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

RE: tooth question



At 11:14 PM 1/25/99 -0800, Dwight Stewart wrote:

>       From:   Phillip Bigelow [SMTP:bh162@scn.org]

>       _Nanotyrannus lancensis_ is a still-younger juvenile _T. rex_.
>Nothing
>       officially published yet, so it's sort of up in the air. 

Thomas Carr & Rick Essner's work is still in press, but I hope that it will
be published soon.

>       @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
>
>       I'd love to get Dr. Holtz's take on Nanotyrannus!  :-)

Funny you should mention that, because that is a concern in one of the five
papers that have topmost code ultra priority right now. (%-S)

As I said at SVP 97, Nanotyrannus and Maleevosaurus come out (based on
character analyses) as the serial outgroups to T. rex + T. bataar.  So, the
characters that unite the big forms COULD be phylogenetically significant,
or they COULD simply be the adult features lacking in Nano. & Maleevo.

Regardless of its position, it is *CLEARLY* juvenile: the bone texture is
very 'ropey', characteristic of animals still in the fast growing stages of
life.  The question then becomes: is it a juvie T. rex, or a juvie something
new.

>What were
>the results of the CAT scans (MRIs... whatever) that Dr. Bakker had
>performed
>       on the Nanotyrannus skull?  I recall the report of this being done,
>but not the results.

Never published.  New scans are planned.

>Is Robert Bakker still convinced this is a distinct
>species of Tyrannosaur, as opposed to a juvenile Tyrannosaurus rex?

Yes.

Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Vertebrate Paleontologist     Webpage: http://www.geol.umd.edu
Dept. of Geology              Email:tholtz@geol.umd.edu
University of Maryland        Phone:301-405-4084
College Park, MD  20742       Fax:  301-314-9661