[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
NEW GENUS UK BASAL ?DINOSAUR
This just in, dunno if anyone else has reported it yet (haven't had time
to check the backlog)...
New basal British ?dinosaur _Agnosphitys cromhallensis_.
Fraser, N. C., Padian, K., Walkden, G. M. & Davis, A. L. M. 2002.
Basal dinosauriform remains from Britain and the diagnosis of the
Dinosauria. _Palaeontology_ 45, 79-95.
_Agnosphitys_ is from the Upper Triassic Cromhall Quarry of Avon,
England, best known for sphenosuchian _Terrestrisuchus_ (which
Fraser et al. regard as distinct from _Saltoposuchus_ - they also report
the presence of two morphs of _Terrestrisuchus_: Fraser in prep.).
Holotype of _Agnosphitys_ is an ilium but referred material includes
maxilla, astragalus, humerus and tooth. Acetabulum semi-perforate,
two sacrals, good brevis fossa, acute anteromedial corner to astragalus.
As for affinities, Fraser et al provide a small cladogram in which
_Agnosphitys_ is more derived than _Herrerasaurus_ and both are
outgroups to Dinosauria - they discuss Sereno et al and Novas etc
work on the position of _Eoraptor_ and herrerasaurids relative to
other dinosaurs but obviously do not include comments on more
recent work by Max Langer and colleagues, much of which has major
implications for polarity and distribution of the characters discussed
here (the _Saturnalia_ paper obviously came out after this was
submitted). From a quick read, it seems that their main take is that
_Eoraptor_ and herrerasaurids are not dinosaurs, let alone saurischians.
One small problemette: two spellings of the new genus are provided in
the paper and they are used interchangeably. In the systematic
palaeontology section, the new genus is given as _Agnosphitys_
whereas - immediately below - the new species within this genus is
given as _Agnostiphys [sic] cromhallensis_!! Whoops. Because
_Agnosphitys_ is first in the paper, I recommend this is the one we use
(unless the authors intended otherwise). Etymology seems a bit vague:
'Greek, unknown or uncertain, with reference to the position of the
new form relative ot the Dinosauria'.
And in same issue....
Schwarz, D. 2002. A new species of _Goniopholis_ from the Upper
Jurassic of Portugal. _Palaeontology_ 45, 185-208.
"Cambridge University Press should be
ashamed of abandoning academic standards
and should be worried about whether competent
scientists will now publish with them."
-- P. R. Ehrlich (2002) reviewing Lomborg's
_The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the State of the World_
PALAEOBIOLOGY RESEARCH GROUP
School of Earth & Environmental Sciences
UNIVERSITY OF PORTSMOUTH
Burnaby Road email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Portsmouth UK tel (mobile): 0776 1372651
P01 3QL tel (office): 023 92846045