[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: A couple of questions
At 18.47 20/10/2002 +0800, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
WHOAH... So does that mean that all the other specimens of "Oviraptor
philoceratops" (including the brooding specimen, the Romeo & Juliet
specimens featured on National Geographic etc etc) are all really
Citipati??? So that means that a lot of paleo artists & sculptors have
been restoring Citipati instead of Oviraptor!!! Then in that case how
would the 'real' O. philoceratops have looked like???
No, Romeo and Juliet are two of the three skeleton assigned to Khaan, while
the brooding specimen is one of the fossil assigned to Citipati osmolskae.
To this species are assigned the holotype (a skeleton in perfect state of
conservation, but at the moment only the skull is described) and an embryo
included in one egg of Big Mama. To Citipati sp. is assigned the "classic"
skull and skeleton (GI 100/42) that was assigned, for years, to Oviraptor
Note that I've just received the volume on the Proceedengs of the 5th
Symposium of the Society of avian paleontology and evolution: in the paper
"Oviraptorosaurs compared to birds" by Lu, Dong, Azuma, Barsbold and Tomida
there is a description of a new specimen, PC 100/2112 (here labelled
Ingenia sp.), that is almost identical to Citipati, particularly to GI
100/42. When the paper was written, the Citipati description was not out
again, but for me this is another Citipati sp.