[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
On 11/03/99 15:52:06 Tom Holtz writes:
>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.
Yes, brachiosaurs have been found in the early-mid Cretaceous of Utah. Some
SVP attendees saw
two new brachiosaurs from the Cedar Mountain Formation, at DMNH two weeks ago.
Tom raises a valid point concerning the blurring of the lines defining
titanosaurs. In researching our latest specimens, I have encountered great
attempting to nail down sufficiently robust characters to support proper
identification of the
of new taxa coming to light in the EK. But eventually, we'll get a handle on
just what kind of
critters we are dealing with. So, with all of the ongoing sauropod research in
the Early - Mid
Cretaceous, the next few years will be VERY exciting!
Denver Museum of Natural History
2001 Colorado Blvd.
Denver, CO 80205
>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.