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

Re: Kritosaurus?



Jon Wagner wrote:

<<...and call it Kritosaurus navajovius, a very old
and well-established name with a long history and much
 coverage in the literature.>

and Dinogeorge wrote:

<Go argue the point with Spencer Lucas; he'll give you
something to chew on. He's one of the authors of the
Anasazisaurus/Naashoibitosaurus paper, and it is
essentially their argument that I presented.>

  Based largely on variation of the nasal bones
relative to the rest of the skull, in both taxa. But
as I recall similar arguments (variation in shape and
form of the frontals and nasals) were made for
*Corythosaurus* and *Lambeosaurus,* resulting in an
enormity of specific (and in a few cases, generic)
identities for specimens. *N. ostromI* does appear to
have a narrow occiput in dorsal aspect, with
squamosals flaring laterally, and *A. horneri* with
_very_ large supraorbital fenestrae, but quantifying
these (and I suspect a few others) would be a task for
disproving Hunt and Lucas' hypothesis of multiple
gryposaur genera.

=====
Jaime "James" A. Headden

  Dinosaurs are horrible, terrible creatures! Even the
  fluffy ones, the snuggle-up-at-night-with ones. You think
  they're fun and sweet, but watch out for that stray tail
  spike! Down, gaston, down, boy! No, not on top of Momma!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com/