The High Tatra granite intrusion is an example of a Variscan syn-tectonic, tongue-shaped intrusion. In some portions of the intrusion, structures occur which appear to be of sedimentary origin. These include structures similar to graded bedding, cross-bedding, troughs and flame structures, K-feldspar-rich cumulates and magmatic breccias. Formation of these structures might be related to changing magma properties, including crystal fraction, development of a crystal mush and a decrease in magma viscosity, stimulated by influx of mafic magma and high volatile content. The suggested processes in operation are: gravity-controlled separation, magma flow segregation, deposition on the magma-chamber floor, filter pressing and density currents stimulated by tectonic activity.

%The formation of the sedimentary structures was also aided by the presence of large numbers of xenoliths that acted as a heat sink and influenced the thermal field in the intrusion, stimulating rapid cooling and crystal nucleation. Sinking xenoliths deformed the layering and, to some extent, protected the unconsolidated crystal mush from erosion by magma flowing past.

%Areas with well-developed sedimentary magmatic structures can be viewed as having involved magma rich in crystals locally forming closely-packed networks from which residual melt was extracted by filter pressing, and preserved in leucocratic pods and dykes. Interleaved, non-layered granite may be interpreted to have formed from the magma with initially low crystal fractions.

%It is suggested that the intrusion was formed from numerous magma injections representing different stages in the mixing and mingling of felsic and mafic sources. It solidified by gravitation-driven crystal accumulation and flow sorting on the magma chamber floor and on the surfaces of large numbers of xenoliths. Shear stress acting during intrusion might have influenced the formation of magmatic structures.

The Devonian actinopterygian Mimia Gardiner & Bartram (1977) of the Upper Devonian (Frasnian) Gogo Formation of Western Australia, one of the most completely known of all Palaeozoic ray-finned fishes, is renamed Mimipiscis nom. nov. due to preoccupation of the former genus by the butterfly Mimia Evans (1953). Recently acquired data, including the description of newly prepared fossil material, has revealed the presence of a second species in this formerly monotypic genus, as well as previously unreported features of the tail, parasphenoid and ontogenetic variability of type species, Mimipiscis toombsi (Gardiner & Bartram 1977). The second form, Mimipiscis bartrami sp. nov., differs from the contemporary M. toombsi in details of the body shape, squamation, snout, suboperculum and parasphenoid. Phylogenetic analyses recover Mimipiscis and Gogosardina as sister genera within a monophyletic Mimiidae, a clade restricted to the Late Devonian of Western Australia.

Gracilisuchus stipanicicorum Romer, 1972, from the Middle-Late Triassic of the Ischigualasto–Villa Unión Basin of Argentina, is an extinct pseudosuchian archosaur on the stem to Crocodylomorpha. The pelvic girdle and hind limb anatomy of a referred specimen of Gracilisuchus stipanicicorum is described and compared with that from a broad range of archosauriform taxa, including basal members such as crurotarsans and basal ornithodirans. The description of this specimen reveals new information on the anatomy of the pelvic girdle and hind limb of Gracilisuchus, through a detailed examination of some anatomical regions barely or not previously described, as well as reinterpretations of previous features. The phylogenetic affinities of Gracilisuchus within the Archosauria remain to be tested, but Gracilisuchus shares two putative synapomorphies with some non-crocodyliform crocodylomorphs, providing tentative support for the monophyly of Sphenosuchia (e.g., Sereno & Wild 1992; Wu & Chatterjee 1993) and the close relationship of Gracilisuchus to that clade. These characteristics are: (i) the morphology and poor development of the femoral fourth trochanter, closely resembling the condition of Pseudhesperosuchus and Trialestes; and (ii) a poor anterior development of the femoral head, shared with Pseudhesperosuchus. On the other hand there are characters that reject the inclusion of Gracilisuchus within Crocodylomorpha (Nesbitt 2011), such as the absence of an imperforated acetabulum, and that rather suggests a sister-taxon position to Crocodylomorpha.