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

Re: Incisivosaurus gauthieri images

Rutger Jansma (fam.jansma@worldonline.nl) wrote:

<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.>

  Though the idea is intriguing, the premaxillary teeth are quite
effectively different, though the first crowns are largest. There are
reasons to consider *Incisivosaurus* Xu, Cheng, Wang & Chang
(2002)distinct from *Protarchaeopteryx* Ji & Ji (1997):
*Protarcharopteryx* has serrated crowns and a dentigerous symphysis of the
mandible, and a rostrocaudally/mesiodistally long premaxillary corpus. The
mesial premaxillary crowns are successively smaller distally in the
series, whereas in the new oviraptorosaur they are all uniform in length
except for the very first. You cannot determine wear facets in the teeth,
but their details are very clear and it is certain that the dentition
complex is quite unique for *Incisivosaurus*.


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!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!