Read the Beforeitsnews.com story here. Advertise at Before It's News here.

By David Peters
Contributor profile | More stories

Story Views
Now:
Last hour:
Last 24 hours:
Total:

Laueropterus (Hone 2026) enters the Large Pterosaur Tree

Wednesday, May 20, 2026 0:22

% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

Following in the wake of the discovery and description of
the pre-pterodactylids, Skiphosaura (Fig 1) and Makrodactylus (Figs 1, 2) comes a third mid-sized pterosaur from the same formation, Laueropterus (Hone 2026, Figs 1, 4, 5).

After an earlier analysis Makrodactylus was recovered as a crestless juvenile of the much larger crested Skiphosaura in the large pterosaur tree, LPT, 268 taxa. Details online here. Now Laueropterus also appears to be conspecific with Skiphosoura.

Figure 1. Skiphosaura reconstruction from Hone et al 2024 here compared to scale with the juvenile, named Makrodactylus by Hone et al 2025. Laeuropterus is seen at lower right, midway in size if this is an ontogenetic series, which is how the LPT recovers these three.

Figure 2. Above: Makrodaactylus reconstruction using DGS methodology = traced from the in situ image. Below: Makrodactylus freehand reconstruction from Hone 2et al. Some pterosaurs left quadrupedal tracks. Others did not. All pterosaurs descend from bipedal ancestors. That’s how they were able to develop flapping wings, like birds did from bipedal theropod ancestors. Beachcombing pterosaurs were secondarily quadrupedal.

After analysis
Skiphosaura and its juvenile nested with Jianchangnathus and its sister, the STM 19-59 specimen in the LPT at the base of the Pterodactylidae. BSP ASI 739 (Fig 3) is the ‘oldest Pterodactylus‘. Propterodactylus = the Painten specimen (Fig 3) is the proximal ancestor for both clades.

Figure 3. The BSP ASI 739 specimen (below) compared to the Painten private specimen= Propterodactylus (above).

Hone 2026
provided excellent in situ photos of Laueropterus (Fig 4) so a DGS tracing could be made, then cut and pasted into an accurate reconstruction (Fig 5). Unfortunately, Hone 2026 provided a generic freehand reconstruction of Laueropterus.

Make sure your own figures mirror the data as precisely as you can manage. Be transparent. That means don’t freehand a pleasing illustration when the data is paramount.

Figure 4. Laueropterus nearly complete, but disarticulated in situ. DGS colors added here.

Smeared roadkill fossils benefit the most from DGS
The value of the much maligned DGS technique becomes (hopefully) obvious in specimens like Laueropterus, a disarticulated 2D specimen in which nearly all the bones are visible (Fig 5).

Figure 5. Reconstructions of Laueropterus. Above: from the DGS tracing in figure 4. Below: a freehand diagram from Hone 2026.

Phylogenetic analysis
Mesquite and PAUP nest Laueropterus with Markodactylus and Skiphosoura. Changes between the taxa are not distinct enough to modify scores between the three conspecific taxa, nor to nest any of these with any other of the 268 taxa.

Instead these three represent three stages in ontogeny. That means the two newer ‘genera’ are junior synonyms for Skiphosoura. The three were conspecific and from the same formation.

The question of Bipedalism vs Quadrupedalism in pterosaurs
The problem: You’ll note distinctly different walking poses presented by Peters and Hone in the above figures. Peters matched Craysaac pterosaur ichnites to Pterodactylus, resulting in an upright configuration using the forelimbs as ski-poles to aid steadiness. This mode permits bipedal take-off. Hone has not yet repeated that experiment.

You’ll note in neither configuration do the forelimbs contribute any anterior force vector to the shoulder glenoid = joint. In the more upright pose with the toes beneath the aerodynamic and terrestrial center of balance pterosaurs are like birds and humans, all lacking a tail. Triassic pterosaurs lost caudofemoralis muscles, so their tail was attenuated, lacking large femoral muscles, as in dinosaurs.

Plus, manual digit 3 often pointed backwards. Not good for forward propulsion.
Not bad for a ski pole.

Figure 6. Scleromochlus from ReptileEvolution.com.

A little background:
When Scleromochlus (Fig 6) was considered a ‘by default’ pterosaur sister/ancestor, the much greater length of its hind limbs was noted. Bennett 2020 agreed with previous workers (eg Benton 1999) that “The posterior trunk was covered with ~20 rows of closely spaced transversely elongate dorsal osteoderms.” After analysis Peters (2000) reported Scleromochlus was a basal bipedal crocodylomorph with a flattened skull and torso, along with sprawling limbs – lacking pedal digit 5 and having tiny, tiny, tiny hands.

When Cosesaurus was considered a pterosaur ancestor, along with the tiny tanystropheids, Langobardisaurus, Sharovipteryx and Longisquama, Peters (2000) matched the manus and pes to Early to Mid-Triassic Rotodactylus tracks in which pedal digit 5 impressed as a small posterior point. This was achieved by flexion of the fifth pedal phalanges during extension of the medial four digits. Like Tanystropheus, Sharovipteryx and pterosaurs, the first phalanx of pedal digit 5 in Cosesaurus was as large and robust as the medial metatarsals. This trait is not found in any other tetrapod clade. Rotodactylus tracks can be quadrupedal, bipedal and some show the transition between the two modes.

Peters 2000a added four previously omitted taxa
(Cosesaurus and kin) to prior studies by Evans, Jalil and Bennett to see if those taxa attracted pterosaurs – or if various other taxa, including archosaurs, archosauriforms and archosauromorphs attracted pterosaurs. That seemed the simplest thing to do given Peters’ tentative freshman attempts at working with MacClade and PAUP.

Hone and Benton 2007 wrote:
“A number of Peters’ character recodings are based on unjustified assumptions and reconstructions.‘

Note: these two authors made no attempt to contact Peters to answer their questions. Nor did they cite Peters 2000a, 2002, which further explored this topic five years before 2007. Let’s take a look at what Hone and Benton consider to be ‘unjustified assumptions.’

Note: There were no re-codings. Just adding taxa and their scores to other matrices.

“Characters for Eudimorphodon are coded as if it were a digitigrade biped capable of both walking and running. This reconstruction of pterosaurs is discounted by many and contradicts trackway evidence (Mazin et al. 2003), the distribution of mass and the issues of balance (Pennycuick 1988) and the structure of the metatarsal/tarsal joints (Clark et al. 1998).”

Hone and Benton omitted citing several sources here. Padian1983 reconstructed Dimorphodon as a digitigrade biped. Peters 2000b, 2002 showed that some pterosaurs were plantigrade, others were digitigrade. Basal non-volent precursors were speedy facultative bipeds (Cosesaurus) to speedy obligate bipeds (Sharovipteryx).

Hone and Benton don’t want to hear those facts. Don’t want to test those taxa. Don’t want to cite outsiders, except to put them down. Is that how scientists should act?

Almost twenty-years after Hone and Benton 2007 I still cannot understand how ‘characters for Eudimorphodon are coded as if it were a digitigrade biped,‘ considering that I used matrices, taxa and characters from three other authors in Peters 2000a. Not my own characters.

Furthermore the only known specimen of Eudirmorphodon lacks feet and legs below the knees.

With regard to the ‘structure of the metatarsal/tarsal joints (Clark et al 1998,) Hone and Benton made a mistake. The structure in question is a butt-joint between the metatarsals and proximal phalanges, distinct from most tetrapods. Clark et al (in a Nature cover story) maintained that butt-joint meant pterosaur feet, like their 3D example, Dimorphodon weintraubi, must have been stiff and plantigrade.

By contrast, Peters 2000b showed the opposite. The proximal phalanges were also elevated in Dimorphodon weintraubi and similar dimorphodontids – and Cosesaurus – and matching Rotodactylus tracks.

This issue could have been explained and avoided with an email, or a trip to the library for Ichnos volume 7, but Hone was eager to make a mark on an outsider (easy prey, no chance of refereeing this or any other manuscript), and learning from his mentor, professor MJ Benton., who had an agenda that’s been at the center of pterosaur origins studies since before 1999 (see above).

“The reconstruction includes a ‘hypothetical’ centre of balance, but no justification is given for its location and this was significantly anterior to the pelvis, which would cause the animal to fall forwards.“

In flying ‘things’, like airplanes, birds, bats, insects and pterosaurs, the center of balance must be near the chord of the wing. In pterosaurs the shoulder joint is near this marker. As in walking birds, walking pterosaur toes extend just beyond this point so the center of balance is above the central phalanges. When running, the feet fall behind this point creating a stronger anterior force vector sustained from imminent collapse (= ‘fall forwards‘) by momentum. Cartoonists know this. It’s simple physics. Evidently Hone and Benton did not learn this key lesson from Road Runner and Coyote.

References
Bennett SC 2020. Reassessment of the Triassic archosauriform Scleromochlus taylori: neither runner nor biped, but hopper. PeerJ. 2020 Feb 19;8:e8418. doi: 10.7717/peerj.8418
Hone DWE 2026. A new early monofenestratan pterosaur from the Mörnsheim Formation of southern Germany. PeerJ 14:e21204 http://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.21204
Peters D 2000a. A redescription of four prolacertiform genera and implications for pterosaur phylogenesis. Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia 106: 293-336.
Peters D 2000b Description and Interpretation of Interphalangeal Lines in Tetrapods
Ichnos, 7: 11-41
Peters D 2002. A New Model for the Evolution of the Pterosaur Wing – with a twist
Historical Biology 15: 277-301

Pterosaurs: Bipedal? Quadrupedal? or Both?

After analysis tiny Makrodactylus is a Skiphosaura juvenile pterosaur

Source: https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/2026/05/20/laueropterus-hone-2026-enters-the-large-pterosaur-tree/

Before It’s News® is a community of individuals who report on what’s going on around them, from all around the world.

Anyone can join.
Anyone can contribute.
Anyone can become informed about their world.

"United We Stand" Click Here To Create Your Personal Citizen Journalist Account Today, Be Sure To Invite Your Friends.

Before It’s News® is a community of individuals who report on what’s going on around them, from all around the world. Anyone can join. Anyone can contribute. Anyone can become informed about their world. "United We Stand" Click Here To Create Your Personal Citizen Journalist Account Today, Be Sure To Invite Your Friends.

LION'S MANE PRODUCT

Try Our Lion’s Mane WHOLE MIND Nootropic Blend 60 Capsules

Mushrooms are having a moment. One fabulous fungus in particular, lion’s mane, may help improve memory, depression and anxiety symptoms. They are also an excellent source of nutrients that show promise as a therapy for dementia, and other neurodegenerative diseases. If you’re living with anxiety or depression, you may be curious about all the therapy options out there — including the natural ones.Our Lion’s Mane WHOLE MIND Nootropic Blend has been formulated to utilize the potency of Lion’s mane but also include the benefits of four other Highly Beneficial Mushrooms. Synergistically, they work together to Build your health through improving cognitive function and immunity regardless of your age. Our Nootropic not only improves your Cognitive Function and Activates your Immune System, but it benefits growth of Essential Gut Flora, further enhancing your Vitality.

Our Formula includes: Lion’s Mane Mushrooms which Increase Brain Power through nerve growth, lessen anxiety, reduce depression, and improve concentration. Its an excellent adaptogen, promotes sleep and improves immunity. Shiitake Mushrooms which Fight cancer cells and infectious disease, boost the immune system, promotes brain function, and serves as a source of B vitamins. Maitake Mushrooms which regulate blood sugar levels of diabetics, reduce hypertension and boosts the immune system. Reishi Mushrooms which Fight inflammation, liver disease, fatigue, tumor growth and cancer. They Improve skin disorders and soothes digestive problems, stomach ulcers and leaky gut syndrome. Chaga Mushrooms which have anti-aging effects, boost immune function, improve stamina and athletic performance, even act as a natural aphrodisiac, fighting diabetes and improving liver function. Try Our Lion’s Mane WHOLE MIND Nootropic Blend 60 Capsules Today. Be 100% Satisfied or Receive a Full Money Back Guarantee. Order Yours Today by Following This Link.

Comments

Visits:	1,806,481,660
Stories:	8,642,789