Talk:Cryptocycloceras

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cephalopods, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CephalopodsWikipedia:WikiProject CephalopodsTemplate:WikiProject CephalopodsCephalopods articles

Palaeontology Low‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

It is requested that an image or photograph of Cryptocycloceras be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Data sources

I found an online ref to Crytocycloceras in uBio [1] crediting Crytocycloceras to Lai & Xu in Xu & Lai 1987. According to Nomenclator Zoologicus I gather this genus was first discovered somewhere in the Yantse Gorge in China. However I found nothing as to its lower taxonomic relationship so all we're left with is what Sepkoski put down.

Paleobiology Database, otherwise a good beginning source, is somewhat careless with the concept "assigned by" . Often, and especially in the case of jack Sepkoski, what is really meant is "included by" or "included in". Some previous worker(s)in the field made the assignment. Sepkoski's contribution to paleontology was is creating lists of valid genera with age ranges for the purpose of studying extinctions and recoveries. They, along with info from Paleobiology Dbase, are a good place to start, but I wouldn't call either of them the final authority.

JM talk