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

Re: Paleosaurus subcylindrodon

Markus Moser wrote-

> type material: 1 tooth, SMNS 52456
> locality: Feuerbacher Haide, Stuttgart; Schilfsandstein, Mittelkeuper


> > Also, does anyone know why Galton (1984) considered this a
> > herrerasaurid?
> Galton (1984: Stuttg. Beitr. Naturk. 106: 11) wrote:
> 'This tooth has a tapering, slightly recurved form with very fine
> serrations set perpendicular to the cutting edge so it is probably from
> a carnivorous archosaur; it is certainly not from a prosauropod.'
> ... so there is no mention of herrerasaurids. Where is that derived
> from?

>From George Olshevsky's post-
Says "This species may be a herrerasaurian dinosaur (cf. Galton, 1984)."
It sounded like a tooth taxon, and last I checked, herrerasaurid teeth
weren't diagnostic to family level.  Perhaps George will explain where his
reference came from.  In any case, it's going back to Dinosauria? indet. in
my list.

Mickey Mortimer