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

Re: Antarctosaurus



<Antarctosaurus von Huene, 1929
[...]
     Brontosauria > Sauropoda > Eusauropoda > Diplodocimorpha >
Dicraeosauridae?>

  I thought in (http://www.cmnh.org/dinoarch/2002Jun/msg00314.html) you
decided it was a junior synonym of Sauropodomorpha? At the time (1991),
Sauropodomorpha has already (Gauthier, for instance) been considered a
reference to the "Prosauropoda" + Sauropoda clade? Aside from the
polyphyly possibly present in "prosauropods" and the only true clade being
Plateosauria, which excludes sauropodomorphans like Saturnalia and
Thecodontosaurus (?), "Brontosauria" would be effective of the sauropods
and its first sistergroup, which may be the plateosaurids and
massospondylids together (Plateosauria?). So ... ?

  Based on postcrania, and given similarities of *Nigersaurus* to
*Rebbachisaurus garasbae* and possible synonymy with *R. tamesnensis*, and
given *A. wichmannianus*'s dentary in resemblance to this, they would be
rebbachisaurids, not dicraeosaurids, basal to diplodocoids. The cranium is
titanosaurian, and the postcrania of the remaining species titanosaurs,
not basal macronarian. Could be wrong....

  Cheers,

=====
Jaime A. Headden

  Little steps are often the hardest to take.  We are too used to making leaps 
in the face of adversity, that a simple skip is so hard to do.  We should all 
learn to walk soft, walk small, see the world around us rather than zoom by it.

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/