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

Re: Egg shapes



Tracy said: [From Original Message: tlford@ix.netcom.com
<tlford@ix.netcom.com>
To: dinosaur@usc.edu <dinosaur@usc.edu>; david_krentz@fa.disney.com
<david_krentz@fa.disney.com>
Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 4:28 AM
Subject: Re: Egg shapes]

>David Krentz wrote:
>>
>> Subject: Egg shapes                                          6:02 PM
>> 12/1/98
...
>>   Have all eggs that were attributed to Protoceratops and Breviceratops
now become Oviraptorid?
>
>No.
>
>Are there any eggs that could reasonably be ceratopsid?
>
>Yes, much to the dismay to some people on the list :->.

    Tracy, even if your opinion is not based totally upon the referenced
papers, it seems to me that at least a brief QUOTE should have been in
order, instead of comments about other listers' , "...dismay..." -- along
with references for the existence of that dismay ;).

    Also, one might wonder -- considering the papers' dates -- about the
possibility that the author, K. E. Mikhailov, was unaware that the famous
"protoceratops" egg types are really those of Oviraptors.  This seems a
possibility.  The Russian dinosaur exhibit circulating around the country
inaccurately identifies (at least it did as of when I saw it in New Jersey)
a nest of such eggs as being those of Protoceratops.

    I haven't accessed the referenced Mikhailov papers, but from the titles
he seems to be dealing more with egg-shell structure and nest structure,
instead of eggs with embryo parts.  Is it possible that (at least in the
earlier papers) he was just taking the earlier word of AMNH with the
(mis)identification of "Protoceratops" eggs and nests?

    As to mis-identified "Protoceratops" nests (or their reproductions) in
certain museums, exhibits almost by necessity lag behind published findings
at the fore-front of paleontological research, unless, of course, you're not
a museum, per se, but are The National Geographic Society ;^)

    Ray Stanford




>Mikhailov, K. E. 1991. Classification of Fossil eggshells of Amniotic
>Vertebrates. Acata. Pal. Pol. Vol. 36, No. 2: 193-238.
>
>Mikhailiov, Konstantin E., 1992. The microstructure of Avian and
>Dinosaurian Eggshell: phylogenetic implications. Papers in Avian
>Paleontology, honoring Pierce Brodkorb. Incorporating the Proceedings of
>the II International Symposium of Society of Avian Paleontology and
>Evolution, held at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County,
>28-30, September, 1988.  Science Series Natural History Museum of Los
>Angles County, No. 36:361-373.
>
>Mikhailiov, Konstantin E., 1994. Theropod and Protoceratopsian Dinosaur
>eggs from the Cretaceous of Mongolia and Kazakhstan. Paleontological
>Journal Volume 28, Number 2: 101-120.
>
>Mikhailov, K. E., 1997. Fossil and Recent eggshell in Amniotic
>Vertebrates: Fine structure, comparative morphology and Classification.
>Special Papers in Paleontology, Number 56: 1-79.
>
>These should answer your questions.
>
>Tracy