New occurrence of the middle Toarcian “Telodactylites” eucosmus (Lippi Boncambi, 1947) (Ammonitina) from the NW European realm, and introduction of a new genus

Abstract

Telodactylites Pinna & Levi-Setti, 1971 was, up to now, considered to be a middle Toar- cian ammonite genus restricted to the Mediterranean realm. We here document two specimens from the Variabilis Subzone (middle Toarcian) of the Thouars area (western France), interpreted as extreme variants of “Telodactylites” eucosmus (Lippi Boncambi, 1947). However, Telodactylites Pinna & Levi-Setti, 1971 must be considered a junior synonym of Peronoceras Hyatt, 1867 and its recent usage is based on an illegitimate subsequent change of its type species. A new genus Neotelodactylites is introduced (type species: Peronoceras eucosmum Lippi Boncambi, 1947). The new finds represent firm evidence for the occurrence of Neotelodactylites n. gen. eucosmus in the NW European realm, therefore considerably extending the palaeogeographical distribution of this species and genus.

Full text

E
N. Jb. Geol. Paläont. Abh.
www.schweizerbart.deE. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart, Germany
1. Introduction
Amongst the numerous genera belonging to the sub-
family Dactylioceratinae , 1867 stands the ge-
nus Telodactylites  & -   
described from the Mediterranean realm. The original
type species, Telodactylites desplacei (, 1844),
was reassigned to another genus (Peronoceras ,
1867) by  &  (2001). In turn, these au-
thors suggested Telodactylites eucosmus ( -
, 1947) as new type species, which is an illegiti-
mate nomenclatorial act not covered by the strict rules
of the ICZN. The genus was commonly reported from
the Mediterranean realm (e.g., Italy, Greece, Betic
Cordillera, Hungary, Morocco, Algeria;  et al.
2013; Fig. 1), in the Bifrons Zone and at the base of
the Gradata Zone (correlating with the NW European
Variabilis Subzone;  2014; Fig. 2).
Here, we describe and illustrate two specimens of
Neotelodactylites n. gen. (formerly “Telodactylites”)
eucosmus from the middle Toarcian Variabilis Subzone
of the Airvault Quarry (near Thouars, western France).
The reader is referred to  (2006) and 
et al. (2016, 2017) for descriptions of the stratigraphy
and sedimentological context of the middle Toarcian in
this quarry. We identify in the literature three middle
Toarcian ammonites from outside the Mediterranean
realm that were somehow taxonomically associated
with the new genus Neotelodactylites (replacing “Telo-
dactylites
the light of the specimens described herein, to eventu-
ally reassess the palaeogeographical range of the genus.
Stuttgart,
DOI:
New occurrence of the middle Toarcian “Telodactylites” eucosmus
(Lippi BoncamBi, 1947) (Ammonitina) from the NW European realm, and
introduction of a new genus
Romain Jattiot, Alexis Gris, and Vincent Trincal
With 4 figures and 1 table
Abstract: Telodactylites  & - , 1971 was, up to now, considered to be a middle Toar-
cian ammonite genus restricted to the Mediterranean realm. We here document two specimens from
the Variabilis Subzone (middle Toarcian) of the Thouars area (western France), interpreted as extreme
variants of “Telodactylites” eucosmus ( , 1947). However, Telodactylites  &
- , 1971 must be considered a junior synonym of Peronoceras  , 1867 and its recent
usage is based on an illegitimate subsequent change of its type species. A new genus Neotelodactylites
is introduced (type species: Peronoceras eucosmum  
   Neotelodactylites n. gen. eucosmus in the NW European realm,
therefore considerably extending the palaeogeographical distribution of this species and genus.
Key words: Ammonites, Toarcian, Telodactylites, NW European and Mediterranean realms,
palaeobiogeography.
295/1 (2020), 53–60
January 2020
Article
© 2020
10.1127/njgpa/2020/0867 $ 2.00/2020/08670077-7749
eschweizerbart_xxx

54 R. Jattiot et al.
2. Systematic palaeontology
Class Cephalopoda , 1797
Order Ammonitida , 1882
Suborder Ammonitina , 1882
Superfamily Eoderoceratoidea , 1929
Family Dactylioceratidae , 1867 emend.
, 1909
Subfamily Dactylioceratinae , 1867
Genus Neotelodactylites nov.
Etymology: From the Greek “neos” (new) and with refer-
ence to the obsolete older genus name Telodactylites.
Type species: Peronoceras eucosmum  ,
1947, designated herein.
Other species included: Neotelodactylites n. gen. poly-
phemus (, 1969), Neotelodactylites n. gen. acherman-
ni ( & - , 1971), Neotelodactylites n. gen.
Fig. 1. Middle Toarcian realm boundaries in Europe, North Africa and West Asia ( 2015). Abbreviations: A: Air-
vault Quarry; B: Belmont Quarry; C: Cornus; G: Gerecse Mts; MA: Middle Atlas, Morocco.
Fig. 2. -
 et al. (2013).
eschweizerbart_xxx

55
New occurrence of the middle Toarcian “Telodactylites” eucosmus (Lippi BoncamBi, 1947)
renzi ( & - , 1971), Neotelodactylites n. gen.
levisettii (, 2014).
Diagnosis: Evolute, depressed shell with whorls slowly
increasing in height throughout ontogeny. Broad and low
  
trapezoidal whorl section and a deep, funnel- like umbili-
        
a strong ventro- lateral tubercle bearing a large spine when
shell is preserved. Secondary (ventral) ribs are frequently
zigzagging.
Remarks: The shell shape and ornamentation of Neotelo-
dactylites n. gen., close to that of Porpoceras, led 
(1973),  et al. (1981) and  (2013) to re-
gard “Telodactylites” as a synonym of Porpoceras. Since the
original type species of Telodactylites, Ammonites despla-
cei , 1844, clearly belongs to Peronoceras  ,
1867, Telodactylites has to be considered a junior synonym
of the latter – and not of Porpoceras. Two specimens of Por-
poceras from the Variabilis Subzone of France are herein
3). One can note that whorl
thickness among Porpoceras species is highly variable.
Porpoceras acanthopsis (, 1850) is by far the most
depressed species (Fig. 3    -
cially resembles representatives of Neotelodactylites n. gen.
(Fig. 4). However, Neotelodactylites n. gen. can be distin-
guished from Porpoceras     
towards inner whorls, forming a trapezoidal whorl section
and a deep, funnel- like umbilicus. In contrast, Porpoceras
      -
ing a relatively shallow umbilicus (compare Fig. 4M and
Fig. 4N). Additionally, Neotelodactylites n. gen. differs from
Porpoceras by its strongly edged ventrolateral shoulders, by

       
Porpoceras representatives), as well as by its primary ribs
that strongly project forward at maturity (as observed in
N. eucosmus, see below).
     
validity of the genus Neotelodactylites n. gen. (former-
ly “Telodactylites”) typical of the Mediterranean realm,
was supported by several works ( &  2001;
 et al. 2010;  et al. 2010;  et al.
2013;  2014). “Telodactylites” was originally erect-
ed for a group of species that are phylogenetically linked to
Mesodactylites of the Bifrons Zone ( & - 
1971: 52). According to  et al. (2013), Mesodac-
tylites is part of a strictly Mediterranean linage (composed
of Mesodactylites, “Telodactylites” [now Neotelodactylites
n. gen.], Transicoeloceras and Collina) and the late Pliens-
bachian genus Aveyroniceras is the presumed common
ancestor of Neotelodactylites n. gen. and Porpoceras. This
suggests a rather large phylogenetic distance between the
two genera.
Stratigraphical occurrence: Bifrons Zone and base of the
Gradata Zone in the Mediterranean realm ( & -
 1971;  2014; Fig. 2), Bifrons Subzone and
Variabilis Subzone in the NW European realm ( 1993;
this work; Fig. 2).
Neotelodactylites n. gen. eucosmus
( , 1947)
Fig. 4
1947 Peronoceras eucosmus  in schedis. – 

1966 Peronoceras tuberculatum. – , p. 115, pl. 6,

1967 Peronoceras zeissi. – 

1971 Telodactylites eucosmus. –  & - ,

non 1972 Porpoceras eucosmum. – , p. 621, pl. 9,

non 1975 Telodactylites eucosmus. –  & , p. 42,

1993 Porpoceras eucosmum. – , p. 28, pl. 14,

2001 Telodactylites eucosmus. –  & ,
p. 149.
2010 Telodactylites eucosmus. –  et al., p. 325,

2013 Telodactylites eucosmus. –  et al., p. 105,

2014 Telodactylites eucosmus. – , p. 58, pl. 7,

Material: Two specimens (UBGD 32217 and UBGD
32218, s collection) from the Airvault Quarry (western
France). Repository: Université de Bourgogne, Géologie
Dijon (UBGD). One similar specimen from  (1993:
 
the description.
Description: Very evolute and very depressed shell with
pronounced ventro- lateral shoulders and strongly conver-
       
whorl section and a deep, funnel- like umbilicus. Broad and
         
strong ventro- lateral tubercle on inner whorls, then grouped
by three at the very end of the last whorl. Intercalated sin-
gle primary ribs crossing the venter seldom present on inner
whorls, but becoming more frequent on the last whorl. Each
tubercle bears a strongly developed spine, yet only present
when the shell is preserved. Three to four secondary, ventral
ribs issue from each tubercle, are slightly projected forward,
and frequently zigzag. Primary ribs strongly project forward
at maturity on some specimens (e.g., Fig. 4A, I). Notewor-
thy, specimen UBGD 32217 (Fig. 4A, B) presents typical
maturity features seen in the Dactylioceratidae, i.e., a con-
spicuous decrease in whorl width and whorl height followed
by a constriction right before the peristome. The latter is
only very partially preserved. Suture lines cannot be traced
on our material.
Remarks: The two specimens from the Airvault Quarry
(Fig. 4A–D), as well the specimen described in  (1993;
Fig. 4E, F) exhibit a particularly depressed shell (high whorl
width/diameter ratio; Table 1) and a broader, slightly more
curved venter in comparison to typical specimens of Neotelo-
dactylites n. gen. eucosmus from the literature (Fig. 4G–L).
The great whorl thickness of specimen UBGD 32218 is not
eschweizerbart_xxx

56 R. Jattiot et al.
surprising given its juvenile stage (Fig. 4C, D), as Dactylioc-
eratinae representatives tend to be thicker at juvenile stages
(see, e.g.,  1972;  et al. 2013). However, the
whorl sections of specimen UBGD 32217 (Fig. 4A, B) and
specimen from  (1993; Fig. 4   
more depressed than typical T. eucosmus specimens at com-
parable size (Fig. 4G–L). Yet, the intermediate width/diam-
eter ratio of specimen MHNN.P.2012.4.67 from Morocco
( et al. 2013; Fig. 4G, H; Table 1) strongly suggest
       
Neotelodactylites n. gen. eucosmus. All other morphological
and ornamental characteristics are otherwise identical among
specimens (Fig. 4). Therefore, we here interpret our material
as well as the specimen from  (1993) as extremely de-
pressed variants of Neotelodactylites n. gen. eucosmus. Alter-
natively, these three specimens might represent a new species
of Neotelodactylites n. gen., but this hypothesis must remain

As stressed by  et al. (2010), the specimen illus-
trated by  &  (1975T. eucosmus
Fig. 3. A, B – Porpoceras acanthopsis (, 1850), specimen D156 (coll. A. ;  et al. 2013) from
the Bifrons Horizon of the Belmont Quarry (eastern France). C, D – Porpoceras gr. vortex (, 1855) – verticosum
, 1914, specimen UBGD 32219 ( collection) from the Variabilis Subzone of the Airvault Quarry (western
France). Scale bar: 10 mm.
eschweizerbart_xxx

57
New occurrence of the middle Toarcian “Telodactylites” eucosmus (Lippi BoncamBi, 1947)
Fig. 4. Specimens of Neotelodactylites n. gen. eucosmus ( , 1947). A, B – UBGD 32217 ( collection)
from the Variabilis Subzone of the Airvault Quarry (western France). Arrows indicate an injury. C, D – UBGD 32218 (
collection) from the Variabilis Subzone of the Airvault Quarry (western France). E, F – Non- inventoried specimen from the
Bifrons Subzone of Cornus (south- eastern France,  1993). G, H – MHNN.P.2012.4.67 ( collection) from the
Gradata Zone of Chaaba Touila (Morocco,  et al. 2013). I, J – SC.2012.41 ( collection) from the Gra-
data Zone of Bánya Hill Quarry (Gerecse Mts, Hungary,  2014). K, L – 2014.41.2, Pisznice- Crocodile, from debris
(Gerecse Mts, Hungary,  2014). M – Cross- section of Neotelodactylites n. gen. eucosmus (, 1947;
 &  2001: 149). N – Cross- section of Porpoceras beurleni ( 1972,

eschweizerbart_xxx

58 R. Jattiot et al.
 
a new species ( &  1987-
 et al. 2005      
et al. (2013), T. achermanni  & - , 1971 dif-
fers from T. eucosmus by its more rounded whorls and its
weaker ornamentation. Neotelodactylites n. gen. renzi (-
 & - , 1971) reaches maturity at a smaller size
and is more involute ( & -  1971; 
et al. 2013). Finally, Neotelodactylites n. gen. eucosmus can
be distinguished from Neotelodactylites n. gen. levisettii
(, 2014) by its wider whorls, trapezoidal whorl sec-
tion and looped, spined primary ribs ( 2014).
Stratigraphical occurrence: Bifrons Zone (Semipolitum
Horizon) and base of the Gradata Zone in the Mediterranean
realm ( & -  1971;  2014; Fig. 2), Bi-
frons Subzone and Variabilis Subzone in the NW European
realm ( 1993; this work; Fig. 2).
3. Discussion
The genus “Telodactylites” – now Neotelodactylites
n. gen. – was long recognized as typical of the Med-
iterranean realm ( &  2001; 
et al. 2010;  et al. 2010;  et al. 2013;
 2014). However, to our knowledge three stud-
ies previously mentioned unusual (i.e., outside the
Mediterranean realm) palaeogeographical occurrenc-
es of species belonging to the genus “Telodactylites”,
or Neotelodactylites n. gen., respectively ( 1972;
 & -  1981;  1993).
 (1972       -
served specimen from southeastern France and as-
signed it to “Porpoceras eucosmum”. In our opinion,
       
species Porpoceras acanthopsis as already suggest-
ed by  et al. (2013), although its poor state
of preservation precludes any further discussion. Lat-
er,  & -  (1981: 49, pl. 4,
   Peronoceras cf. ren-
zi” from Chile that has been renamed Telodactylites
cf. renzi by  et al. (2013). However, due to
its poor preservation, its relatively small size and in
the absence of a ventral view, the taxonomical as-
signment of this specimen to Neotelodactylites n. gen.
remains highly doubtful. Finally,  (1993: 28,
Porpo-
ceras eucosmum” from the Bifrons Subzone of south-
eastern France, whose features indeed strongly recall
those of typical specimens of Neotelodactylites n. gen.
eucosmus (Fig. 4). Although  (1993) used anoth-
er generic assignation, this important specimen is in
Neotelodactylites
n. gen. from the NW European realm.
In addition to this latter specimen, we here provide,
with two specimens from the Variabilis Subzone of
       
Neotelodactylites n. gen. in the NW European realm.
Based on the stratigraphical age (Bifrons Subzone) of
the specimen from  (1993), we can hypothesize
that the longitudinal dispersion of Neotelodactylites
n. gen. from the Mediterranean to the NW European
realms occurred at the latest during the Bifrons Sub-
zone. This is in contrast with several other taxa (e.g.,
Septimaniceras, Crassiceras, Paroniceras), whose
longitudinal dispersion from the Mediterranean to the
NW European realm seems to have initiated in the
Variabilis Subzone ( et al. 2017;  &
 2019). Overall, the longitudinal dispersion of
these above- mentioned taxa from the Mediterranean
to the NW European realm appears coincident with
Table 1. Measurements (in mm) of Neotelodactylites n. gen. eucosmus ( , 1947) specimens. Abbreviations:
D: Diameter; H: whorl height; W: whorl width; U
Genus Species Specimen D H W U H/D W/D U/D
“Telodactylites” eucosmus Venturi & Ferri (2001, p. 149) 49 12 / 31 0.24 / 0.63
“Telodactylites” eucosmus  38 8 14 22 0.21 0.37 0.58
“Telodactylites” eucosmus  41 8 14 24 0.20 0.34 0.59
“Telodactylites” eucosmus MHNN.P.2012.4.67; Rulleau et al.

58 13 22 35 0.22 0.38 0.60
“Telodactylites” eucosmus MHNN.P.2012.4.68; Rulleau et al.

52 13 15 30 0.25 0.29 0.58
Neotelodactylites eucosmus BUGD 32218 22.8 6.6 13.8 10.6 0.29 0.61 0.46
Neotelodactylites eucosmus BUGD 32217 60.5 13.4 28.5 33.6 0.22 0.47 0.56
“Porpoceras” “eucosmum”  80* 22* 37* 41* 0.28* 0.46* 0.51*
eschweizerbart_xxx

59
New occurrence of the middle Toarcian “Telodactylites” eucosmus (Lippi BoncamBi, 1947)
the faunal renewal and the diversity drop observed in
NW Europe during the Bifrons- Variabilis extinction
( et al. 2010).
Acknowledgements
We are deeply grateful to   and 
 (Ciments Calcia, Airvault Quarry). We thank -
 for valuable discussions, as well as -
-
,  and  are thanked
for their comments, which much improved this work.
References
 (2006): Les Harpoceratinae, Hildoceratinae et
Paroniceratinae du Toarcien de la Vendée et des Deux-
Sèvres (France). – Documents des Laboratoires de Géol-
ogie de Lyon, 162: 1–149.
 ,   &   (2005): Le renou-
vellement des faunes d’ammonites à la limite Toarcien
moyen – Toarcien supérieur dans les domaines du nord-
ouest de l’Europe et de la Téthys occidentale. – Bulle-
tin de la Société Géologique de France, 176 (1): 23–35.
doi: 10.2113/176.1.23
  (1909–1930): Yorkshire Type Ammonites,
1, 2, and Type Ammonites, 3, 7. – I–XVI + 121 pp.; Lon-
don (Wesley & Son).
  (1797): Tableau Élémentaire de l’Histoire Na-
turelle des Animaux. – 710 pp.; Paris (Baudouin).
 ,  ,  ,  , -
 &  (2010): High- resolution dy-
namics of Early Jurassic marine extinctions: the case of
Pliensbachian- Toarcian ammonites (Cephalopoda). –
Journal of the Geological Society, 167: 21–33. doi: 10.1144/
0016-76492009-068
 &  (1975): Ammoniti Toarciane della
“facies non rossa” del Romitorio S. Angelo Presso Cin-
goli (MC). – 48 pp.; Macerata (Litocompagnucci).
 ,   &  

 &   (eds.): The Ammonoidea:
       -
ical usefulness of a major fossil group. – Systematics
Association, Special volumes, 18: 101–155; New York
(Academic Press).
 &  (1987): Relations entre la structura-
tion tectonique, la composition des peuplements et l'évo-
lution; exemple du Toarcien du Moyen- Atlas méridional
(Maroc). – Bollettino della Società Paleontologica Itali-
ana, 26 (1–2): 47–62.
  (1882–1887): Manuel de conchyliologie et de
paléontologie conchyliologique ou Histoire naturelle
des mollusques vivants et fossiles. – 1369 pp.; Paris
(F. Savy).
, ,  &  (2010):
Ammonite stratigraphy of a Toarcian (Lower Jurassic)
section on Nagy- Pisznice Hill (Gerecse Mts, Hunga-
ry). – Central European Geology, 53 (4): 311–342.
doi: 10.1556/CEuGeol.53.2010.4.1
  (1967): Ammonoides Jurassiques de Csernye,
Montagne Bakony, Hongrie, Part II. (excl. Hammatocer-
atidae). – Geologica Hungarica, Series Palaeontologica,
35: 1–413.
 (1972): Répartition biostratigraphique des ammo-
nites du Toarcien moyen de la bordure sud des Causses
-
estier, 1931. – Eclogae geologicae Helvetiae, 65 (3):
611–645.
  (1973): Dimorphisme des Dactylioceratidae
du Toarcien. – Eclogae geologicae Helvetiae, 66 (3):
545–583.
 &  (1981): Ammo-
niten aus dem Toarcium (Jura) von Chile (Südamerika).
Die Arten der Gattungen Dactylioceras, Nodi coelo-
ceras, Peronoceras und Collina. – Zitteliana, 6: 3–74.
 (2013): Part L Revised, Volume 3B, Chap-
ter 4: Psiloceratoidea, Eodoceratoidea [sic], Hildocera-
toidea. – Treatise Online, 57: 1–139.
 (1867): The fossil Cephalopoda of the Museum
of Comparative Zoology. – Bulletin of the Museum of
Comparative Zoology, 5: 71–102.
 , ,  &   (2016):
Revised stratigraphic range of the Toarcian ammonite
genus Porpoceras Buckman, 1911. – Geodiversitas, 38
(4): 505–513. doi: 10.5252/g2016n4a3
,  &  (2017): Nouvelles
données sur la paléobiogéographie des genres Septiman-
iceras Fauré, 2002 et Crassiceras Merla, 1932 (Ammo-
nitina) du Toarcien moyen. – Revue de Paléobiologie,
36: 169–177.
 (2014): Toarcian Dactylioceratidae (Ammoniti-
na) from the Gerecse Mts (Hungary). – Hantkeniana, 9:
45–77.
 (2015): Notes on the Lower Jurassic Mercatic-
eratinae fauna from the Gerecse Mts (Hungary). – Hant-
keniana, 10: 29–40.
   (1947): Ammoniti del Lias superiore
dell’Umbria centrale. – Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia
53 (4): 123–152.
  (1931): Ammonites rares ou peu connues
et ammonites nouvelles du Toarcien moyen de la ré-
gion sud- est de l’Aveyron. – Mémoires de la Société
Géologique de France, 7 (15): 79 pp.
 (1842–1852): Paléontologie française, terrains
jurassiques. I: Céphalopodes. – 642 pp.; Paris (Masson).
 (1966): Ammoniti del Lias superiore (Toarciano)
dell’Alpe Turati (Erba, Como). Famiglia Dactyliocerati-
dae. – Memorie della Società italiana di Scienze naturali
e del Museo Civico di Storia naturale di Milano, 14 (2):
85–136.
       
Giuseppe Meneghini nelle tav. 1-22 della “Monogra-
phie des Fossiles du Calcaire Rouge Ammonitique”
(1867-1881). – Memorie della Società italiana di Sci-
eschweizerbart_xxx

60 R. Jattiot et al.
enze naturali e del Museo Civico di Storia naturale di
Milano, 18 (1): 7–21.
 &  (1971): I Dactylioceratidae della
Provincia Mediterranea (Cephalopoda Ammonoidea). –
Memorie della Societa italianà di Scienze naturali e
del Museo Civico di Storia naturale di Milano, 19 (2):
47–136.
  &   (2019): Révision de la sous-
famille Mercaticeratinae Guex, 1973 (Ammonitina,
Hildoceratidae) du Toarcien moyen de la province nord-
ouest européenne. – Revue de Paléobiologie, 38 (1):
19–38.
, ,   & 
(2013): Les Dactylioceratidae du Toarcien inférieur
et moyen, une famille cosmopolite. – 245 pp.; Lyon
(Dédale Éditions).
 (1993): Coup d’oeil sur les fossiles des Causses
II. Jurassique : du Toarcien au Kimméridgien. – 95 pp.;
Millau (Association des amis du Musée de Millau).
 (1855): The Fossils of the Yorkshire Lias; de-
scribed from Nature. –149 pp.; London (Whitby).
  (1929): Corrections of cephalopod nomencla-
ture. – The Naturalist, 871: 269–271.
 &  (2001): Ammoniti liassici dell’Ap-
pennino Centrale. – 268 pp.; Città di Castello (Medisimi).
, ,  &  (2010):
Ammoniti: un viaggio geologico nelle montagne appen-
niniche. – 367 pp.; Perugia (Porzi).
Manuscript received: October 18th, 2019.
Revised version accepted by the Stuttgart editor: Novem-
ber 28th, 2019.
Addresses of the authors:
, UMR CNRS 6282 Biogéosciences,
Université Bourgogne Franche- Comté, 6 Boulevard
Gabriel, F-21000 Dijon, France;
e- mail: jattiot.romain@gmail.com
 , 10 rue Danièle Casanova, F-33370
Artigues- près- Bordeaux;
e- mail: gris.alexis01@gmail.com
 , Laboratoire Matériaux et Dura-
bilité des Constructions (LMDC), Université de Tou-
louse, INSA/UPS Génie Civil, 135 avenue de Rangue-
il, F-31077 Toulouse cedex 04, France;
e- mail: vincenttrincal@gmail.com
eschweizerbart_xxx