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

Re: Rapetosaurus stuff

But a faunal interchange between North and South America is necessary to
explain the marsupials, ungulates, hadrosaurs, avisaurs. Alamosaurs is
closer to South titanosaurs or to Asian titanosaurs?
If titanosaurs lived in Asia, where did they come from? How a Gondwanan
group could reach Asia? Via Africa?Via some South Asian block coming from
Australasia? If the Angaran side of Asiamerican fauna had a kind of
Gondwanan element, this could be the same way Gondwanan dromeosaurs reach
Asia, since it being found a lot of interesting dromeosaurs in Argentina,
many of them close to the birds .
Taxa with Asian and North American relatives usually are very closer (cf.
tyrannosaurs, hadrosaurs, dromeosaurs, multituberculates). If Alamosaurus
was of Asian origin, why there has not been found yet an Asian Alamosaurus?
Or even a Canadian Alamosaurus? The "bridge" between South and North was
probably a sort of pre-Antillan filter, used by island-hoppers, like the
Antillan Pleistocenic fauna of ground sloths, hystrichomorphs and monkeys.

Joao SL
----- Original Message -----
From: rbi <rbi@dana.ucc.nau.edu>
To: <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 10:38 AM
Subject: RE: Rapetosaurus stuff

> With Nemegtosaurus now looking firmly entrenched in the Titanosauria, does
> this open up the possibility that Alamosaurus is of Asian origin instead
> one from South America?  In the Rapetosaurus paper's phylogenetic
> Alamosaurus is more derived than Nemegtosaurus, but less derived than
> of the South American titanosaurs.  Also, we have much better evidence of
> faunal interchange between Asia and N. America than we do with S. America
> the Cretaceous.  Any thoughts?
> Regards,
> Randall Irmis