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

RE: Horns and Beaks: New taxa and descriptions

I can't say about Heterosaurus, though i'm guessing its remains may not be 
diagnostic. Vectisaurus
is a junior synonynm of I. atherfieldensis, albeit, subjective. I don't know if 
its juvenile
status or incompleteness (few skull elements are known) are enough to push 
aside the name
Vectisaurus in favour of Mantellisaurus. Another potential problem with the 
Vectisaurus material
is that it comprised of Iguanodon as well as Valdosaurus(and possibly 
Yaverlandia) elements.
However, Norman already did a fine job of seperating the material, and 
establishing synonymy.

I can't really say i'm in favour of generic seperation of I. atherfieldensis & 
I. bernissartensis,
though i haven't read Paul's paper - yet. Obviously, i'm waiting for the book 
to see what the
justification is, and the justification for rejecting previously named I. 


--- Michael Mortimer <mickey_mortimer111@msn.com> wrote:

> Andrew A. Farke wrote-
> >Paul, G. S. 2006. Turning the old into the new: a separate genus for the
> >gracile iguanodont from the Wealden of England; pp. 69-77 in K. Carpenter
> >(ed.), Horns and Beaks: Ceratopsian and Ornithopod Dinosaurs. Indiana
> >University Press, Bloomington.
> >
> >Iguanodon atherfieldensis is renamed Mantellisaurus atherfieldensis.
> Why isn't it Heterosaurus or Vectisaurus?  Both of these were synonyms of 
> Iguanodon atherfieldensis.
> Mickey Mortimer

Check out the New Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things 
done faster.