[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Bakker's Brontosaurus and Late Cretaceous populations
Against the flow, heroic efforts have been made to reinstate
and I don't know what to make of _Eobrontosaurus_.
Hasn't someone just let it disappear in *Camarasaurus*...?
At the other end of the spectrum, there are genera that look rather
'lumpy', and perhaps (in some cases, definitely) deserve to split up into
more than one genus: _Plateosaurus_, _Alamosaurus_, _Iguanodon_,
_Probactrosaurus_, _Psittacosaurus_, _Euoplocephalus_, &c. This has
already happened with _Chilantaisaurus_, _Dilophosaurus_ and
Do you mean *"Dilophosaurus" sinensis* has been renamed??? ~:-|
The process of breaking up European _Plateosaurus_ has already begun: one
study spun off _Gresslyosaurus_ as a valid genus, another resurrected
_Efraasia_, another erected _Ruehleia_, and more may be on the way.
*Efraasia* is not even a prosauropod, so that's not a case of
(The process is not entirely one-way: _Sellosaurus_ was sunk into
_Plateosaurus_, although as a separate species from the type.)
About as the same time as said type was reseparated into 2 species (*P.
engelhardti* and the much more common *P. longiceps*).
Work is being done to break up others
among the aforementioned 'lumpy' genera, and some new names have already
been coined - but these have yet to be published.
Would be really great to have a phylogeny of *Psittacosaurus*. Even the
attempt to synonymise the species into four is so old (1993?) that 2 or 3
species have been described since.