[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Atlasaurus correction/update
On Sun, 21 Nov 99 16:55:34 +0000 email@example.com writes:
> From: Ben Creisler firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Atlasaurus correction/update
>I looked up an earlier very preliminary description
> published in 1981 (C.R. 292 (2): 243-246), which gives the
> following dimensions: sacrum 105x100cm; longest rib 220cm;
> scapula 165 cm; humerus 195 cm, radius 123 cm; tibia 126
> cm, femur 200 cm. The limb proportions in the 1999 article
> are humerus:femur ratio 0.99; ulna:tibia ratio 1.15.
The limb proportions sound suspiciously like those of "Cetiosaurus"
*mogrebiensis*, which is from the late Bathonian of Morocco. According
to *The Dinosauria*, "C." *mogrebiensis* has a humerus:femur ratio of
0.97 and a radius:humerus ratio of 0.62, while this information gives
*Atlasaurus* an h:f of 0:99 and a r:h of 0.63. Could this new taxon be
the same as "C." *mogrebiensis*, or alternately could the "Cetiosaurus"
information come from a skeleton that actually belongs to *Atlasaurus*
and not to "C." *mogrebiensis*? Or, could they be two similar but
distinct sauropods living in about the same area of the world at about
the same time, like *Barosaurus* and *Diplodocus*?
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.