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

Re: Archie skull pneumatics?

Rutger Jansma wrote-

> Nope,
> the entire facial region on the skull is missing, so it probably had a
> set of teeth in both it's upper and lower jaws, this in contrary to
> Epidendrosaurus IIRC, who only had bony bumps on the lower jaws.

Though the figure would give the impression of teeth in the Epidendrosaurus
holotype being merely "bony bumps", one must remember the figure is very
small and undetailed.  The paper refers to "at least twelve teeth in the
mandible", and it is coded as having serrationless teeth with reduced
mediolateral constriction.  So even if there are teeth preserved in
Scansoriopteryx's holotype, this would not be a morphological difference
between the specimens.

Nick Gardner wrote-

> Ehm, if only 15 are preserved and then two more are estimated to be
> then how is Jaime wrong as that would be 17.

Because Jaime said 17 were preserved, and about 21 would be expected-
"The Solnhofen specimen preserves only 17 caudals, but the series is
incomplete, lacking the last few vertebrae; according to Elzanowski, there
would only have been about 3-4 vertebrae missing, based on comparisons to
other specimens, suggesting the specimen had an original caudal count of

Mickey Mortimer