[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Procheneosaurus (was Re: Two open letters from Storrs Olson (LONG))
In a message dated 11/11/99 3:07:04 PM EST, email@example.com
<< I don't think this would happen, for two reasons:
1) As with centrosaurines and chasmosaurines, the diagnostic characters of
lambeosaurines are probably ontogeny-dependent and only manifest themselves
with maturity. _Procheneosaurus praeceps_ may be a juvenile _L. lambei_,
but this this will be hard to prove. Like _Monoclonius crassus_ and
_Brachyceratops montanensis_, names based on juvenile lambeosaurine material
are probably best treated as nomina dubia.
(2) Any attempt to sink _L_ into _P_ would be met with some degree of
consternation from the palaeontological community. I'm sure the ICZN would
be petitioned to have a name as well-loved as _Lambeosaurus_ preserved and
_Procheneosaurus_ suppressed a la _Coelophysis_. >>
I certainly agree. But the possibility does exist.