[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
COELOPHYSOIDS & CARCHARODONTOSAURS
I recently said that coelophysoids do not have a fibular crest on the
tibia, and that this might therefore be a shared derived character of
Neoceratosauria + Tetanurae. This does not seem to be correct.
Padian, in his redescription of the type material for _Coelophysis_,
figures and describes a fibular crest. I know that this material
probably does not belong to the same taxon as the GRT, but it is
still a coelophysoid so far as I know. I do not have Welles' (1984)
on _Dilophosaurus_ to hand, but the diagrams in Rowe and Gauthier
(1990) of the dilophosaur tibiae do have a ridge that appears to be a
Gauthier (1986) used fibular crest as a theropodan synapomorphy, but
outside of Tetanurae he only said that it was present in
_Liliensternus_ and _Procompsognathus_. In Ostrom (1981), the
_Procompsognathus_ tibiae are such a mess it's hard to make sense of
them, and a fibular crest is not evident. I've not seen Huene's 1934
paper on _Liliensternus_.
Therefore, presence of fibular crest is apparently common to
coelophysoids, neoceratosaurs and tetanurans.
CARCHARODONTOSAURIDS AS ABELISAURS
Coria's suggestion that carcharodontosaurids are abelisaurs is not
just published in Currie and Padian (1997) - it also deserves mention
in Sampson et al. (1998): the _Majungatholus_ paper. Coria's
characters are all based on cranial ornaments and the fact that the
postorbital invades the orbit as a rostral flange. This is seen
convergently in tyrannosaurids, and in fact I think all of these
characters are prone to homoplasy and are outweighed by the
characters uniting Allosauroidea.
The new _Geology Today_ has an article by Lingham-Soliare on
predation in tyrannosaurs. Nice photo on the cover of some tarbosaur
"Never trust a tidy scientist"