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

Re: Audubon article

In a message dated 97-03-05 09:16:59 EST, jpoling@dinosauria.com (Jeff
Poling) writes:

<<  I didn't read the article but skimmed it (the bookstore seems to have a
 problem with people reading the articles rather than buying the mag), but
 the fossil was called _Compsognathus prima_.  My guess is whoever wrote it
 is referring the animal to _Compsognathus_ ... which makes those Solnhofen
 _Compsognathus_ specimens warrant renewed scrutiny, I would think, if the
 referral is correct. >>

Someone on the list has already noted that the correct renaming of the
species, if it is indeed referable to _Compsognathus_, would be
_Compsognathus primus_, not _Compsognathus prima_. The species epithet
_prima_ is an adjective modifying the feminine noun _Sinosauropteryx_, and if
it were transferred to the masculine noun _Compsognathus_, it would be
inflected as _primus_.