[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
"Brontosaurus" (was Re: Not-well-thought-out Paleo-positions)
At 09:11 AM 8/22/97 -0400, Molator wrote:
>And about the use
>of Brontosaurus. As much as it gets me, Bakker still uses that term to
Well, this is actually (or at least potentially) a different kind of case.
Since _Apatosaurus_ and _Brontosaurus_ have different type species (_A.
ajax_ and _B. excelsus_, respectively), one *could* make the argument that
these two species are different from each other at the generic level.
Hence, you could retain both generic names. Bakker, who is about as much as
a splitter as anyone is in dinosaur paleontology, seems to go that route.
(On the other hand, his use of the taxonomically impossible combination
_Brontosaurus ajax_ on pp. 400 and 464, and possibly elsewhere, in _The
Dinosaur Heresies_, is unjustifiable. If the type of _Apatosaurus ajax_ is
included in the same genus as _Brontosaurus exclesus_, then the generic name
for this dinosaur MUST be _Apatosaurus_).
Speaking of which, watch the new season of PaleoWorld for the fantastic new
skull of "_Brontosaurus_" that Bakker's crew have discovered. It is quite a
(As always, trying to steer the discussion back towards paleontology... :-)
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