[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Astrodont Diagnosis & Referral
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 22:23:42
Jaime A. Headden wrote:
> However, if you want a codified reference, that's
>fine, too. I'm sure I can enjoin Tom and the collections
>managers of the museums which house Antlers, Cloverly, Arundel,
>and Trinity SS (like the OMNH, YPM, etc.) to compare materials
>and do a simple "Yes, there is comparative and quite similar
>material available here to suggest that star-shaped teeth are
>prevalent among a host of different sauropod types" statement,
>and work from there. As my study involves non-mammalian
>tooth-types, this is on my to-do list, or hopefully someone will
>beat me to the chase and all I need do is cite them.
That would be great.
> If you dissagree, Steve, please tell Tom, Ray, or myself why
>*Astrodon* is diagnostic that it needs to be studied to reduce
>it to a nomen dubium when it is one on its face?
There is a high probability that Astrodon may not be diagnostic. But, I stick
by what I already said: we at least need some sort of study to be sure. I'm
not disagreeing with you or Tom that Astrodon is necessarily different. It may
be diagnostic, but likely isn't. The assumption is that it is not. However,
we can't just say that without any proof (other than looking at the outsides of
the teeth, which is NOT what Astrodon was diagnosed on by Johnson and Leidy).
Dino Land Paleontology
P.S.: I just posted a review of the new Roy Chapman Andrews book up on my site.
Check it out at http://www.geocities.com/stegob/dragonhunter.html
Get 250 color business cards for FREE!