[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Deltadromeus classification clarification
Tommy Bradley wrote-
> Using the info gained from my recent quarry on Dryptosaurus, I have
updated my info to list it as a Coelurosaurian, and possible basal
> So now what I'd like to know is: "What's the deal with Deltadromeus?"
It's Bahariasaurus. :-)
> Someone (I can't remember who) responding to my Dryptosaurus missive said,
"It's an Abelisaur." Okay, but "Abeli-what?"
> Any of the other subdivisions?
> Or is this all merely speculative?
Well, traditionally Bahariasaurus is a basal coelurosaur. Sereno et al.'s
terrible analysis found this, as did Holtz's and Rauhut's good analyses.
However, some people believe it is more likely to be a ceratosaur. Carrano
listed it as a possible ceratosaur in their SVP 2002 abstract, which I think
is the only published reference for this hypothesis.
If it is a ceratosaur, it seems most similar to the gracile forms
(elaphrosaurs, noasaurs), but who knows. No one's looked into this yet, and
ceratosaur phylogeny is still sketchy (though Carrano et al.'s huge in prep
analysis should take care of that).
> PS: What's Paul Sereno's two cents on the reassignment of Deltadromeus?
At SVP 2002 he seemed open to it.