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

RE: Tetanurae

Mickey Mortimer wrote:

I'd say Dandakosaurus, "Saltriosaurus", "Walkersaurus", Cryolophosaurus and Magnosaurus.

"Walkersaurus" is _Megalosaurus hesperis_. A new genus might be warranted, given that _M. hesperis_ it is not referrable to _Megalosaurus_ sensu stricto. The species is taxonomically valid, but "Walkersaurus" is a nomen nudum.

There's also _Megalosaurus cambrensis_ (originally _Zanclodon cambrensis_), which was also given its own genus that is likewise a nomen nudum ("Newtonsaurus"). _M. cambrensis_ is a Late Triassic theropod, though I'm not sure if it's ceratosaur or tetanuran. Molnar (1990) and Galton (1998) referred this taxon to _Megalosaurus), but Rauhut and Hungerbuhler (2000) suggested ceratosaur (coelophysoid) affinities. Most recently, _Z. cambrensis_ was mentioned in Galton's (2005) paper on the Rhaetic Bone Bed, but he didn't really discuss its relationships (except to say that it resembles _M. hesperis_).

Personally, I'd prefer that these names ("Walkersaurus", "Newtonsaurus", etc) not be used at all, given that they were not validly named and only cause confusion. Somebody might mistake them for valid genera, for example. This is not Mickey's fault (who in fact emphasized their nomen nudum status by putting them in quotation marks), but the fault of the person who named them without following ICZN rules.



View Athlete?s Collections with Live Search http://sportmaps.live.com/index.html?source=hmemailtaglinenov06&FORM=MGAC01