[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
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 <email@example.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