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

Re: Kritosaurus?



George wrote:
>Weishampel and Horner (authors of the 
>chapter) refer to the species as "Kritosaurus" incurvimanus (generic name in 
>quotes) and list it as "unnamed gryposaur" in their table of hadrosaur genera 
>and species.
        Really, an entry in a taxon list? This hardly qualifies as a
taxonomic statement of any importance, let alone a "discussion."
        If you'll note, those authors regard Kritosaurus navajovius as a
potential nomen dubium, thus "requiring" the reapportionment of Kritosaurus
species to other genera. Their retention of K. incurvimanus taxon as a
potentially valid species seems to me little more than taxonomic
conservatism in what was, after all, a review article, not a taxonomic treatise.
        On the other hand, author Horner (in 1993) definitively referred
this species to Gryposaurus, and again voiced the possibility (which he
chose conservatively not to support at that time) that it was congeneric
with G. notabilis. Author Weishampel has not since commented in print on
this species, although his cladistic study (Weishampel et al. 1993), which
coded hadrosaur genera, failed to code this species as a separate "potential
genus."
        This sounds like a fairly closed "discussion" to me.

>Likewise a specimen Horner referred to "Hadrosaurus" notabilis, 
>listed as another species of "unnamed gryposaur."
        That being the one he, in 1993, referred to K. navajovius.


>Note that Horner is a coauthor of this chapter.
        And author of the 1993 study.

>Suggest you spend some time reading the 
>hadrosaur literature (which is extensive) instead of publicly sniping at me.
        George, I shall not lose my public composure by playing into this
sort of pettiness, but rest assured that I am steeped in the hadrosaur
literature. If you care to match wits over your interpretations of
nomenclatural trivia, I must refuse the challenge. If you would like to
engage in a substantive discussion of the EVIDENCE regarding the
species-level taxonomy of the hadrosauridae, I would be amenable to it
(although, frankly, I don't really have the time). You are more than welcome
to await publication of my findings, although I imagine you will find them
dissatisfying; they take a sensible and reductive approach to hadrosaur
taxonomy... I do not necessarily plan to name new genera.

        Wagner

P.S. No, I haven't forgotten about our geology discussion, I simply do not
have the time. I have a family to visit with right now.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Jonathan R. Wagner, Dept. of Geosciences, TTU, Lubbock, TX 79409-1053
  "Why do I sense we've picked up another pathetic lifeform?" - Obi-Wan Kenobi