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

Re: Laelaps and Brontosauria (was Re: Resending)

Mike Taylor wrote:

>> However who use's Brontosauria in the literature?
> Absolutely nobody.

... except Bakker, of course.  See for example Bakker, R. T.  1994.
The Bite of the Bronto.  Earth 3 (6): 26-35.  This refers to
"brontosaurs" throughout.

But doesn't he just use "brontosaur" in an informal sense, without using the formal term "Brontosauria"?

(It also include a skull reconstruction of... *tah-dah* _Haplocanthosaurus_. Excuse me.)

Wow, I'm impressed! :-)

Jay <sappororaptor@yahoo.com> wrote:

The relationship between Sinraptor + Yangchuanosaurus is quite stable/strong and so warrants a name.

According to Rauhut (and he isn't the only one), _Sinraptor_ and _Yangchuanosaurus_ are so similar that they are actually the same genus, so this taxon would take the name _Yangchuanosaurus_ (with _Sinraptor_ as a subjective junior synonym). Thus, a Sinraptoridae defined as _Sinraptor_ + _Yangchuanosaurus_ would effectively be monotypic.

It can't be helped that Metriacanthosaurus's relationship was subsequently revealed. It may not
even be an sinraptorid. Is it an Allosauroid?

AFAIK, _Metriacanthosaurus_ is difficult to pin down phylogenetically owing (in part) to the incompleteness of the material. Other theropods have been touted as possible "sinraptorids", such as _Siamotyrannus_ and _Marshosaurus_. I don't think it's advisable to anchor any suprageneric clade in the genus _Metriacanthosaurus_. Sinraptoridae could be defined as something like "theropods closer to _Sinraptor_ than to _Allosaurus_ or _Torvosaurus_".