[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Classification questions
At 02:36 PM 8/20/97 -0400, T. Mike Keesey wrote:
>-Is Macronaria stem-based or node-based? If stem, it could be different
According to Sereno (1997) is that it is node-based, but it could be "saved"
by using a stem-based version.
>Also, has Macronaria been published yet?
Only "official" use so far is in Sereno's (1997) paper in Annual Review of
Earth & Planetary Science. It will formally be proposed in a
soon-to-be-published (hopefully) paper by Wilson & Sereno.
>Should I be using it? Same goes for Carnotaurinae.
Good questions. Carnotaurinae has not formally been proposed yet.
>-Have there been any recent studies on the internal structure of these
Not yet, beyond the suggestion (in Kellner, A.W.A., 1996. Remarks on
Brazilian dinosaurs. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 39(3): 611-626) that
the Brazilian spinosaurids might be closer to _Spinosaurus_ than to
_Baryonyx_, because they share unserrated carinae.
In process by more than one group.
> ankylosaur families
Forthcoming by Kirkland & Carpenter, and others.
Forthcoming in a paper by Sereno: Systematics, evolution and polar
wanderings of margin-headed dinosaurs (Ornithischia: Marginocephalia). In M.
Benton, E. Kurochkin, M. Shishkin & D. Unwin (eds.), The Age of Dinosaurs in
Russia and Mongolia. Cambridge Univ. Press.
The results, presented in Sereno (1997), are:
--unnamed (perhaps Goyocephalia Sereno 1986)
-------Microcephale nov. gen. (et sp.?)
>Right now I pretty much just have the genera within them listed straight
>out. Does _Irritator_ form a Baryonychinae with _Baryonyx_?
Not according to Kellner.
>Which two oviraptorids form a subfamily? etc.
>-Anyone have info on Arkansaurus fridayi?
Being worked on.
>-What about citations for _Archaeopteryx bavarica_
Wellnhofer, P. 1993. Das siebte Exemplar von _Archaeopteryx_ aus den
Solnhofener Schchten. Archaeopteryx 11: 1-48.
>and _Rebbachisaurus tessonei_?
Calvo, J.O. & L. Salgado. _Rebbachisaurus tessonei_ sp. nov., a new
Sauropoda from the Albian-Cenomanian of Argentina: new evidence on the
origin of the Diplodocidae. Gaia 11: 13-33.
>-Have any studies recently been done on "prosauropods"? Should I be
>showing them as being paraphyletic or is the other view dominant? If they
>are paraphyletic, are there any named clades between Sauropodomorpha and
Sereno (1997) considers them monophyletic. I remain skeptical.
>-The titanosaur study unfortunately did not include some important genera.
>Anyone have any good ideas about where I can place _Titanosaurus_,
>_Pellegrinisaurus_ and other stuff I have listed as "Titanosauridae
>-Speaking of incertae sedis, there are dozens of genera I have listed as
>"Neotheropoda incertae sedis" that I just *know* can go somewhere more
>specific. I would love for someone to have a look and offer ideas. The
>The Tetanurae page could also use some cleaning up in the incertae sedis
Hey, I'm working on it, I'm workin on it... (326 characters and growing...).
>-Why are the two "sailback sauropods" _Amargasaurus_ and _Rebbachisaurus_
>placed in different families (Dicraeosauridae and Rebbachisauridae,
See the Calvo & Salgado (1995) paper.
Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Vertebrate Paleontologist Webpage: http://www.geol.umd.edu
Dept. of Geology Email:firstname.lastname@example.org
University of Maryland Phone:301-405-4084
College Park, MD 20742 Fax: 301-314-9661