2026 in archosaur paleontology

New pseudosuchian taxa

Name	Novelty	Status	Authors	Age	Type locality	Country	Notes	Images
Antusuchus[1]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Fernandez-Dumont et al.	Late Cretaceous (Cenomanian)	Candeleros Formation	Argentina	A member of the family Peirosauridae. Genus includes new species A. rionegrinus.
Carinthiasuchus[2]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Dalla Vecchia & Cau	Triassic (Ladinian-Carnian)	Partnach Formation	Austria	A member of Poposauroidea. The type species is C. kandutschi.
Crocodylus lucivenator[3]	Sp. nov	Valid	Brochu et al.	Pliocene	Hadar Formation	Ethiopia	A crocodile, a species of Crocodylus.
Eosphorosuchus[4]	Gen. et sp. nov		Margulis-Ohnuma et al.	Late Triassic (Rhaetian)	Chinle Formation	United States ( New Mexico)	An early member of Crocodylomorpha. The type species is E. lacrimosa.
Galahadosuchus[5]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Bodenham et al.	Late Triassic (Carnian–Rhaetian)	Cromhall Quarry	United Kingdom	A member of Crocodylomorpha belonging to the family Saltoposuchidae. The type species is G. jonesi.
Indosinosuchus peninsularensis[6]	Sp. nov	Valid	Lauprasert et al.	Middle-Late Jurassic	Khlong Min Formation	Thailand	A member of the family Teleosauridae.
Labrujasuchus[7]	Gen. et sp. nov		Turner et al.	Late Triassic (Norian)	Chinle Formation	United States ( New Mexico)	A member of Poposauroidea belonging to the family Shuvosauridae. The type species is L. expectatus.
Shakajlura[8]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Cardillo et al.	Triassic (Ladinian-Carnian)	Chañares Formation	Argentina	Probably an early-diverging member of Paracrocodylomorpha. The type species is S. riojanensis.
Sonselasuchus[9]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Smith & Sidor	Late Triassic (Norian)	Chinle Formation	United States ( Arizona)	A member of Poposauroidea belonging to the family Shuvosauridae. The type species is S. cedrus.

General pseudosuchian research

• Evidence from the study of the histology of appendicular elements of Saurosuchus galilei, Sillosuchus longicervix, Aetobarbakinoides brasiliensis, Aetosauroides scagliai, Gracilisuchus stipanicicorum, Tarjadia ruthae and Riojasuchus tenuisceps, indicative of diversity of growth rates of the studied pseudosuchians, is presented by Ponce, Cerda & Desojo (2026).^[10]
• Terras et al. (2026) compare the cranial morphology of Triassic pseudosuchians and other reptiles (including dinosaurs), and argue that cranial similarities among pseudosuchians and other reptiles do not necessarily reflect functional similarities.^[11]
• Evidence from the study of the histology of long bones of the holotype specimen of Dynamosuchus collisensis, interpreted as indicative of a sustained rapid growth, is presented by Farias et al. (2026).^[12]
• Ulloa-Guaiquin et al. (2026) study the neurovascular anatomy of the snout of Riojasuchus tenuisceps, interpreted as consistent with presence of sensory system similar to those seen in extant crocodilians and birds, and supporting a wading-foraging behavior of the studied ornithosuchid.^[13]
• A new specimen of Postosuchus cf. kirkpatricki, comparable in size to the holotype of this species, is described from the strata of the Chinle Formation from the Petrified Forest National Park (Arizona, United States) by Marsh et al. (2026).^[14]
• Hutchinson et al. (2026) study the locomotor biomechanics of Postosuchus kirkpatricki, reporting conflicting evidence for its possible stance and gait.^[15]

Crocodylomorph research

• Paixão et al. (2026) describe isolated eggshells and egg clutches from the Upper Cretaceous Adamantina Formation (Brazil) with the egg arrangement similar to those seen in extant crocodilians, including an assemblage of at least 47 eggs representing the largest Mesozoic crocodyliform egg clutch reported to date.^[16]
• Tan et al. (2026) describe new fossil material of Edentosuchus tienshanensis from the Lower Cretaceous Lianmuqin Formation (Xinjiang, China), providing new information on the morphology of members of this species.^[17]
• Soni et al. (2026) study the sensory evolution in thalattosuchians on the basis of data from digital endocranial reconstructions, reporting evidence of proportional scaling of visual structures with skull size of members of the group, and interpret metriorhynchids as maintaining visual reliance.^[18]
• Barrientos-Lara & Alvarado-Ortega (2026) report the first discovery of geosaurine fossil material from marine deposits of the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) Sabinal Formation (Oaxaca, Mexico).^[19]
• Herrera, Spindler & Bronzati (2026) redescribe the anatomy and study the phylogenetic affinities of Dakosaurus maximus on the basis of data from a new specimen from the Kimmeridgian Torleite Formation (Germany), and report evidence of preservation of cartilaginous fish (likely hybodontiform) remains within the abdominal cavity of the studied individual.^[20]
• Paiva et al. (2026) provide new estimates of body length of 40 notosuchian species, and report discrepancies between estimates based on skull length and those based on femoral length.^[21]
• Candeiro et al. (2026) describe a tooth of one of the largest sphagesaurian specimens reported to date from the Upper Cretaceous Adamantina Formation in the Goiás state, representing the first notosuchian record from mid-west Brazil.^[22]
• Navarro et al. (2026) study the bone histology of Yacarerani boliviensis, and interpret it as consistent with fast growth dynamics with periods of decline.^[23]
• Carneiro et al. (2026) identify probable sebecid tooth marks on a dentary of Didelphopsis sp. from the Eocene strata from the Itaboraí Basin (Brazil), interpreted as produced during head-shaking and defleshing of the carcass by the predator, and interpret sebecids as likely killing small mammals in a manner similar to extant monitor lizards.^[24]
• The first formal description of crocodyliform fossil material from the Upper Jurassic-Lower Cretaceous Missão Velha Formation (Brazil), interpreted as belonging to indeterminate neosuchians, is published by Albuquerque et al. (2026).^[25]
• Castillo-Visa et al. (2026) report evidence of preservation of cartilaginous and epidermal tissues in a specimen of Montsecosuchus depereti from the Barremian strata from Spain.^[26]
• Jouve et al. (2026) provide phylogenetic definitions for Tethysuchia and its subgroups that are valid under the PhyloCode, and coin a new name Stenorhynchosuchia for the putative clade including Tethysuchia and Thalattosuchia.^[27]
• Barbini et al. (2026) provide new information on the internal cranial anatomy of Pholidosaurus purbeckensis, reporting evidence of greater similarity of the endocranial anatomy to that of goniopholidids than dyrosaurids, and evidence of presence of possible osteological correlates of nasal salt glands.^[28]
• A study on the histology of teeth of Guarinisuchus munizi, providing evidence of variable rates of dentine deposition, is published by Izidio et al. (2026).^[29]
• Szegszárdi, Ősi & Rabi (2026) describe a new partial skull of Doratodon carcharidens from the Santonian Csehbánya Formation (Hungary), reinterpret this species as a paralligatorid, and reinterpret Ogresuchus furatus as a neosuchian likely to be an atoposaurid.^[30]
• Redescription of the anatomy and a study on the phylogenetic affinities of Koumpiodontosuchus aprosdokiti is published by Barker et al. (2026), who support the placement of the studied species within Bernissartiidae.^[31]
• Prondvai et al. (2026) report evidence of Hunter-Schreger band-like patterns in the tooth enamel of Iharkutosuchus (interpreted as differing in structural origin from Hunter-Schreger bands of mammals), as well as evidence of wavy enamel in the studied crocodyliform (a feature also known in ornithopod dinosaurs), interpreted as likely adaptations to a herbivorous diet and high-efficiency chewing.^[32]
• Redescription and a study on the affinities of Thoracosaurus isorhynchus is published by Boerman et al. (2026).^[33]
• Donzé et al. (2026) describe the morphology of endocranial structures of Leidyosuchus canadensis and Stangerochampsa mccabei.^[34]
• Bateman, Demers-Potvin & Larsson (2026) compare reconstructed jaw adductor musculature and feeding performances of Leidyosuchus canadensis and Champsosaurus lindoei, interpreted as suggestive of dietary resource partitioning between the two taxa.^[35]
• Lindblad et al. (2026) describe two new crocodyliform specimens from the Paleocene strata of the Ravenscrag Formation (Saskatchewan, Canada), including the first member of the genus Boverisuchus from the middle-late Paleocene of Saskatchewan and a specimen with probable alligatorid affinities.^[36]
• Taxonomic revision of the genus Diplocynodon is published by Walter et al. (2026).^[37]
• Burke & Mannion (2026) study the diversity of endocranial anatomy in extant and extinct crocodylians and basal eusuchians, reporting evidence of anatomical differences facilitating the identification of members of distinct lineages.^[38]
• Cidade et al. (2026) revise the phylogenetic nomenclature of Caimaninae, defining new clades Bottosauria, Caimanini, Purussauria and Purussauridae.^[39]
• Agne et al. (2026) identify the extinct crocodile population from Seychelles as representing the westernmost known population of saltwater crocodiles on the basis of analysis of mitochondrial genomes.^[40]
• Review of the fossil record of late Quaternary crocodilians from Australasia is published by Ristevski et al. (2026).^[41]

New dinosaur taxa

Name	Novelty	Status	Authors	Age	Type locality	Country	Notes	Images
Bicharracosaurus[42]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Reutter et al.	Late Jurassic (Oxfordian-Kimmeridgian)	Cañadón Calcáreo Formation	Argentina	A macronarian sauropod. The type species is B. dionidei.
Changzhousaurus[43]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Xu	Early Cretaceous (Aptian)	Jiufotang Formation	China	A pennaraptoran theropod with an unusual mosaic of features; possibly an early-diverging deinonychosaurian. The type species is C. sinensis.
Cryptarcus[44]	Gen. et comb. nov		Holmes et al.	Late Cretaceous (Campanian)	Dinosaur Park Formation	Canada ( Alberta)	A chasmosaurine ceratopsid; a new genus for "Chasmosaurus" russelli Sternberg (1940).
Dasosaurus[45]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Mayer et al.	Early Cretaceous (Aptian)	Itapecuru Formation	Brazil	A sauropod belonging to the group Somphospondyli. The type species is D. tocantinensis.
Doolysaurus[46]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Jung et al.	Cretaceous (Albian–Cenomanian)	Ilseongsan Formation	South Korea	A thescelosaurid ornithischian. The type species is D. huhmini.
Eopinacosaurus[47]	Gen. et comb. nov	Valid	Penkalski	Late Cretaceous	Bayan Mandahu Formation	China Mongolia	An ankylosaurid; a new genus for "Pinacosaurus" mephistocephalus Godefroit et al. (1999).
Ferenceratops[48]	Gen. et comb. nov	Valid	Maidment et al.	Late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian)	Sânpetru and Densuș-Ciula formations	Romania	A ceratopsian. The type species is the 'rhabdodontid' "Zalmoxes" shqiperorum Weishampel et al. (2003).
Foskeia[49]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Dieudonné et al.	Early Cretaceous (Barremian–Aptian)	Castrillo de la Reina Formation	Spain	A rhabdodontomorph ornithopod. The type species is F. pelendonum.
Gongshuilong[50]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Yao et al.	Late Cretaceous	Lianhe Formation	China	A saurolophine hadrosaurid. The type species is G. fanwei.
Haolong[51]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Huang et al.	Early Cretaceous (Barremian)	Yixian Formation	China	An iguanodontian ornithopod. The type species is H. dongi.
Jian[52]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Zhou et al.	Early Cretaceous (Aptian)	Xiagou Formation	China	A microraptorine dromaeosaurid. The type species is J. changmaensis.
Kank[53]	Gen. et sp. nov		Motta et al.	Late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian)	Chorrillo Formation	Argentina	A unenlagiid theropod. The type species is K. australis.
Kryptohadros[54]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Magyar et al.	Late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian)	Densuș-Ciula Formation	Romania	A hadrosauroid ornithopod. The type species is K. kallaiae.
Nagatitan[55]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Sethapanichsakul et al.	Early Cretaceous (Aptian–Albian)	Khok Kruat Formation	Thailand	A euhelopodid macronarian sauropod. The type species is N. chaiyaphumensis.
Phosphatotitan[56]	Gen. et sp. nov		Longrich et al.	Late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian)	Ouled Abdoun Basin	Morocco	A titanosaur sauropod. The type species is P. khouribgaensis.
Pinacosaurus hilwitnorum[47]	Sp. nov	Valid	Penkalski	Late Cretaceous	Djadochta Formation	Mongolia	An ankylosaurid; a species of Pinacosaurus.
Ptychotherates[57]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Srivastava & Nesbitt	Late Triassic (Norian or Rhaetian)	Chinle Formation	United States ( New Mexico)	A saurischian in the novel clade Morphoraptora. The type species is P. bucculentus.
Spinosaurus mirabilis[58]	Sp. nov	Valid	Sereno et al.	Late Cretaceous (Cenomanian)	Farak Formation	Niger	A spinosaurid theropod; a species of Spinosaurus.
Xenovenator[59]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Rivera-Sylva et al.	Late Cretaceous (Campanian)	Cerro del Pueblo Formation	Mexico	A troodontid theropod. The type species is X. espinosai; genus may also contain "Saurornitholestes" robustus Sullivan (2006).
Xiangyunloong[60]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Hu et al.	Early Jurassic	Fengjiahe Formation	China	A massopodan sauropodomorph. The type species is X. fengming.
Yantaloong[61]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Zhang et al.	Middle Jurassic	Zhanghe Formation	China	A eusauropod with possible turiasaur affinities. The type species is Y. lini.
Yeneen[62]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Filippi et al.	Late Cretaceous (Santonian)	Bajo de la Carpa Formation	Argentina	A titanosaur sauropod. The type species is Y. houssayi.

General non-avian dinosaur research

• Henderson (2026) determines rates of discovery of new dinosaur taxa and changes geographical origin of new discoveries throughout the history of the study of the group.^[63]
• Brownstein & Griffin (2026) reconstruct early evolutionary history of dinosaurs, placing the emergence of the group between 251.2 and 230 million years ago, and reporting evidence of a burst of rapid morphological evolution in the Middle to early Late Triassic that coincided with emergence of major dinosaurian subgroups (Ornithischia, Sauropodomorpha and Theropoda).^[64]
• Aureliano et al. (2026) compare the microstructure of appendicular bones in non-avian dinosaurs and large-bodied mammals, and interpret it as indicating that gigantism was achieved through divergent evolutionary pathways in the two groups.^[65]
• Wilson et al. (2026) study the evolution of the body size of Mesozoic dinosaurs, finding no evidence of a correlation between body size and climatic conditions before or after shifts in preferred climatic niches.^[66]
• Saitta (2026) argues that models of growth in dinosaurs used in studies from preceding years may be underfit, failing to account for possible causes variation between specimens other than ontogeny.^[67]
• Review of factors influencing the formation of dinosaur tracks is published by Falkingham & Gatesy (2026).^[68]
• Hartmann et al. (2026) provide a method for recognizing patterns of shape variation differentiating dinosaur tracks with the use of unsupervised machine learning, and use it to study affinities of controversial dinosaur tracks, reporting evidence of small, three-toed, bird-like footprints from the Triassic and Early Jurassic falling within the bird-dominated region of morphospace, and evidence of some Middle Jurassic tridactyl tracks from the Isle of Skye (Scotland, United Kingdom) grouping with ornithopods rather than with theropods.^[69]
• Ha & Kim (2026) present a new automated system for detection of dinosaur tracks across diverse tracksites and preservation conditions.^[70]
• Granata et al. (2026) report evidence of impact of erosion on preservation of dinosaur tracks from the Carnian strata of the Lerici ichnosite in Italy (the type locality of Evazoum sirigui).^[71]
• Ait Haddou et al. (2026) report the discovery of new tracksites preserving theropod and quadrupedal dinosaur (possibly stegosaur or sauropod) tracks from the strata of the Jurassic Tilougguit and Guettioua formations (Morocco).^[72]
• Evidence indicating that theropod and ornithopod tracks from the Middle Jurassic strata in the Tizi N'Talghemt area (Morocco) were originally left on tidal flats during low tide points is presented by El Ouali et al. (2026).^[73]
• Ornithischian and theropod (possibly including large dromaeosaurid) tracks are described from the Lower Cretaceous strata of the Serra do Tucano Formation (Brazil) by Barros et al. (2026).^[74]
• Choi et al. (2026) identify dinosaur eggs assigned to at least two distinct oogenera (Macroelongatoolithus and Mosaicoolithus) from the Cenomanian strata of the Dadaepo Formation (South Korea).^[75]
• Evidence indicating that dinosaur eggs from the Upper Cretaceous strata of the Wido Volcanics (Wi Island, South Korea) assigned to the ootaxon Propagoolithus widoensis were laid in nests established before the igneous intrusion rather than in a rock that was already metamorphosed as a result of volcanic activity is presented by Kim et al. (2026).^[76]
• Cardozo et al. (2026) report the discovery of faveoloolithid eggshells fom the late Maastrichtian strata of the Lago Colhué Huapí Formation (Argentina), originating from strata with abundant hadrosaurid remains and no sauropod remains reported to date, and expanding known geographic distribution of Faveoloolithidae in South America.^[77]
• Pantelides et al. (2026) present a new mechanistic energetic model for the studies of the capability of terrestrial vertebrates for transoceanic dispersal, apply it to extant vertebrates, Lambeosaurus and Rapetosaurus, and interpret their findings as suggestive of feasibility of dispersal of hadrosaurs and titanosaurs between Africa and Europe through the oceanic corridor separating Iberia from Morocco during the Cretaceous.^[78]
• Roberts et al. (2026) study the stratigraphy and age of the strata of the Hell Creek Formation from the excavation site of the "Dueling Dinosaurs", from other locations on the Murray Ranch and from the McGinnis Butte section (Montana, United States), and determine the age of the "Dueling Dinosaurs" locality to be approximately 66.895 million years.^[79]
• Wyenberg-Henzler & Scannella (2026) study a skull of Edmontosaurus from the Hell Creek Formation (Montana, United States) with a tyrannosaurid tooth embedded in the nasal around the time of death of the hadrosaurid, interpreted as likely resulting from a bite to the snout of Edmontosaurus during a predation attempt.^[80]
• Han et al. (2026) study the hydrodynamic evolution of the Shanyang Basin (China) during the latest Cretaceous, reporting evidence of reduction of suitable nesting habitats of dinosaurs before the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event.^[81]

Saurischian research

• Pawlak et al. (2026) identify lungfish aestivation burrows in the Triassic strata of the Ørsted Dal Formation (Greenland), interpreted as indicative of a seasonally dry climate in the studied area during the late Norian, and indicating that aridity was not a barrier for dispersal of theropods and sauropodomorphs living in the studied area at the time.^[82]
• A new assemblage of sauropod and theropod tracks is described from the Lower Cretaceous (Barremian–Aptian) strata of the Shinekhudag Formation (Mongolia) by Mainbayar et al. (2026).^[83]

Ornithischian research

• A study on the life history of Changchunsaurus parvus, providing evidence of one of the slowest growth rates reported in dinosaurs, is published by Wang et al. (2026).^[182]

New bird taxa

Name	Novelty	Status	Authors	Age	Type locality	Country	Notes	Images
Coracias chauvireae[209]	Sp. nov		Zelenkov	Pleistocene		Crimea	A roller, a species of Coracias.
Corvus venustus[210]	Sp. nov	Valid	Zelenkov	Pleistocene		Crimea	A species of Corvus.
Eopavo[211]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Yu et al.	Miocene	Liushu Formation	China	A peafowl. The type species is E. hezhengensis.
Eschatornis[212]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Machado et al.	Pleistocene		Brazil	A member of the family Phorusrhacidae. The type species is E. aterradora.
Gorgonavis[213]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Nebreda et al.	Early Cretaceous (Barremian)	La Huérguina Formation	Spain	A member of Enantiornithes belonging or related to the family Longipterygidae. The type species is G. alcyone.
Jamninkaornis[214]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Bochenski et al.	Oligocene		Poland	A passerine in the suborder Tyranni. The type species is J. kencampbelli.
Kunpengornis[215]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Huang et al.	Early Cretaceous	Jiufotang Formation	China	A euornithean. The type species is K. anhuimusei. Announced in 2025, the final article version was published in 2026.
Meterchen[216]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Tennyson et al.	Miocene	Bannockburn Formation	New Zealand	A probable goose. The type species is M. luti.
Pavo miejue[217]	Sp. nov	Valid	Lan, Mayr & Tsai	Pleistocene	Chiting Formation	Taiwan	A species of Pavo.
Plumadraco[218]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Clark et al.	Early Cretaceous (Aptian)	Jiufotang Formation	China	A member of Enantiornithes. The type species is P. bankoorum.
Porphyrio claytongreenei[219]	Sp. nov	Valid	Worthy et al.	Pleistocene		New Zealand	A swamphen.
Pujatopouli[220]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Irazoqui et al.	Late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian)	López de Bertodano Formation	Antarctica	A probable member of Neoaves with affinities with the group Aequornithes. The type species is P. soberana. Announced in 2025, the final article version was published in 2026.
Rhynchaeites mcfaddeni[221]	Sp. nov	Valid	Ksepka et al.	Eocene	Green River Formation	United States ( Wyoming)	A stem-ibis.
Shargaotis[222]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Zelenkov	Miocene		Mongolia	A bustard. The type species is S. ignipes. Published online in 2026, but the issue date is listed as December 2025.
Strigops insulaborealis[219]	Sp. nov	Valid	Worthy et al.	Pleistocene		New Zealand	A parrot related to the kākāpō.
Urmiornis shargensis[223]	Sp. nov	Valid	Zelenkov	Miocene		Mongolia	A member of Ergilornithidae.
Vegavis geitononesos[224]	Sp. nov	Valid	Irazoqui et al.	Late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian)	López de Bertodano Formation	Antarctica	A neornithine; a species of Vegavis.
Vegavis notopothousa[224]	Sp. nov	Valid	Irazoqui et al.	Late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian)	López de Bertodano Formation	Antarctica	A neornithine; a species of Vegavis.
Zhengheornis[225]	Gen. et sp. nov		Wang et al.	Late Jurassic (Tithonian)	Nanyuan Formation	China	An early member of Avialae. The type species is Z. buyu.

Avian research

• Benito et al. (2026) contest the conclusions of the study of Wilken et al. (2025)^[226] about the evolution of the ability of birds to move parts of the skull independently, arguing that these conclusions were based on inadequate taxon sampling and morphological misinterpretations;^[227] in response Wilken et al. (2026) agree that the bone interpreted in the 2025 study as a coracoid of Janavis is more likely to be a pterygoid, but question the affinities of this bone among Mesozoic birds, and overall reaffirm their original conclusion that powered prokinesis is most likely an autapomorphy of neognath birds.^[228]
• Lechki & Benson (2026) compare the reproductive output of extant and extinct amniotes, and link the increase of size of eggs and offspring (relative to adult size) in birds compared to other dinosaurs to the evolution of larger brain, likely also related to increased parental care.^[229]
• Jo et al. (2026) report the first discovery of Mesozoic avialan-type eggs from Korea, discovered in the mid-Cretaceous strata of the Ilseongsan Formation (South Korea), and name a new ootaxon Onggwanoolithus aphaedoensis.^[230]
• O'Connor & Marugán-Lobón (2026) revise the fossil record of avialans from the Upper Jurassic Solnhofen Limestones (Germany), consider purported diagnostic characters of Ostromia crassipes and Alcmonavis poeschli to be equivocal, and interpret the studied fossils as most likely representing a single taxon (Archaeopteryx).^[231]
• Zhou et al. (2026) interpret the evolution of teeth of Mesozoic birds as random and mainly influenced by phylogeny and evolution time, with no evidence of a consistent trend towards tooth loss.^[232]
• Wu et al. (2026) study the evolution of the triosseal canal of birds on the basis of data from Archaeorhynchus and a new enantiornithean specimen from the Jiufotang Formation (Liaoning, China), interpreting the triosseal canal as resulting from evolution of the coracoscapular joint into synchondrosis in members of Ornithothoraces, and from subsequent closing of the canal in members of Ornithuromorpha as a result of the appearance of the acrocoracoclavicular joint between their coracoid and furcula.^[233]
• Holdaway et al. (2026) study the variation within the moa genus Euryapteryx, and find that their phylogenetic relationships indicated by the study of ancient mitochondrial DNA do not match patterns recovered in morphometric analysis.^[234]
• Evidence from the study of ostrich eggshells from Middle Pleistocene to late Holocene sites in Israel, indicative of shift from eggshells with pore patterns similar to those seen in extant Somali ostrich to eggshells with pore patterns similar to those seen in Arabian ostrich which might related to a species turnover in the studied area between 100,000 and 70,000 years ago, is presented by Tsahar et al. (2026).^[235]
• Niespolo et al. (2026) determine the youngest known eggshells of Genyornis to be approximately 46-44,000 years old.^[236]
• Sosa & Acosta Hospitaleche (2026) describe a synsacrum of an indeterminate member of Neognathae from the Ypresian strata of the La Meseta Formation from the Seymour Island, interpreted as evidence of presence of a small shorebird or marine bird in Antarctica during the Eocene.^[237]
• Somogyi et al. (2026) interpret cases of apparent morphological convergence in members of major lineages of Neoaves that lack consistent functional drivers as likely linked to high levels of incomplete lineage sorting during the early radiation of the group in the aftermath of the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event, resulting in difficulty of phylogenetic placement of early Cenozoic members of the group.^[238]
• Hellyer-Price, Venditti & Humphries (2026) calculate the drag on the bill of Pelagornis while skimming, and argue that the studied bird was likely unable to skim-feed.^[239]
• Goedert et al. (2026) report the discovery of a braincase of Pelagornis orri from the Miocene Astoria Formation (Oregon, United States), providing new information on the anatomy of the species, as well as discovery of isolated vertebra and phalanx bone of Pelagornis sp. from the Eocene Keasey Formation (Oregon), representing one of the oldest pelagornithid records reported to date.^[240]
• Degrange et al. (2026) study the anatomy of the brain endocast of Conflicto antarcticus, reporting the absence of Wulsts, lack of adaptations to filter-feeding seen in extant anatids, and presence of large olfactory bulbs.^[241]
• Zelenkov (2026) describes fossil material of Pleistocene bustards from the Taurida Cave (Crimea), confirms the validity and distinctiveness of Otis lambrechti and "Otis" kalmani, and assigns the latter species to the genus Tetrax.^[242]
• De los Reyes, Acosta Hospitaleche & Sosa (2026) report the discovery of a tarsometatarsus of the grey-cowled wood rail from the strata of the La Esperanza Formation (Buenos Aires Province, Argentina), interpreted as suggestive of presence of seasonal wetlands and/or humid scrublands in the studied area during the early Pleistocene.^[243]
• Lenser, Reed & Worthy (2026) interpret the fossil record of shorebirds from the Blanche Cave (South Australia) as indicative of mostly terrestrial environment in the studied area in the Pleistocene, including open forest and woodland but also with wetland elements, and interpret changes of composition of the studied assemblage as indicative of decrease in available wetlands at the end of the Last Glacial Maximum.^[244]
• Mayr & Richter (2026) describe new fossil material of Hassiavis laticauda from the Eocene Messel Formation (Germany), providing new information on the anatomy of members of this species, and reevaluate the phylogenetic affinities of Archaeotrogonidae.^[245]
• New fossil material of the Cuban pauraque and the Antillean nighthawk is described from the Pleistocene and Holocene strata from the El Abrón Cave (Cuba) by Gorbatcheva & Zelenkov (2026).^[246]
• Hunt, Lucas & Smith (2026) describe bromalites from the Eocene Willwood Formation (Wyoming, United States) interpreted as owl regurgitalites containing bones of glyptosaurid lizards, and name a new ichnotaxon Sauresus osteodermus.^[247]
• Fossil material of members of two honeyguide species, representing the earliest record of members of this group reported to date, is described from the Pliocene strata of the Varswater Formation from the Langebaanweg site (South Africa) by Louchart, Manegold & Pavia (2026).^[248]
• A study on the bone histology of Andrewsornis abbotti and Physornis fortis, providing evidence of uninterrupted growth strategy in phorusrhacids, is published by Dreyer, Cooper & O'Connor (2026).^[249]
• Mayr (2026) studies the phylogenetic relationships of Parapsittacopes and Psittacomimus, assigning them to the new family Psittacomimidae interpreted as likely sister group of Parapasseres (the clade formed by the Zygodactylidae and Passeriformes).^[250]
• A study on the phylogenetic relationships of the Hawaiian honeyeaters, indicative of a relationships with the clade including the families Hypocoliidae and Hylocitreidae rather than a sister relationship with Hypocoliidae alone, is published by Zhao, Kimball & Braun (2026).^[251]
• A study on the morphological diversity of Cretaceous to Pleistocene avian tracks from continents that were parts of Gondwana is published by Farina et al. (2026).^[252]
• Review of the composition of the Eocene bird assemblage from the Walton Member of the London Clay (United Kingdom) is published by Mayr (2026).^[253]
• Farina, Krapovickas & Marsicano (2026) study the composition of the bird track assemblage from the Miocene Vinchina Formation (Argentina), including the oldest rheiform track in southern South America reported to date and probable phorusrhacid track.^[254]
• Serrano et al. (2026) describe Early Pleistocene bird remains from the Venta Micena site (Spain), interpreted as indicative of presence of wetland environment.^[255]
• Zelenkov et al. (2026) report the discovery of fossil material of a new late Pleistocene bird fauna from the Khondu locality (Sakha Republic, Russia), including at least 25 taxa.^[256]
• Oros Sršen et al. (2026) study the composition of the late Pleistocene bird assemblages from the Marlera site (Croatia), reporting evidence of presence of taxa associated by open and dry environments, as well as aquatic taxa.^[257]
• A new, diverse Late Pleistocene bird assemblage is reported from the Taguatagua 3 site in the Tagua Tagua Lake area (Chile) by Alarcón-Muñoz et al. (2026).^[258]
• Evidence from the study of ancient environmental DNA indicative of changes of composition of bird communities in high-latitude areas of Eurasia and Alaska from the Last Glacial Maximum to the Holocene is presented by Sander et al. (2026).^[259]
• Peralta et al. (2026) report the discovery of a new avian assemblage from the early Holocene strata from the Molino Doll locality (Entre Ríos Province, Argentina).^[260]
• A study on the composition on the middle Holocene avian assemblage from the Cueva del Llano site (Fuerteventura, Canary Islands), providing evidence of presence of taxa typical of forest environments and the edges of bodies of water, is published by Sánchez-Marco, Sánchez-Sastre & Castillo (2026).^[261]

New pterosaur taxa

Name	Novelty	Status	Authors	Age	Type locality	Country	Notes	Images
Laueropterus[262]	Gen. et sp. nov	Valid	Hone	Late Jurassic	Mörnsheim Formation	Germany	An early member of Monofenestrata. The type species is L. vitriolus.
Rexarthuria[263]	Gen. et comb. nov		Thomas & McDavid	Early Cretaceous (Valanginian)	Tunbridge Wells Sand Formation	United Kingdom	An azhdarchoid; a new genus for "Palaeornis' cliftii Mantell (1844).
Tylodorhynchus[264]	Gen. et comb. nov	Valid	Pêgas & Holgado	Early Cretaceous (Barremian)	Wessex Formation	United Kingdom	A coloborhynchine anhanguerid; a new genus for "Uktenadactylus" rodriguesae Holgado & Pêgas (2020).

Pterosaur research

• Walters, Rayfield & Donoghue (2026) argue that modern reconstructions of pterosaur wings likely underestimate the diversity of wing shapes within this group.^[265]
• Cerqueira et al. (2026) compare the allometry in the skeletal elements of Rhamphorhynchus muensteri and pterodactyloid pterosaurs, reporting evidence of differences interpreted as likely linked to different flight capabilities and to differing ecology.^[266]
• Tong et al. (2026) report the discovery of two specimens of Cascocauda rong from the Jurassic Tiaojishan Formation (China) providing new information on the anatomy of anurognathids, including evidence of presence of a skull element resembling the supraorbital (or palpebral) bones found in extant lepidosaurs and possibly helping to secure the pterosaurs' eyes within the orbits.^[267]
• A probable pterodactyloid radius is reported from the Bathonian strata from the Stonesfield Slate locality (United Kingdom) by Averianov & Lopatin (2026).^[268]
• Grice et al. (2026) report evidence of preservation of molecular biomarkers in a pterosaur wing phalanx from the Lower Cretaceous Romualdo Formation (Brazil), and interpret the results of molecular analyses of steroids from the studied fossil as consistent with a diet including fish and/or cephalopods.^[269]
• Unwin et al. (2026) argue that the holotype of purported pterosaur Bakiribu waridza is actually fossil material of an indeterminate ray-finned fish (possibly an amiid).^[270]
• Averianov & Gubarev (2026) report the discovery of a pterosaur cervical vertebra from the Cenomanian Melovatka Formation (Saratov Oblast, Russia) with similarities to a probable targaryendraconid vertebra from the Albian Toolebuc Formation (Australia), and interpret the studied vertebrae as likely to be the first diagnostic postcranial remains of members of Targaryendraconia.^[271]
• A wing phalanx bone of a member of Ornithocheiriformes that is the first known pterosaur bone from Egypt is described from the Cenomanian Bahariya Formation by Salem et al. (2026).^[272]
• Jung et al. (2026) describe track of a large pterosaur (possibly a member of Neoazhdarchia) from the Lower Cretaceous (Albian) strata of the Jinju Formation (South Korea), found in close association with a small tetrapod trackway and possibly documenting predation of a pterosaur on a small tetrapod, and name a new ichnotaxon Jinjuichnus procerus.^[273]

Other new archosaur taxa

Other archosaur research

• McDavid, Marchant, & Reid (2026) revise the nomenclature of Alickmeron maleriensis and consider it a junior objective synonym of Alwalkeria maleriensis due to being based on the same holotype and type species, also reinterpreting it as an indeterminate member of Pan-Aves.^[274]
• Description of the braincase and cranial endocast of the holotype of Venetoraptor gassenae is published by Damke et al. (2026).^[275]
• A femur of one of the largest silesaurids known worldwide is described from the Ladinian strata of the Pinheiros-Chiniquá Sequence of the Santa Maria Supersequence (Brazil) by Müller (2026).^[276]