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

Up-To Date Pubs? [was Re: ]

Tim "Holtztyrannus carpenterussellorum" wrote:

<It doesn't mean that the papers aren't good: a lot of
them are very useful and influential. However, going
to it for Charig & Milner's chapter on _Baryonyx_, for
instance, is at this point a wasted effort, as so much
more is known about spinosaurids.>

  But going to it for Currie et al.'s paper on Judith
R. teeth (and *Ricardoestesia*) is a good point, since
they make a fair, and moving, argument for the
validity of Judith R. taxa based on teeth, validating
*Troodon* over *Stenonychosaurus*, though on available
material, I'd take the latter over the former.

  However, Charig and Milner is useful as a critism of
Gauthier, 1986, though they're comments refer _only_
to the presented data, instead of modifying it to fit
a new taxon into the fold. That they recently recinded
their separation of Bary from Spino into -idae's
(1989; also, see Sereno et al., 1998) is a sigh of

Jaime "James" A. Headden

"Come the path that leads us to our fortune."

Qilong---is temporarily out of service.
Check back soon.
Do You Yahoo!?
Thousands of Stores.  Millions of Products.  All in one place.
Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com