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

RE: Megalosaurids



Tom Holtz wrote:
> 5.What other species of amniotes were present?

Other dinos in the quarry are _Iliosuchus incognitus_ and indeterminate
hypsilophodont-grade ornithopod.

A tyrannosauroid?

> 8.Is Megalosauridae a valid grouping?  If so, what supports it?

As the existence of _Megalosaurus_ as a valid group (of bones) is
questionable, I think you can see why the next step up is even more
tentative. I have a contribution forthcoming that does support a
grouping f _Meg._, _Torvo._, _Poekilo._, _Eustrep._, _Piatnitzky._, _Afrovenator_, and someone else (heh, heh, heh...), to the exclusion of all other theropods. One the other hand, if you do NOT consider the non-dentary _M. bucklandi_ material as belonging to a single taxon, the monophyly of Megalosauridae falls apart relative to other basal tetanurines. As for what supports it: wait for the paper... :-)

Will do.


> 9.Should Torvosaurus and Poekilopleuron be sunk into Megalosauridae?

See above.

Whoops, I mean to ask if they should be sunk into Megalosaurus.


=-=-=-=-=-= Nick Gardner AIM - CloudRaptor05 MSN - n_gardner637@hotmail.com


_________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com