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

Re: Giraffatitan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Williams" <twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com>
To: <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 6:20 PM
Subject: Re: Giraffatitan

> The skull in question (USNM 5730), designated "_Brachiosaurus_" sp. is
> certainly different from that of _B. brancai_; but whether it warrants
> generic separation from the Tendaguru brachiosaur (_brancai_) is a
> subjective decision.  Further, we cannot be 100% sure that USNM 5730
> to _Brachiosaurus altithorax_ since, although the skull certainly comes
> a brachiosaurid (or at least a basal titanosauriform), it was not
> with _B. altithorax_ skeletal elements AFAIK, and there may be more than
> brachiosaur in the Morrison.  Carpenter and Tidwell (1998) deliberately
> off referring USNM 5730 to _altithorax_.

Before thinking if USNM 5730 could be assigned to the genus Brachiosaurus or
not, my principal question is, at this time there's a list of diagnostic
cranial character for the genus Brachiosaurus? If I'm right both, before
Riggs (1904) and after Paul (1988) diagnosed Brachiosaurus only with
postcranial characters. I don't known about Janensch (1935) because I don't
have the paper, but..... I think that when we establish a list of
diagnostic-cranial-character we could establish if USNM 5730 is a
Brachiosaurus skull or not.

Alessandro Marisa
Via A. grandi n.18
email: amaris@tin.it
or: iguanodontia@yahoo.it