[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
> I think Norman suggested *Iguanodon atherfieldensis* is a
> feminine variation of *I. bernissartensis.*
Wasn't it Nopsca who suggested this? Norman's studies have
supported the view that they are good species but (in popular texts at
least) he has mentioned the >possibility< that they are sexual morphs.
Anyway, no one believes this idea nowadays (and there is already
considerable variation within these two species - I've looked at stacks
of _Iguandon_ material: we have more than we know what to do with).
For the record, I'm not convinced by Smith's conclusions on
_Allosaurus_. As some of you will be aware, in several recent
presentations he has actually argued *for* the recognition of various
new _Allosaurus_ taxa.
"People have the power to redeem the work of fools"
[this quote not in any way relevant to the text of this email]
PALAEOBIOLOGY RESEARCH GROUP
School of Earth, Environmental & Physical Sciences
UNIVERSITY OF PORTSMOUTH
Burnaby Road email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Portsmouth UK tel: 01703 446718