[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Quaesitosaurus and Nemegtosaurus



On Wed, 11 Dec 1996, Tim Williams wrote:

> Tom Holtz wrote:
> 
> > As George notes above, a recent study (by Calvo) shows that the skulls of
> > _Nemegtosaurus_ and _Quaesitosaurus_ are much less like diplodcoids than
> > reconstructed, and are actually very similar to _Brachiosaurus_!  
> > 
> > Contra my previous thoughts on the subject (i.e., that "nemegtosaurids" were
> > diplodocoids), I find the evidence for _Nemegtosaurus_ and _Quaesitosaurus_
> > within a titanosauroid-brachiosaurid clade very compelling
> 
> I wonder then if _Antarctosaurus_, which has also been 
> reconstructed with a very diplodocoid-like skull, might be a 
> titanosauroid after all.

        Amargasaurus, however, is generally reconstructed as
diplodocid, so that would argue that they were in S. America.  Then
again, if Opisthocoelicaudia has cleft neural spines and peglike
teeth...
        Hm. It fits geographically with being a diplodocid, after all 
they were there in Africa in the Late Jurassic and Africa seems to have 
had a lot of exchange w/ africa, but same with titanosaurs, it would 
seem.  Can Mr. Curtice enlighten us about Amargasaurus? What, besides 
peglike teeth and cleft neural spines, indicates that this animal is 
diplodocid? 

[ Um... Nick, I think one of those Africa's should be "South America".
  I don't think anyone is going to argue with you when you say that an
  animal lived where it lived. :-)  Or are "africa" and "Africa"
  different places?  Sorry.  Just don't want you to feel a need to
  send in a clarification since I think your meaning is obvious. -- MR ]