produced disarticulated remains of actinopterygian fishes, such as scales of Ptycholepididae indet., Coccolepididae indet., Pholidophoridae indet., Holostei indet., and isolated teeth of?Ichthyodectiformes indet. In addition, remains of conchostracans, ostracods, and indeterminate malacostracans have been found in this locality (Nesov et al., 1996).</p> <p>The Kugart 1 and Kyzylsu 1 localities have yielded similar vertebrate assemblages, which (besides Kokartus) include hybodont sharks (Polyacrodontidae indet), actinopterygian fishes (Holostei indet.), brachyopoid temnospondyls, turtles, and a poorly preserved molar of a possible docodont mammal (Nesov et al., 1994, 1996; Averianov et al., 2008). The presence of sharks of the family Polyacrodontidae does not necessarily indicate an estuarine environment, as was suggested by Nesov et al. (1994), because hybodont sharks are known from different Asian localities that were formed under freshwater conditions (Cuny, Suteethorn &amp; Kamha, 2005).</p> <p>The Kugart 1 and Kyzylsu 1 vertebrate assemblages contain remains of both non-lissamphibian temnospondyls and salamanders (Averianov et al., 2008). The co-occurrence of salamanders and nonlissamphibian temnospondyls is very rare and is known only from two other Jurassic vertebrate assemblages: the Bathonian fauna of the Peski Quarry near Moscow, Russia (Shishkin, 2000a; Alekseev et al., 2001; Gambaryan &amp; Averianov, 2001) and the Oxfordian Qigu Formation in the southern Junggar Basin, China (Skutschas, Martin &amp; Ge, 2009).</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C55C87E7FFF9FF8C52AE0EDAFF34FA75	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Skutschas, Pavel;Martin, Thomas	Skutschas, Pavel, Martin, Thomas (2011): Cranial anatomy of the stem salamander Kokartus honorarius (Amphibia: Caudata) from the Middle Jurassic of Kyrgyzstan. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 161 (4): 816-838, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2010.00663.x, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2010.00663.x
C55C87E7FFFFFF8C53030E1FFD6AF9DF.text	C55C87E7FFFFFF8C53030E1FFD6AF9DF.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Caudata SCOPOLI 1777	<div><p>CAUDATA SCOPOLI, 1777</p> <p>KARAUROIDEA IVAKHNENKO, 1978</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C55C87E7FFFFFF8C53030E1FFD6AF9DF	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Skutschas, Pavel;Martin, Thomas	Skutschas, Pavel, Martin, Thomas (2011): Cranial anatomy of the stem salamander Kokartus honorarius (Amphibia: Caudata) from the Middle Jurassic of Kyrgyzstan. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 161 (4): 816-838, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2010.00663.x, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2010.00663.x
C55C87E7FFFFFF8153310E4AFDE3F8D9.text	C55C87E7FFFFFF8153310E4AFDE3F8D9.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Karauridae IVAKHNENKO 1978	<div><p>KARAURIDAE IVAKHNENKO, 1978</p> <p>Type genus: Karaurus Ivakhnenko, 1978</p> <p>Geographical and stratigraphical range: Central Asia, Middle–Late Jurassic.</p> <p>Included genera: Karaurus Ivakhnenko, 1978, Kokartus Nesov 1988.</p> <p>Diagnosis (revised from Ivakhnenko, 1978; Estes, 1981): [primitive (-), derived (+), and of uncertain polarity (?) for caudate character states]. Stem salamanders characterized by the following combination of characters: skull wide, relatively short, and flattened (?); skull roof heavily sculptured by tubercles and short ridges (+); alary process of premaxilla broad and short (-); nasal strongly overlaps the anterior portion of the frontal (-); prefrontal and frontal form a postorbital projection (+); frontal with no anterolateral extension (-); sculptured dorsal portion of squamosal element extending over the otic capsule and contacting parietal (-); quadratojugal present (-); vomerine tooth rows parallel to the maxillary arcade (-); parasphenoid with rounded anterior incisure owing to large intervomerine fontanelle (+); internal carotid foramen on lateral process of parasphenoid present (-); exoccipital sculptured (?), not fused with the opisthotic (-); occiput not projecting beyond the skull roof (-); teeth monocuspid, nonpedicellate (?); stapes robust and perforate (-); ossified pair of hypobranchials (-) and trident-shaped basibranchial present (+); amphicoelous vertebrae sculptured (-), with no basapophyses and spinal nerve foramina (-); spinal cord supports in the neural canal of the vertebrae (+); ribs bicapitate (-); complex strap-like glenoid and supraglenoid foramen present in scapulocoracoid (-).</p> <p>Remarks: Marmorerpeton Evans, Milner &amp; Mussett, 1988 from the Middle Jurassic of Great Britain differs from ‘typical’ karaurids (Karaurus, Kokartus) in having weak or no sculpture on the premaxilla and maxilla, bicuspid teeth (monocuspid in Karaurus and Kokartus), a lower number of premaxillary teeth (seven vs. 25 in Karaurus and about 15–20 in Kokartus). Additionally, Marmorerpeton differs from Kokartus by a circular dentary symphysis (rectangular in Kokartus). Thus, we exclude Marmorerpeton from the Karauridae.</p> <p>The ‘Kirtlington salamander A’ is present at the same localities as Marmorerpeton and this large undescribed salamander is characterized by plesiomorphic morphology of the vertebrae similar to that of Kokartus (Milner, 2000). Some cranial bones assigned to Marmorerpeton may belong to this form (Milner, 2000). The attribution of the ‘Kirlington salamander A’ to the Karauridae is not supported by any synapomorphic features.</p> <p>Isolated salamander atlantes from the Upper Jurassic Morrison Formation, USA, were referred to the Karauridae by Nesov (1993) without further explanation, and this material never has been described or figured. Therefore, the attribution of this material to the Karauridae needs further confirmation.</p> <p>The robust anterior dentary fragment from the Middle Jurassic Berezovsk Quarry locality, Russia, was presumably referred to the Karauridae because of its coarsely sculptured lateral surface (Skutschas et al., 2005; Skutschas, 2006). The dentaries of Karaurus and Kokartus differ significantly from the Russian specimen in the following features: weak sculpture formed by thin longitudinal ridges and grooves, and symphyseal region low and lightly built in contrast to the coarse sculpture composed of rounded and oval pits and deep and robust symphyseal region of the Russian specimen, excluding it from the Karauridae. The heavily sculptured dentary fragment from the Berezovsk Quarry may belong to non-lissamphibian temnospondyls, which were a common element of the Middle-Late Jurassic vertebrate assemblages in Asia (Shishkin, 2000a; Averianov et al., 2008; Skutschas et al., 2009).</p> <p>According to this re-evaluation, the family Karauridae currently includes only two genera and the geographical and temporal distribution of karaurids is restricted to the Middle–Late Jurassic of Central Asia. The heavily sculptured skull roof of Karauridae was considered to be a primitive character (Carroll, 2007), similar to that of the non-lissamphibian temnospondyls. However, the sculpture of the skull roof in karaurids is formed by relatively high tubercles and short ridges, sometimes anastomosing with other ridges, in contrast to the honeycombed or pitted sculptural pattern of the most of the nonlissamphibian temnospondyls and the polygonal pitted sculptural pattern of the albanerpetontids (P. Skutschas, pers. observ., 2009). Some nonlissamphibian temnospondyls (e.g. amphibamid Micropholis, plagiosaurid Gerrothorax) have the tubercular sculpture (Schoch &amp; Rubidge, 2005; Jenkins et al., 2008; Witzmann et al., 2010), which differs from that of karaurids in several aspects. In contrast to non-lissamphibian temnospondyls with the tubercular sculpture, tubercules in karaurids are considerably smaller and more numerous and short ridges never form a regular radial pattern (P. Skutschas, pers. observ., 2009). The specific sculpture of the skull roof in karaurids could represent a highly modified sculpture of the non-lissamphibian temnospondyls or it could be developed secondarily, like in some salamandrids (e.g. Chelotriton, Tylotriton). The results of our phylogenetic analysis (see below in ‘Phylogenetic position of Kokartus ’) support a suggestion about the secondarily developed sculpture of the skull roof in karaurids.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C55C87E7FFFFFF8153310E4AFDE3F8D9	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Skutschas, Pavel;Martin, Thomas	Skutschas, Pavel, Martin, Thomas (2011): Cranial anatomy of the stem salamander Kokartus honorarius (Amphibia: Caudata) from the Middle Jurassic of Kyrgyzstan. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 161 (4): 816-838, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2010.00663.x, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2010.00663.x
C55C87E7FFF2FF8551A40EBAFD1FFC9E.text	C55C87E7FFF2FF8551A40EBAFD1FFC9E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Kokartus honorarius Nesov 1988	<div><p>KOKARTUS HONORARIUS NESOV, 1988</p> <p>1988 Kokartus honorarius Nesov, pp. 434–435, figure 2.</p> <p>1993 Kokartus honorarius Nesov; Milner, p. 675.</p> <p>1996 Kokartus honorarius Nesov; Nesov et al. p. 3, figure 1.</p> <p>2000a Kokartus honorarius Nesov; Shishkin, p. 305.</p> <p>2008 Kokartus honorarius Nesov; Averianov et al. pp. 6–12, figures 4–7.</p> <p>Diagnosis (revised from Nesov, 1988; Nesov et al., 1996): Karaurid salamander that differs from Karaurus by a long, slender dentate anterior process of the pterygoid; by an internarial fenestra; and by the presence of a separated coronoid.</p> <p>Remarks: Recently, Skutschas (2009) noted that Kokartus has spinal cord supports in the neural canal of the vertebrae, but did not provide any illustrations. This structure is unique to caudates and absent in other extant vertebrates, including anurans, caecilians (Wake &amp; Lawson, 1973), and albanerpetontids (P. Skutschas, pers. observ., 2009). Skutschas (2009) proposed that the presence of spinal cord supports is a synapomorphy of Caudata. Although the main scope of this paper is to describe the skull structure of Kokartu s, we provide an illustration showing the presence of the spinal cord supports in this taxon (Fig. 8C, D). We included this character in the phylogenetic analysis, but detailed information about the structure of the neural canal of basal tetrapods, including groups that are possibly closely related to lissamphibians (e.g. lepospondyls, dissorophoid temnospondyls), is lacking.</p> <p>DESCRIPTION</p> <p>Dental arcade</p> <p>The premaxilla is known from three complete or nearly complete specimens (isolated right premaxilla CCMGE 94/12937 and the pair of premaxillae in the disarticulated partial skull CCMGE 1/12937, Figs 2, 6A, B, 7). The premaxilla is slightly convex externally. It has a short maxillary (= posterior) process and a relatively narrow, long, and posteromedially orientated alary process that arises from the anterior part of the bone and overlaps the nasal anteriorly. The alary processes on the paired premaxillae were closely spaced and probably in contact. The anterior portion of each premaxilla has a shallow incisure, where they were weakly sutured to each other and they bordered the internarial fenestra. The internarial fenestra was not described and figured by Nesov et al. (1996). The dorsal edge of the maxillary process and the lateral edge of the alary process border the anteromedial portion of the external nostril. The dorsal surface is weakly sculptured with short ridges. The maxilla is known only from anterior and posterior fragments in the disarticulated partial skull CCMGE 1/12937 (Figs 2, 7); therefore, information on the shape and the structure of this bone is limited. It seems to be a rather large and long bone (contra Nesov et al., 1996, who suggested that the maxilla in Kokartus was shortened), with a well developed supradental shelf.</p> <p>Skull roof</p> <p>The paired (but disarticulated) nasals in the partial skull roof CCMGE 2/12937 document the structure of this bone (Fig. 4). The nasal is flat, pentagonal in shape, and relatively large. The medial edge is curved and the nasals were in contact along their anteriormost and posterior parts, bordering a narrow fontanelle. The presence of a fontanelle is probably an ontogenetic character. The nasal strongly overlaps the anterior portion of the frontal and its ventral surface bears a large triangular facet reaching the centre of the bone. The posterolateral edge is straight and was in contact with the anteromedial portion of the prefrontal. The anterolateral edge is slightly convex and borders an external nostril. The ventral surface near the anterolateral edge is deeply depressed. The ventral surface of the bone bears striations, which diverge radially from the centre. The external sculpture is unknown.</p> <p>The frontal is known from complete and fragmentary specimens [paired articulated frontals in the partial skull roof CCMGE 2 /12937, in the posterior part of skull ZIN PH 65/47, and from the fragmentary frontal CCMGE 1 /11998 (holotype), Figs 3A, B, 4, 6C, D]. The frontal is massive and relatively long with its length almost equalling that of the parietals and it has no anterolateral extension. The anterior part of the bone is roughly triangular and anteriorly extends far below the nasal. The frontals are in contact medially along most of their length and have no median fontanalle (contra Nesov et al., 1996). The lateral edge has a broad, almost triangular process. The anterolateral edge of this process is in contact with the prefrontal and formed together with this bone a distinct postorbital projection, which marked the border between the small orbit and temporal part of orbitotemporal opening (like in Karaurus). The posterolateral edge of the process is thick, depressed, and bordered the anteromedial part of the temporal fenestra. The posterior part of the lateral edge of the bone is parallel to the midline and has a distinct ridge that is continuous and reaches the middle of the lateral process. The posterior edge of the bone is straight and overlaps the parietal. The ventral surface of the bone bears striations, which diverge radially from the centre. The external sculpture is represented by tubercles and short ridges, sometimes anastomosing with other ridges.</p> <p>The paired parietal in the partial skull roof CCMGE 2/12937, in the posterior part of the skull ZIN PH 65/47, and the isolated almost complete parietal CCMGE 3/12937 document the structure of this bone (Figs 3A, B, 4). The parietal is ‘L’-shaped as a result of the presence of a posterolateral extension (= lateral ala), relatively long with a ratio of its maximum posterior width to the midline length of about 0.6, and thick. Anteriorly it is overlapped by the frontal and posterolaterally it is in contact with the dorsal portion of the squamosal. The anterior edge is roughly straight. The parietals contact one another medially along their entire length. Anterior to the posterolateral extension, the lateral edge is straight and parallel to the midline. It is thick and ventrally bordered by a ridge that continues onto the frontal. The posterolateral extension is nearly rectangular. The posterior edge is slightly curved in the anterior direction. The central part of the ventral surface is deeply depressed. The striations on the ventral surface are similar to that of the frontal and consist of ridges that radially diverge from the posterolateral part of the bone. There is no pineal pit on the ventral surface of the frontals (contra Nesov et al., 1996). The external sculpture is also similar to that of the frontals. In some large, and presumably old, individuals, the parietals are fused to one another (Fig. 3A, B) and to the frontals (Fig. 6E, F).</p> <p>The squamosal is known from several almost complete specimens: the squamosal in the disarticulated partial skull CCMGE 1 /12937, the partial squamosals in anatomical position in the posterior part of the skull ZIN PH 65/47, squamosal CCMGE 2 /11998 (type material), and squamosal CCMGE 6 /12937, Figs 2, 3A, B, 5, 7). It consists of two distinct parts: a flat dorsal portion and a thin ventral ramus. The ventral ramus diverges anteroventrally from the dorsal part, close to its lateral edge. The dorsal portion is nearly rectangular in dorsal view and is only slightly longer than wide. This orientation of the ventral ramus suggests that the jaw articulation was situated anterior to the occiput. The medial edge of the dorsal portion contacts the lateral edge of the posterolateral expansion of the parietal. The ventral ramus has an expanded middle part and tapering distal part, and bears a distinct ridge on its lateral surface and a groove on its ventral surface. The external sculpture of the dorsal portion is mostly composed of isolated tubercles.</p> <p>Palate</p> <p>The vomer is known only from a small fragment in the disarticulated partial skull CCMGE 1/12937 (Figs 2, 7) and from an isolated vomer in CCMGE 13/12937 (not figured), providing only a partial picture of the shape and detailed structure of this bone. There is a single row of teeth on the vomer. The orientation of the tooth row is unclear.</p> <p>The pair of pterygoids in the disarticulated partial skull CCMGE 1/12937, the pterygoid in the posterior part of the skull ZIN PH 65/47, and the isolated complete pterygoid CCMGE 5/12937 document the structure of this bone (Figs 2, 3, 6G, 7). The pterygoid is boomerang-shaped and has a prominent medial process (= medial ramus, = basipterygoid ramus). The structure of the pterygoid–parasphenoid contact (basicranial articulation) is unknown but was probably rather loose. The anterior process (= palatine ramus) is long, strongly arcuate, and tapers anteriorly. The anterior portion of the palatine ramus is anteromedially orientated. The ventral surface of the anterior process bears a row of homodont teeth along its entire length. The posterolateral process (= quadrate ramus) is broad and rounded. The dorsal surface of the pterygoid has a prominent ridge, which is almost parallel to the lateral edge of the bone. Medial to this ridge, the posterolateral process is sculptured by several small parallel ridges.</p> <p>The parasphenoid is known from imprints on the almost complete specimen CCMGE 3 /11998 (type material) and from the inner structure and outline of the parasphenoid that was made visible by computed tomography (C/ T) scanning of the disarticulated partial skull CCMGE 1 /12937 (Figs 6H, I, 7). The parasphenoid is relatively broad anteriorly and posteriorly and has a constriction in its middle portion. The parasphenoid rostrum (= cultriform processes) is indented and has a rounded incisure (like in Karaurus). This incisure forms the posterior border of the intervomerine fontanelle. The dorsal and ventral surfaces of the rostrum have a similar sculpture consisting of parallel straight ridges. The lateral processes are relatively short, narrow, and perforated by a small internal carotid foramen opening into a short transversely orientated groove. The posterior portion of the parasphenoid (behind the lateral processes) is nearly rectangular, with parallel-sided lateral edges and a straight posterior edge. The dorsal surface is slightly concave.</p> <p>Braincase</p> <p>The structure of the exoccipital was described in detail and figured by Averianov et al. (2008) (see also Fig. 5D, F, G). The exoccipital of Kokartus is sculptured, anteroposteriorly short and not fused with the opisthotic. It has a processus lamellosus along the dorsolateral edge and a prominent rugosity along the ventrolateral edge of the bone. The occipital condyle is single, large, and kidney-shaped.</p> <p>Mandible</p> <p>No complete mandible is preserved in the collected material; therefore, the precise number of bones composing the lower jaw is unknown. Three bones are consistently present in the material: the dentary, coronoid, and prearticular (Figs 2, 5F–H, 7). These elements were figured in Nesov et al.’s (1996) reconstruction of the mandible, but were not described. The structure of the dentary was briefly described by Averianov et al. (2008) as tapering anteriorly and with a relatively deep and almost rectangular symphysis, which is corroborated by specimen CCMGE 1/12937 (Fig. 7). The medial surface has a wide Meckelian groove, which narrows anteriorly, reaches the symphysis, and is bordered dorsally by a shallow dental shelf and ventrally by a thickened bony margin. The lateral surface is strongly convex and sculptured with parallel longitudinal ridges. There is a wide horizontal groove on the posterior portion of the bone.</p> <p>Medially and just posteriorly to the middle of the dentary is a small, narrow, tooth-bearing bone, which is interpreted as a coronoid (Fig. 2). Medially to the dentary fragment in CCMGE 2/11998 (Fig. 5H) is a fragment of a dorsoventrally deep, plate-like bone, which is interpreted as the prearticular.</p> <p>Dentition</p> <p>Marginal dentition is present in the premaxillae, maxillae, dentaries, and coronoids. The number of teeth on the maxilla is unclear; the estimated premaxillary tooth count is 15–20, the dentary tooth count is more than 40, and the coronoid tooth count is more than ten. All marginal teeth are homodont, nonpedicellate, and have a sharp monocuspid crown. The tops of some crowns are inclined medially. The premaxillary, maxillary, and dentary teeth are almost equal in size; the coronoid teeth are markedly smaller than the dentary teeth. Palatal dentition is present on the vomers and pterygoids, where they are arranged in a single row and have slightly transversely expanded tooth bases; the structure of the crowns in the palatal dentition is unknown. The vomerine and pterygoid teeth are almost the same size as the dentary and maxillary teeth or only slightly smaller.</p> <p>Hyobranchial skeleton</p> <p>The elements of the hyobranchial skeleton are represented by hypobranchials 1 and 2 in the disarticulated partial skull CCMGE 1/12937 (Figs 2, 7), which show general similarity with that of Karaurus. Both hypobranchials are relatively short, straight, and have a slender middle part and expanded ends. Hypobranchial 1 is slightly larger than hypobranchial 2.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C55C87E7FFF2FF8551A40EBAFD1FFC9E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Skutschas, Pavel;Martin, Thomas	Skutschas, Pavel, Martin, Thomas (2011): Cranial anatomy of the stem salamander Kokartus honorarius (Amphibia: Caudata) from the Middle Jurassic of Kyrgyzstan. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 161 (4): 816-838, DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2010.00663.x, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2010.00663.x
