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

RE: Nanningosaurus (was Re: Planet of the New Papers)



Tim Williams wrote-

(1) WRT your tree, it shows _Gyposaurus_ and _Aralosaurus_ as consecutive outgroups. This implies that traditional Hadrosaurinae is paraphyletic. I'm not sure of the current definitions of Hadrosaurinae or Lambeosaurinae, although Sereno's (1998) stem-based definitions use _Saurolophus_ and _Parasaurolophus_ as mutually exclusive specifiers. (Incidentally, TaxonSearch revises these definitions, with the intention of including the name-giving genera as additional specifiers; but the exact definitions are addled with regard to content.)

(2) What happens when _Pararhabdodon_ is included?

As Nick is slow to respond...

I'm not sure about Pararhabdodon, but Aralosaurus was recently reidentified as a lambeosaurine (Godefroit et al., 2004), so Nick's tree doesn't imply a paraphyletic Hadrosaurinae.

Godefroit, P., Alifanov, V., and Bolotsky, Y. (2004). A re-appraisal of Aralosaurus tuberiferus (Dinosauria, Hadrosauridae) from the Late Cretaceous of Kazakhstan. Bulletin de l`Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Sciences de la Terre 74 (Supplement): 139-154.

Mickey Mortimer