FIGURE 11 in A revision of the genus Conocrinus d'Orbigny, 1850 (Echinodermata, Crinoidea, Rhizocrinidae) and its place among extant and fossil crinoids with a xenomorphic stalk

FIGURE 11. Constraints to phylogenetic reconstruction and classification of post-Paleozoic crinoids with a xenomorphic stalk (except Caledonicrinus): first hypothesis. This hypothesis implies substantial changes in taxonomy and phylogeny: Bourgueticrinus suedicus (B.s), B. ellipticus (B.e) and Dunnicrinus (Dunn) are considered as belonging to the same lineage corresponding to the family Bourgueticrinidae sensu stricto (Bourg), B. fisheri (?B.fish) is not considered as congeneric with B. ellipticus and B. suedicus, Naumachocrinus (Naum) deriving from B. fisheri lineage. Two other extant families with xenomorphic stalk distant to Bourgueticrinina are mentioned for comparison: Septocrinidae (Septo and associated colour) and Guillecrinidae (Guill and associated colour). See discussion in text. Other abbreviations—Bathy: genera of Bathycrinidae other than Naumachocrinus, B.cf: B. ex gr. fisheri of Zitt & Vodrazka (2008), Carst: Carstenicrinus, Cherb: Cherbonniericrinus, Conoc: Conocrinus, Demo: Democrinus, Paleo: Paleobathycrinus sensu Klikushin (1982), Parac: Paraconocrinus, Phryn and associated colour: Phrynocrinidae, Pseudo: Pseudoconocrinus, Rhizo: Rhizocrinus.