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


Darren Naish wrote, in response to "Pete Buchholz wrote of _Avimimus

>Once again I will mention the possibility that the _Avimimus_ premax 
>does not go with the cranium of the genus,
        I personally know that Pete is aware of this fact. However, until
such time as somebody decides, we're kind of up in the air, aren't we?

>but may instead be from a hadrosaur. 
        I can't quite recall exactly what the avi premax looks like (and
I've only seen drawings anyway), but I was under the impression that it has
the aspect of a very laterally compressed snout, i.e. premaxillary symphysis
almost parallel to the lateral plane of the bone, suggesting a sharply
angled rostrum. I know of no hadrosaur with such a sharp premaxillary angle.
Am I incorrect in my interpretation?

>This may or may not be correct. But Pete's contention that a 
>crennulated premax would be suggestive of oviraptorosaurian 
>affinities are a little suspect aren't they?
        Isn't it really just suggestive of close relationships with anything
with a crenulated premax (_Caudipteryx_, hadrosaurs, etc. etc.)? I know
Peter has a bunch of other material on the oviraptorsaur question, of which
the premax ammounts to corroborative evidence.

>A vaguelly crennulated  premax has been figured for _Oviraptor
mongoliensis_, >but I'm not convinced these represent proper crennulations
(which should be 
        Surgeon General's Warning: Hypothesizing homology a priori of
phylogenetic analysis may result in circular reasoning.
    Jonathan R. Wagner, Dept. of Geosciences, TTU, Lubbock, TX 79409-1053
                    "...To fight legends." - Kosh Naranek