CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Kileskus

genus of reptiles (fossil)

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 13, 2026
Entity authorityQ132522 ↗
Source-derived summary

Kileskus (meaning "lizard" in the Khakas language) is a genus of tyrannosauroid dinosaur known from partial remains found in Middle Jurassic (Bathonian stage) Itat Formation of Sharypovsky District, Krasnoyarsk Krai (Russia). Fossils recovered include the holotype maxilla, a premaxilla, a surangular, and a few bones from the hand and foot. Additional remains referred to the genus include cervical and caudal vertebrae, as well as a fibula. The skull bones are similar to those of Proceratosaurus. The type species is K. aristotocus, named in 2010 by Averianov and colleagues.

Classification

Kileskus has been included in two phylogenetic analyses and found to be a basal proceratosaurid both times.

Although it is unknown whether Kileskus sported a nasal crest, it can be assigned to Proceratosauridae due to a number of other features. These include elongated external nares, a short ventral margin of the premaxilla, and the area of the antorbital fossa directly below the antorbital fenestra being deeper than the maxilla directly below it. Kileskus also shares with Proceratosaurus nares inclined posterodorsally at a 40-degree angle to the skull. Kileskus is distinguished from other proceratosaurids by the anterior rim of its maxilla being confluent with the ascending process of the maxilla and gently sloping posterodorsally.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Kileskus” is genus of reptiles (fossil). The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Kileskus, genus and reptiles, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA practical orientation to terminology and classification, particularly when read beside dated observations, specimens or technical literature. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2010—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Kileskus, genus and reptiles is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

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.

Evidence profile

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 13, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q132522. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2010.

Critical limits

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.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Kileskus”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Kileskus primary sources, Kileskus archive and Kileskus research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Kileskus”?
  2. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
  3. Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Kileskus” 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.