Initially, Procerosuchus was regarded as a stagonolepidid along with the genera Rauisuchus and Prestosuchus.[2] Later, it was reassigned by Huene to the family Rauisuchidae. Alfred Sherwood Romer first considered Procerosuchus to be a possible ornithosuchid, but later assigned it to the family Prestosuchidae, which he constructed in 1966.[3][4] In 1972, Romer assigned Procerosuchus as a possible member of the family Proterochampsidae.[5] Krebs (1976) considered it to be a rauisuchid, as did Chatterjee (1985) and Carroll (1988).[6][7][8]
Procerosuchus has been suggested to be member of the subfamilyRauisuchinae and the tribeRauisuchini.[9] However, the genus has not yet been included in any phylogenetic analyses of rauisuchians, and its classification remains uncertain. The alpha taxonomy of rauisuchians is still debated (the order itself is now considered paraphyletic) and the anatomy of many taxa, including Procerosuchus, has not yet been thoroughly described.[10]Procerosuchus does not seem to belong to a recently identified monophyletic grouping of rauisuchians termed Clade X (and now known as Poposauroidea), which includes poposaurids and ctenosauriscids.[11]
^ abHuene, F. v. (1942). "Ergebnisse der Sauriergrabungen in Südbrasilien 1928/29". Die fossilen Reptilien des südamerikanischen Gondwanalandes. München: C. H. Beck. p. 332.
^Romer, A. S. (1956). Osteology of Reptiles. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 772. ISBN0-89464-985-X.
^Kuhn, O. (1976). "Pseudosuchia". In Kuhn, O. (ed.). Handbuch der Paläoherpetologie (13th ed.). Stuttgart: G. Fischer Verlag. pp. 40–98. ISBN0-89574-191-1.
^Nesbitt, S. J. (2005). "Osteology of the Middle Triassic pseudosuchian archosaur Arizonasaurus babbitti". Historical Biology. 17 (1–4): 19–47. doi:10.1080/08912960500476499. S2CID84326151.