[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: besides mamenschisaurus
Sam j hogan wrote:
> I don't actually have the book, but the description sounds suspiciously
> like the mounting found in the atrium of the American Museum of Natural
> History in New York City. Is the Mamenchisaurus (identified as
> Barosurus in the museum's display) rearing up to defend itself and its
> offspring from the theropod? If it is, then it's the same display. In
> this case, the theropod is _Allosaurus_ (fragillis?).
I didn't get that from the description, Sam. I didn't get it from the
photograph, either. The mamenchisaur and the theropod are simply in
conventional mounts, more or less side by side, not a "lifelike" display
like the AMNH _Barosaurus_.
The theropod in question looks strongly allosaurish to me, but I know
zip about how to distinguish big allosaurish theropods. It's big, it's
got a heavy skull with lots of teeth, and it has three-fingered hands.
That's all I can tell about it from the photo. Being in the Beijing
Museum means it's certainly Chinese. Three fingers means it isn't
_Tarbosaurus_, which is the only Chinese theropod I could identify from
a photograph, and that only because of the tyrannosaurid two-fingered
hands. Lambert's ULTIMATE DINOSAUR BOOK says that _Yangchuanosaurus_
comes from the same formation as _Mamenchisaurus_. _Yangchuanosaurus_
is a big allosaurish theropod. Given all that, I think T.A. Curtis's
identification of that skeleton as a _Yangchuanosaurus_ is about as good
a guess as any, and more likely than most.