[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]On Behalf Of
> Toby White
> At 110My, wouldn't this be the wrong age (early Albian) for a
> Titanosaur in N.
> America? Yet its too recent to be a Brachiosaur. Very odd.
It is most assuredly not too recent for a brachiosaur, as at least SOME of
the _Astrodon_/_Pleurocoelus_ material (contemporaneous with
"Sauroposeidon") seems to be brachiosaurid. Furthermore, there is now
evidence of titanosaurs in North America by the mid-Cretaceous.
Of course, there is the whole question now of what other than _Brachiosaurus
altithorax_ and _B. (sometimes _Giraffatitan_) brancai_ IS a brachiosaurid.
It may be that "Brachiosauridae" in the old more inclusive sense includes a
paraphyletic grade of titanosaur outgroups.
Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Department of Geology Director, Earth, Life & Time Program
University of Maryland College Park Scholars
College Park, MD 20742
Phone: 301-405-4084 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Fax (Geol): 301-314-9661 Fax (CPS-ELT): 301-405-0796