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

Re: Niger expedition's over

Calzola wrote-
Would  anbody out there, after looking at the general proportions of this bone,  be able to make some kind of speculation regarding its owner?( well, i think that if they let us see it, it's possible to espress personal opinions, right?)
Unfortunately, the maxilla is incomplete dorsally and photographed in such a way that many details (presence of promaxillary fenestra, etc.) are undiscernable.  The maxilla is of roughly megalosaur proportions (which is to say it resembles just about any large theropod) and appears to have at least thirteen teeth.  If it weren't for the fact they specifically said it was not from Carchardontosaurus, I would assign it to that animal.  The difference is presumedly in the tooth morphology, as Carcharodontosaurus has distinctive ridged teeth that aren't as recurved as many theropods.  The main problem in identifying this species is the homogeniety of large theropod maxillae.  It could very well be from an abelisaurid or Deltadromeus (which are in the area).  It is not from a spinosaurid, as these have much longer and lower maxillae that are very convex anteroventrally.  That's why these types of things need to be described, preparation and personal examination is vital to understanding them correctly.
Mickey Mortimer