[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: ceratopsid series, etc.
I mentioned that Jack Horner at one time described (verbally) a series
of ceratopsian fossils as exactly that - a specific series showing different
ages of the animals and through different evolutionary stages as well.
I personally think that Jack described these fossils as such to tweak
Peter Dodson about _Avaceratops_ (Jack also said that _Avaceratops_ belonged
to the series and that they were all _Brachyceratops_ - which is what Peter
initially thought _Avaceratops_ was).
Jack certainly did not publish these theories, and eventually two of the
group of fossils were named _Einiosaurus_ and _Achelousaurus_ (Probably
more of the specimens were assigned to one or the other species).
Good luck with the flu-like virus - it really had knocked me on my tail
(and I still have some problems based on it - severe coughing especially).
The Zinc lozenges really do help.
From: Pat Grant (Library: Serials Catalog <PATG@vax2.concordia.ca>
To: firstname.lastname@example.org <email@example.com>
Date: Monday, February 09, 1998 3:11 AM
Subject: ceratopsid series, etc.
A few days ago, somebody asked about a "series" of centrosaurine
species, identified by another list member as Einiosaurus and
Achelosaurus. Since nobody explained onlist (and I lost the info.
about the enquiry), I will rashly point out that Einiosaurus and
Achelosaurus were found in different strata not that (geographically)
far apart, so speculation is that Einio may have evolved into Achelo;
Achelo may even have evolved into Pachyrhinosaurus. We have, of
course, no way of verifying (or falsifying) this intriguing theory, so
less-rash folks will refrain from dragging it into the discussion.
Also, regarding the phylogeny of dino-list members: I can't figure out
where paleoartists fit in. Personally fitting in somewhere near the
Wannabeoids (in terms of art--I hope I'm a bit closer to the
Gottaclueoids overall), still there seems to be a marked behavioural
difference, at least on this list, between those professionals who
usually restrict themselves to textual publications (like our St. Tom
of the Infinite Patience) and at least some of those who are more at
home in visual communications (and seem more inclined to go ballistic
when confined to text, as on this list). Perhaps this impression is
merely skewed due to the regrettably small sample size of this taxon?
Heading out to look for zinc lozenges, since the only time I get
reckless enough to de-lurk is when I'm addled by flu viruses