One of the difficulties in the study of ichthyosaurs has been the lack of ossification, said to be a common characteristic of aquatic groups. This difficulty has been partially removed by the discovery of a specimen of Ophthalmosaurus which is particularly well ossified, revealing clear facets which are not usually present. This specimen, together with well preserved skulls of Ichthyosaurus, Leptopterygius and Stenopterygius and many other isolated elements and fragments of Ichthyosaurus s.l. formed a basis for the interpretation of the ichthyosaur skull which, with literature of Triassic forms, has led to the recognition of a large number of ancestral ichthyosaurian features. The principal theories of the origin of ichthyosaurs have been examined in the light of this new evidence and shown to be untenable. In particular, von Huene's and Nielsen's theories of direct descent from amphibia are criticised and it is shown that Romer's suggestions of pelycosaur affinities of the ichthyosaurs are mistaken. The relationships of ichthyosaurs are then discussed in terms of the fuller knowledge of ichthyosaur anatomy and of recent literature on primitive reptiles and amphibia. Ichthyosaurs are shown to have common ancestry with chelonians and the ichthyosaur‐chelonian stock is considered to be derived from a more primitive stock evolving towards procolophonids or towards procolophonids and pareiasaurs. It is shown that otic conditions superficially similar to those of captorhinomorphs and pelycosaurs but which are, in fact, “sauropsid” may occur in several groups, including ichthyosaurs. The evolution of the temporal region is discussed and used to suggest that ichthyosaurs and chelonians had their origins in Deuterosaurus (Permian) times or later but probably not later than the close of the Permian.
Read full abstract