[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
At 03:27 AM 7/2/2002, Tracy L. Ford wrote:
Well the thing is Bob Sullivan synonymized Ornithomimus edmontonensis with
Ornithomimus antiquus 1997
Sullivan, R. M., 1997, A Juvenile Ornithomimus antiquus (Dinosauria:
Thropoda: Ornithomimosauria), from the Upper Cretaceous Kirtland Formation
(De-Na-Zin Member), San Juan Basin, New Mexico: New Mexico Geological
Society Guidebook, 48th Field Conference, Mesozoic Geology and
Paleontology of the Four Corners Region, 1997, p. 249-253.
This seems a bit extreme, does it not? I wish I had the paper to work from
(I only have Glut's synopsis of Sullivan's point of view). It seems a bit
of a stretch to me to synonymize all of the species of Ornithomimus due to
one tibial characteristic. If anything, it should be generically
significant, which would leave Ornithomimus antiquus as O. sp., due to the
fact that it consists of only a partial hind limb. I tend towards being a
lumper, but this is a bit more than even I can handle.
Not only that, but O. antiquus being the only species from the
mid-Campanian to the late Maastrichtian and living in places as far apart
as New Mexico, Alberta, and the American East Coast also seems a bit
much. Why does O. sedens get to be a valid species, if it is only a sacrum
and ilial arches (I hope I didn't invent a term)? I realize that time and
distance are not supposed to be the only characteristics separating
species, but many of these specimens are fragmentary.
I was under the impression that someone was working on sorting out the
Ornithomimidae. Is this true, or am I nuts (yes, I realize both can be
true, but I am talking about a specific case)? There are several good
specimens now available, complete with some un crushed skulls. I had a
look at the specimen in the picture a few years ago at the Tyrrell. What a
beauty. I wish they had also had the Struthiomimus skull on display,
pictures of it are amazing.
Here's a throw away, is it possible that the type of O. velox is a juvenile
tyrannosaur? It has a (relatively) short metatarsus. Brown(?) thought
that the juvenile Albertosaurus specimens in the bone bed were
ornithomimids. Man, would that ever mess up ornithomimid phylogeny. Would
that kill the name Ornithomimus?
Darryl Jones <email@example.com>
For information on tyrannosaurids and
cool activities and information for kids,
visit my webpage at: