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

Re: Horner and Goodwin on Triceratops

I don't really see a lot of good ways to classify the various ceratop(s?)ids, myself. On one hand you have those who would make up new species for every minor horn/frill variation, and on the other, there are those who would dump everything into one species and cite "individual variation" to explain away the differences. I'd mainly look for characteristics unrelated to ornamentation to base species on, as ornamentation is highly variable within a species.

I seem to recall horridus and prorsus were mainly separated on the basis of the nasal horn being anteriorly curved in prorsus, posteriorly curved in horridus, similar to the situation of apertus/nasicornus in Centrosaurus (at least, if the AMNH's Centrosaurus display can be trusted, as they still have Tyrannosaurus labeled as a carnosaur in their cladogram, which, needless to say, is wrong). Could this mean Centrosaurus species ought to be reevaluated as well?