[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: From Oliver Rauhut - Re: Amygdalodon addendum
Oliver Rauhut wrote, forwarded by Tim Williams
<Wouldn´t think so. It doesn´t look like any dinosaur dermal armour I´ve
ever seen and would be awefully big for any of the sauropods represented
by the material of Amygdalodon. It kind of looks like part of a plate of a
large turtle, maybe with a rib attachment on the interior side, though
Marcelo de la Fuente could not identify it as any turtle element. Another
possibility might be part of a plesiosaur pectoral girdle (parts of the
section are marine), but again, Zulma Gasparini saw it and couldn´t think
of any plesiosaur bone that looks like that. The bone thus remains a
mystery and can only be referred to as vertebrata indet.>
Maybe not that far back, as it is unlikely a fish had such a large plate
of curved bone. However, would it be possibly a portion of iliac or othe
pelvic plate with curvature of "bowling" or "cupping" of the surface?
Adhered bone can be artefactual, and thus not naturally a part of the
element. It needn't be sauropodan either, but ankylosaurian, etc.
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.
"Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969)
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search - Find what you?re looking for faster