Carolowilhelmina
species of fish
Carolowilhelmina geognostica is an extinct arthrodire placoderm fish that lived in the Late Eifelian epoch (of Middle Devonian) of Aragon, Spain. In life, C. geognostica was a long-snouted pelagic fish, superficially similar to the Australian Rolfosteus and the European Oxyosteus. It is currently known only from an incomplete cranium that is about 43 cm (17 in) long. The fossil material is housed in the Natural Sciences museum of the University of Zaragoza, Spain (Museo de ciencias Naturales de la Universidad de Zaragoza).
Discovery
Initial fragments belonging to Carolowilhelmina were accidentally uncovered by paleontologist Peter Carls in April 1971, after breaking a limestone nodule in an attempt to obtain a Conodont sample. The following day, fellow paleontologist Otto H. Walliser identified the fragments as fish remains, as they had been washed clean by a creek below the section. The origin of the fragments, however, could not be identified, as a portion of the slope had slid down and covered it. This did prompt a search for fish remains elsewhere, resulting in the discovery of Grossius aragonensis. by 1986, the creek had eroded at the sediment, revealing part of the fossil's rostrum. The fossil was collected in 1993.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Carolowilhelmina” as species of fish. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the science & nature register because the source frames it as species of fish. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated Apr 24, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5045284. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1971, 1986 and 1993.
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 “Carolowilhelmina”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Carolowilhelmina primary sources, Carolowilhelmina archive and Carolowilhelmina 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 “Carolowilhelmina”?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Carolowilhelmina” 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.