Indosuchus
genus of reptiles (fossil)
Indosuchus (lit. 'Indian crocodile') is a genus of abelisaurid dinosaur from the Late Cretaceous Period (Maastrichtian, 70 to 66 million years ago) of what is now India. Like most theropods, Indosuchus was a bipedal carnivore. It was about 7 metres (23 ft) long, weighed about 1.2 tonnes (1.3 short tons), and had a crested skull, flattened on the top.
Discovery and naming
Indosuchus was named by Friedrich von Huene in 1932 and was described by Huene and Charles Alfred Matley in 1933 from three partial skulls found by Matley in India near Jabalpur in Madhya Pradesh in strata of the Lameta Formation. The lectotype is GSI K27/685, consisting of the parietals and frontals of a single individual. Two paralectotypes were referred, both including material from the posterior skull, with the fossils referred based on the parietal morphology. The known remains of the lectotype material have been lost.
The generic name is derived from Indos, Ancient Greek for the Indus and Soukhos, Ancient Greek for the Egyptian crocodile god. The specific name raptorius means "raptorial" in Latin.
Classification
Because only some skull elements have been found, Indosuchus placement has been somewhat erratic.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Indosuchus” is genus of reptiles (fossil). The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Indosuchus, genus and reptiles, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “genus of reptiles (fossil)” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated Feb 15, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q135327. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1932 and 1933.
A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. 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 “Indosuchus”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Indosuchus primary sources, Indosuchus archive and Indosuchus 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 “Indosuchus”?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Indosuchus” 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.