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

Re: No aquatic dinos? (was Re: No dinosaurs in Quebec, Canada?)



Stan Friesen wrote:

> From: "Tim Williams" <T.Williams@cclru.randwick.unsw.edu.au>
>
> > The description of _Kollikodon_, a beaver-sized monotreme from the
> > Early Cretaceous of eastern Australia, suggested that it may have
> > been an aquatic mammal; ...
>
>Interesting.  What is the taphonomy and stratigraphy of the find
>location?  This might help decide if it was aquatic or not.

Kollikodon probably derives from the Griman Creek Formation which is
thought to be distal esturine deposits. As to what inference about the
animals way of life this information might present, I would be very
careful. The GCF has produced dinosaurs, mammals, plesiosaurs, crocodiles,
turtles and a wide variety of invertebrates which appear to be both
allochthonous and authochonous (spelling looks close enough) elements. As
Kollikodon is known from a single dentary fragment with three teeth, it
would be very difficult to determine if it was living there of (more
likely) it was a blow in (or should I say wash in).

Cheers, Paul

Dr Paul M.A. Willis
Consulting Vertebrate Palaeontologist
Quinkana Pty Ltd
pwillis@ozemail.com.au