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

RE: Megalosaurids & Dinosaur Genera List update #187

Mickey Mortimer wrote:

> Xuanhanosaurus is a non-coelurosaur tetanurine (Rauhut, 2000).

Might even be the same as _Monolophosaurus_.  The only overlapping remains
are vertebrae - and _X._ needs to be re-described.  (This has been done by
Oliver Rauhut; look forward to the paper.)

> Stokesosaurus probably is (Holtz, 2001).  

Unfortunately, the assembled material for _Stokesosaurus_ - pelvic bones
(including the type), part of an upper jaw, braincase and tail bones - may
not belong to one taxon.  Although all the bones come from the Morrison
Formation, none of the material was found associated AFAIK.  The ilium (sort
of) and braincase (definitely) look tyrannosaurid-like, but the rectangular
premaxilla superficially resembles that of _Ceratosaurus_ (which has only
three teeth per premaxilla, however).  There seems no justification for
referring the caudals to _Stokesosaurus_.

Nevertheless, the braincase (basicranium; UUVP 2455) does document the
presence of tyrannosauroids in the Late Jurassic.  Whether or not it belongs
to _Stokesosaurus_ is another question.

Dinogeorge wrote:

> How odd that a number of my other nomenclatural acts in the first 
> printing of MM #2 have  mainly been ignored, e.g., correcting 
> Avaceratops lammersorum, 

Perhaps not so odd, since Peter Dodson himself (who named and described
_Avaceratops) prefers the original and etymologically imperfect _lammersi_
rather than _lammersorum_.  As such, it represents a completely different
case to the _Ricardoestesia_/_Richardoestesia_ fiasco.



Timothy J. Williams, Ph.D. 

USDA-ARS Researcher 
Agronomy Hall 
Iowa State University 
Ames IA 50014 

Phone: 515 294 9233 
Fax:   515 294 9359