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

Re: A couple of questions (Oviraptorids)

Dino Rampage (dino_rampage@hotmail.com) wrote:

<1) What's the difference between Citipati osmolskae & Oviraptor
philoceratops? Seriously, to me they both look identical. And while we're
at that, in what way does Khaan differ from Ingenia? Does anybody know
what Nomingia's head looked like? And is Rinchenia mongoliensis still
valid or is it now Oviraptor mongoliensis??>

  After Nick Pharris answered this, I felt only one thing should be added.
In the identification of *Ingenia* in the popular press or on websites:

  There is only a partial skull known for the holotype of *Ingenia*, and
this is the braincase only, giving us no idea if the animal had a *Khaan*
or *Citipati* or GI 100/42-like skull. It was also quite large-headed. On
websites, you will note numerous photos have been taken of skeletons with
either low fidelity casts, mock-up bones, or bad photography. None of
these are *Ingenia* and in fact the unusual pelvis and hand of *Ingenia*
have yet to surface in further specimens ... Khoboor in Mongolia is
notoriously bad place to work, and here is where the type is derived.
Similarly, material from the Barungoyot or Barun Goyot sediments (from
which is comes) are not as well preserved or associated as those of the
Djadokhta levels and equivalents. Bayan Mandahu is an example of a
Djadokhta-like sediment where some higher energy water channels occur and
this lends itself to the poorer preservation than in the Djadokhta type
level (Bayn Dzak or Bain Dzag) or Ukhaa Tolgod.

  Much caution must be taken in calling anything other than the type (GI
100/30A) as *Ingenia*. Most material appears to be referrable to other
taxa, and in fact some of the material catalogued under GI 100/30
apparently belongs to *Oviraptor mongoliensis* (pelvis, limbs, braincase
are all *Ingenia* however). Conversely, some regard only the hand as being
*Ingenia* based on the polychthonous assemblage (multiple associated
animals), and has the original figure to which *Ingenia* was described and
diagnosed in 1981. In 1983 and 1986, more material was figured by
Barsbold, and later he and the two Polish queens of paleo, Maryanska and
Osmólska, published more figures as *Ingenia* (1990, 1992, _The

  Warning complete.


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!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site