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

Re: A few questions



>Hi! I'm new to the list, and I've got a few questions to ask:
>
Welcome
>
>2) There has been speculation that Lurdusaurus has a body form that is
>convergent with the ground sloths. Any good reconstructions to illustrate
>this?
>
Search around the web and especially the archives, maybe you will find
something there. From what I know that description fits the animal quite
well, but sported a humongous thumb spike on it's "hand."
>
>3) What is the current taxonomic status of the giant caenagnathid? Is it
>Chirostenotes pergracilis, a new species of Chirostenotes or a new genus?
>
The specimen is referrable to Chironestes, but that is as far as I can go.
>
>6) Are there any good restorations of the many species of Monoclonius? And
>what is Monoclonius exactly? A valid centrosaurine genus related to
>Centrosaurus, a genus closer to Einiosaurus, or is it merely a mixture of
>assorted ceratopsid bones?
>
The different specimens or species are illustrated in Glut's first edition
of the Dinosaur Dictionary (if you want scans?), but only figured are the
specimens known from cranial material. The remaining species mainly consist
of teeth and a partial postcranial skeleton IIRC. The Ceratopsia website
(www.ceratopsia.net) has a good comparison between the holotype frill of
Monoclonius and a frill of Centrosaurus. Main difference is the lack of
"tongue-shaped" projections in the Monoclonius specimen. "Monoclonius"
sphenocerus is a nasal horn and premaxilla which probably belongs to
Styracosaurus.
>
>7) Is there any news on the carcharodontosaurine that is supposedly larger
>than Giganotosaurus?
>
Wait for the paper
>
>8) Just what is Sandy? Is it a Pachycephalosaurus, a Stygimoloch, or a new
>genus?
>
There was a discussion about this in the archives, better search there, but
the horns on the squamosals sure look a lot like the ones of Stygimoloch
>

The other post by Dino Rampage on sauropods)
>
1) The skull illustration on  DINODATA
shows a skull that could be diplodocoid, but yet at the same time, it could
also be titanosaurian. Is this the most recent reconstuction of the skull?
And if A. wichmannianus is indeed diplodocoid, does it show affinities to
dicraeosaurids, rebbachisaurids or diplodocids?
>
The only known skull elements include a partial lower jaw (which is probable
referrable to a Rebbachisaurid) and a braincase (which is of unknown
affinitie, but is possible Titanosaurid), so the remainder is based
speculation. Huene, in part famous for lumping disassociated in one species
and seperating skeletons into multiple species, has parts of different
specimens mixed up. He reconstructed Antarctosaurus, based on the
incorrectly referred lower jaw with the tiny teeth, as a Diplodocid, with no
direct evidence for this.
>
2) The DINODATA site also has a skull illustration of Alamosaurus
sanjuanensis. However, it looks extremely diplodocid to me. Most
reconstructions I have seen of Alamosaurus have given it a Camarasaur-like
head. Since when have cranial elements been found? And are there any good
restorations or skeletal reconstructions available on the Internet? And is
it closely related to Saltasaurus? Would it be okay to give it dermal
armour?

>
No skull material is known for this genus, except maybe a few teeth. The
drawing there is also to Diplodocid like in appearance ans should have been
more similair to that of Brachiosaurus, just your average Titanosaur-skull.
Reconstructions are hard to find on any Titanosaur, Rapetosaurus is just a
rarity concerning this group but this due to the publication enthousiasm of
American Paleontologists.
Of course it is okay to give it body armor, so far the only known genus
which seems to be lacking any is Epachthosaurus, but the way it is located
on the body...
>
5) I?ve seen some reconstructions of Omeisaurus, Euhelopus and even
Mamenchisaurus with a small tail club. Is there any direct evidence of this
or is this simply an artifact of having a Shunosaurus tail club being found
near an Omeisaurus tail?
>
Tailclubs have been found for Omeisaurus and Shunosaurus, the tailclub on
Mamenchisaurus is not actually preserved, but since it could be close to
Omeisaurus, it had the honour of receiving one too. Euhelopus is accordingly
to Sereno a related to the Titanosaurs and this seems probable enough for
me. Therefore the tailclub must be lacking and perhaps some body armor is
warranted on the animal when restoring it.
>
6) I?ve been hearing about the apparently unique dentition of Nigersaurus,
as well as the supposed sail on Rebbachisaurus garasbae. Any good
restorations to refer to and give me some idea of how they may have looked
like in the flesh?
>
They looked weird :)
>
8) I?ve seen many place Rapetosaurus close to Nemegtosaurus. Has any dermal
armour been discovered in association with Rapetosaurus?

>
(ex) listmember Mark Hallet restored it with body armor in National
Geographic magazine last august IIRC, but if this is based on actual
evidence... Not entirely sure about that. It seems logical enough given the
reaction at the Alamosaurus segment of this post.
>
Rutger Jansma