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

Re: Stegosaurus species



Tim Williams writes,

>There could be as many as three genera represented from among the Morrison 
>material now called "Stegosaurus".  _S. armatus_ (?including _S. 
>ungulatus_), _S. stenops_, and _S. longispinus_ may each represent a 
>separate genus.  It's been suggested that _S. longispinus_ might be a N. 
>American species of _Kentrosaurus_.  Bakker put _stenops_ in the genus 
>_Diracodon_, but this genus name shouldn't be used.

On the subject of species classification, do we need to have a certain number 
of specimens uncovered until we have a good idea of where to draw the line 
between each species?  What I have noticed is that when dinosaurs were first 
discovered centuries ago, there were dozens of new species described.  Over the 
past half-century, many of these "separate" species have been redefined and 
sunk together under one or two names.

Comments?


Rob Meyerson

***
"History repeats itself.  it has to.  No one listens the first time around."
        -Woody Allen