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

re: ptero embryo ID

DP wrote: The big difference is the embryo does not have the rotated
scapulae that
characterizes Haopterus and all higher ornithocheirids. It also has
larger feet and a shorter tibia, as in ancestral scaphognathids.>

 JH wrote: You'd expect a lot of anatomical development and change
between embryo and

>>>>>  Not if they were able to fly shortly after hatching (sensu
Unwin). And not if they were days or minutes from hatching as this one
apparently was.

BTW, the determination of the original ptero embryo as an anurognathid
was, to my knowledge, predicated on the hypothesis that it was an

>>>>>> Not at all. It had all the characteristics of an anurognathid of
any ontogenic age. The fact that it was, in the egg, as large as the
majority of known anurognathids (presumeably adults), and twice as big
as Tischlinger's/Bennett's "baby" suggested that it was an adult ?? but
there is one giant anurognathid, "Dimorphodon" weintraubi and this one
could be kin.

Determining familial or generic status of emrbyos requires more concise
that that which was presented. For example, one of the reasons the
second egg
was referred to *Pterodaustro* was because of it's provenance and
proximity to
many other pterodaustros and apparent nest structure.

>>>>>> At it had all of the characteristics of Pterodaustro. Look
closely. It's a match.

David Peters
St. Louis