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

Re: Incisivosaurus gauthieri images

You wrote:

> This is not surprising, as the featured cladogram and text place
> _Incisivosaurus_ -- the most basal oviraptorosaur -- as being more closely
> related to _Caudipteryx_ than to any other well preserved theropod.  The
> restoration seems like a reasonable tentative guess to me, but, given the
> absence of postcrania, this is only a guess, and future discoveries could
> prove it to be way off.  Given the cranial differences between the two
> taxa, major discrepancies between their postcrania wouldn't be unexpected.
Has anyone noticed the similarities in the dentition between this new genus
and that of Protoarchaeopteryx with the LARGE premaxillary teeth?
Caudipteryx has large premax. teeth, which can be viewed as a possible basal
condition in the Oviraptorosaurs, but not to the extent seen in
Protoarchaeopteryx, so perhaps it is better to base the postcranium on the
latter genus. Are there actually differences between the two genera that
might or might not prove they are synonymous (for the record, I mean
Incisivosaurus and Protoarchaeopteryx)? One is based on a relatively good
skeleton with a poor skull and the other on a complete skull and poor
postcranial material... Just a thought.

Rutger Jansma