Amartuvshin Purevdorj, Gankhuyag Purev-Ochir, Amarkhuu Gungaa, Batbayar Bold, Batmunkh Davaasuren, Makhgal Ganbold, Batbayar Galtbalt, Nyambayar Batbayar, Lutfor Rahman, Andrew Dixon

Journal of Raptor Research Vol. 59, Issue 2, (Apr 2025) , pgs 1-8

KEYWORDS: avian electrocution, perch deflector, raptor.

Read Abstract +

25 April 2025 Open Access

Avian Pathology Volume 53 Number 6 December 2024 Table of Contents

Avian Diseases Vol. 69, Issue 1, (Apr 2025) , pgs 131-131

No abstract available

DOWNLOAD PAPER

25 April 2025

A Review of Nanosaurus agilis Marsh and Other Small-Bodied Morrison Formation “Ornithopods”

Paul M. Barrett, Susannah C.R. Maidment

Bulletin of the Peabody Museum of Natural History Vol. 66, Issue 1, (Apr 2025) , pgs 25-50

KEYWORDS: bone beds

Read Abstract +

25 April 2025

History of Dinosaur State Park, Registered National Natural Landmark, One of North America's Largest in Situ Dinosaur Trackways, Rocky Hill, Connecticut

Michael P. Ross, Chelsey F. Knyff, Patrick W. Murphy, Emily M.I. Rochette, Rachel C. Burns

Bulletin of the Peabody Museum of Natural History Vol. 66, Issue 1, (Apr 2025) , pgs 51-69

KEYWORDS: Connecticut Valley, Dinosaur State Park, Eubrontes

Read Abstract +

25 April 2025

Archival Evidence of Strong, Longtime Ties between Yale Peabody Museum's Division of Vertebrate Paleontology and Connecticut's Dinosaur State Park

Daniel L. Brinkman, James A. Hyatt

Bulletin of the Peabody Museum of Natural History Vol. 66, Issue 1, (Apr 2025) , pgs 71-86

KEYWORDS: Grant Meyer, John Ostrom, Peter Galton, Rocky Hill

Read Abstract +

25 April 2025

The Yale Peabody Museum Dinosaur Footprint Block/Slab from Dinosaur State Park, Rocky Hill, Connecticut

James O. Farlow, Daniel L. Brinkman, James A. Hyatt

Bulletin of the Peabody Museum of Natural History Vol. 66, Issue 1, (Apr 2025) , pgs 87-97

KEYWORDS: Anchisauripus, Eubrontes

Read Abstract +

25 April 2025

Documenting Footprints for Tracksites at Dinosaur State Park, Rocky Hill, Connecticut

James A. Hyatt, James O. Farlow, Peter M. Galton, Patrick R. Getty

Bulletin of the Peabody Museum of Natural History Vol. 66, Issue 1, (Apr 2025) , pgs 99-139

KEYWORDS: Eubrontes

Read Abstract +

25 April 2025

Distinguishing True Tracks from Undertracks and Overtracks at Dinosaur State Park, Rocky Hill, Connecticut

Peter A. Drzewiecki, James A. Hyatt

Bulletin of the Peabody Museum of Natural History Vol. 66, Issue 1, (Apr 2025) , pgs 141-174

KEYWORDS: displacement rim, ephemeral lake, Eubrontes, preservation quality

Read Abstract +

About 750 Eubrontes footprints occur on three stratigraphic layers in the Jurassic East Berlin Formation at Dinosaur State Park in Rocky Hill, Connecticut (USA). Several trackways and individual tracks are preserved on multiple sedimentary layers, as true tracks on one layer and as their corresponding transmitted undertracks or overtracks on another, making the park an ideal place for investigating morphological, stratigraphic, and sedimentological criteria for distinguishing true tracks from undertracks and overtracks. True tracks are deeper and preserve more anatomical detail than corresponding undertracks and overtracks. Sedimentary features associated with tracks, such as skin impressions, displacement rims, radial fractures, and structural deformation features, typically form on the tracked surface but may be transmitted to layers below. Of these features, only displacement rims occur at Dinosaur State Park, but even they are uncommon. The relationship between the footprint and sedimentary structures is used to determine the relative timing of track registration. Wave ripples on tracked surfaces predate the tracks and are destroyed by the trackmakers, but ripples are preserved in overtracks and some undertracks. Microbial mat formation enhanced preservation of tracks by binding sediment, decreasing the sediment plasticity, and minimizing erosion after track registration. Internal laminae in beds at Dinosaur State Park can reliably identify the tracked surface. Beds below the tracked surface preserve deformation associated with vertical compression when the track was registered. Beds overlying the tracked surface preserve distinct lateral and vertical sediment fill patterns. These criteria are used to assign tracks to a specific tracked surface to identify which dinosaur footprints were registered roughly contemporaneously. This is critical for understanding paleoecology, investigating possible gregarious behavior of trackmakers, determining the type of locomotion (walking, running, or swimming), and exploring other trackmaker behavior in their environment. Observations from Dinosaur State Park can be applied to other tetrapod tracksites.

25 April 2025

Yellow foxtail (Setaria pumila) reduces establishment of alfalfa interseeded into corn

Md Rayhan Shaheb, John H. Grabber, Marta M. Kohmann, Mark J. Renz

Weed Science Vol. 73, Issue 1, (Apr 2025) , pgs 1-6

KEYWORDS: Alfalfa–corn interseeding

Read Abstract +

25 April 2025

Changing the narrative on human–bear conflicts by standardizing bear management terms

Carl Lackey, Dave Telesco, Kim Annis, Dave Battle, Hilary Cooley, Paul Frame, Lindsey Mangipane, Colleen Olfenbuttel, Mark Vieira, Tammy Waldrop

Ursus Vol. 2025, Issue 36e4, (Apr 2025) , pgs 1-10

KEYWORDS: food-conditioned bear, habituated bear, problem bear

Read Abstract +

Human–wildlife interactions and conflicts are increasing in many parts of the world. The ability of North American wildlife agencies to accurately record information about human–wildlife conflict and then share and compare those data is important for agency conservation efforts, inter-agency communications, and public messaging. Agency bear managers and researchers record human–bear conflict data and depend upon that information for making management decisions, determining whether those decisions were effective, and for developing public education messaging. To successfully manage human–bear conflict, it is essential that inter-agency communication, recording of data, and public messaging be consistent. Yet, defining human–bear conflicts in a consistent manner, even within jurisdictions, can be difficult and the application of common bear management terms is often inconsistent, and therefore may be unreliable. Even when these terms are clearly defined, there is often no uniformity in application, nor is there a defined entity to collect, store, and disseminate the information. Additionally, some terms commonly used in agency messaging and often repeated by the public are subjective and can have negative connotations for bears. The International Association for Bear Research and Management's (IBA) Management Committee (MC), with members representing 9 jurisdictions and all 3 bear species in North America, reviewed literature that list terms and definitions used in bear management and bear research with the following goals: (1) identifying terms and definitions that were clear, concise, and used consistently among jurisdictions; (2) defining or modifying those terms and definitions that are commonly used, yet are used inconsistently, incorrectly, or interchangeably; and (3) identifying terms that should be removed from written and verbal agency messaging that lead to mischaracterization of bears. Here we present 12 terms and definitions that will help facilitate clear and consistent inter- and intra-agency communications and allow jurisdictions to better compare information across databases. We also identify 5 terms that should be removed from professional wildlife management vernacular and publications. Finally, we propose that the IBA adopt these terms and definitions for use within their publications and request the use of these terms and definitions by other governing and publication entities.