[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
> From: Scott <HORTON@bcrssu.agr.ca>
> > I thought that, _BY_DEFINITION_, ornithomimids had no teeth. If I'm right,
> > what
> > should it be categorized as?
>That's not *quite* correct, but I tend to agree that this is too
>many teeth for it to be a proper ornithomimid.
>In that case, it would be in the Coelurosauria (restricted sense)
>or in the basal Maniraptora. (The taxonomy of the small Late
>Jurassic and Early Creatceous generalist therapods is still
But it will be much better in September :-) (see reference 23 in the
Anyway, we can do better than that. Pelecanimimus shares, uniquely with
the Ornithomimidae, metacarpals of all the same length and proportions of
the phalanges of the hand. In this respect it is more similar to valid
ornithomimids than to Harpymimus. Also, it shares with all
ornithomimosaurians and all troodontids the bulbous parasphenoid capsule
(an unusual structure of the braincase). Therefore, the body of evidence
shows that this animal is a member of the troodont-ornithomimosaurian clade
(to be named in ref. 23), and additionally is closer to ornithomimids than
to troodonts. Thus, it is an ornithomimosaurian.
Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Vertebrate Paleontologist in Exile
U.S. Geological Survey
Branch of Paleontology & Stratigraphy
MS 970 National Center
Reston, VA 22092