[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Some corrections to the large predator list
> > [Epanterias, by the way, is an invalid name, since the holotype material
> > includes both allosaurid theropod and camarasaurid sauropod fossils. Thus,
> > like Trachodon (whose type specimen is composed of teeth of hadrosaurids
> > and ceratopsids), Epanterias must be thrown out.]
>By my understanding of the Code, this is not quite correct.
>This falls under the compisite type material section, which allows
>a reviser to declare which subset of the original type material
>is to be considered the actual type. Thus, Epanterias either
>becomes a allosaurid OR a camarasaurid, depending on what the
>first reviser decides to do with the type material. [Given the
>way the literature has treated it, the best choice is clearly to
>choose the allosaurid teeth as the type].
>Either way, it sounds as if it is not synonymous with Saurophagus.
Actually, I don't think there are teeth in the type of Epanterias. Also,
until Bakker revived the name for the allosaurid, Epanterias has been
considered a junior synonym of Camarasaurus in most literature, so most of
history would support the sauropod. However, hopefully Chure will a)
redescribe the Epanterias material and b) determine if any of it can be
determined to be Saurophagus or a big Allosaurus.
Incidentally, despite Bakker's press releases of a few years ago, he has
not treated Epanterias in the technical literature with the exception of a
few vertebrae in a paper on the uppermost Morrison fauna.
Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Vertebrate Paleontologist in Exile Phone: 703-648-5280
U.S. Geological Survey FAX: 703-648-5420
Branch of Paleontology & Stratigraphy
MS 970 National Center
Reston, VA 22092