Agaresuchus
extinct genus of crocodylomorphs
Agaresuchus is an extinct genus of allodaposuchid eusuchian crocodylomorph from the Late Cretaceous (Campanian-Maastrichtian) of Spain. It includes two species, the type species A. fontisensis, and A. subjuniperus, which was originally named as a species of the related genus Allodaposuchus. However, it has been proposed that both species may instead belong to the genus Allodaposuchus.
Discovery and naming
The genus Agaresuchus was named in 2016 upon the discovery of Agaresuchus fontisensis. Allodaposuchus subjuniperus, discovered in 2013 and originally classified as a new and second species of Allodaposuchus, was then reassigned to Agaresuchus. It is based on the holotype skull, specimen MPZ 2012/288.
A. subjuniperus was named in 2013 on the basis of a skull from the late Maastrichtian-aged Conquès Formation, part of the Tremp Group, in the province of Huesca, Spain. The skull was found underneath a juniper tree whose roots had grown between the bones, hence the specific name subjuniperus or "under juniper" in Latin.
In 2016, the new genus and species Agaresuchus fontisensis was discovered and described. The genus name refers to the demon Agares, depicted by Johann Weyer as an old man riding a crocodile.
The public source identifies “Agaresuchus” as extinct genus of crocodylomorphs. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Agaresuchus, extinct and genus.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Agaresuchus”, the useful work is to connect “extinct genus of crocodylomorphs” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Stable identifiers, scientific names and standards terminology offer the best bridge between this overview and specialist evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 5, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q28736399. The first chronological checks are 2016, 2013 and 2012.
A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Agaresuchus”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Agaresuchus primary sources, Agaresuchus archive and Agaresuchus research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Agaresuchus”?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Agaresuchus” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.