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

Re: No Cretaceous placental mammals?

----- Original Message -----
From: "K and T Dykes" <ktdykes@arcor.de>
To: <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
Cc: <dinosaur@usc.edu>

(Accordingly, I got two copies: one in HTML, and one in plain text without line breaks. That means that many list members probably got the "message truncated" error. So I reproduce the entire e-mail:)

Me: <<Going totally off-track, I've heard there should be a Lower Cretaceous trity (-lodontid) cynodont appearing some time in the not too distant future.>>

DM: <<A third one?>>

Unless I've missed something, this'll be the second to make it into print, with the first being a single tooth that received some kind of mention or other in: Hammer, W.R. 1996. Evolutionary and biogeographic implications of an Antarctic Jurassic dinosaur fauna. AAPG Bulletin 80: 1827.

The tip-off is from a very good source. Somewhat less reliably, I think this is probably one dug up several years ago. In that way, despite being one specimen, it could appear to be both a second and a third.

No, I meant the third Early Cretaceous trity, after *Xenocretosuchus* and the over 100 unnamed teeth from Japan.