[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
> _Apatosaurus_ has been used almost exclusively for the genus for most of the
> twentieth century. It is not at all an "unused" name.
Something which bugs me is that the holotype of _Apatosaurus_ is
actually an immature specimen - in fact, the characters which Marsh
originally used to differentiate _Apatosaurus_ from _Brontosaurus_
(such as lower no. of sacral vertebrae) are juvenile characters.
I wonder if the holotype of _Apatosaurus ajax_ has enough characters
to diagnose the genus and/or the species, and distinguish it from _excelsus_.
If not, then _Apatosaurus_ is a nomen dubium, and _Brontosaurus_
would be resurrected.