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

why isn't Tethyshadros insularis just a juvenile?

Although the various specimens "lack evidence of osteological immaturity 
suggestive of a juvenile condition" (in the paleobiogeography section), I don't 
see where this is addressed elsewhere in the paper. 

There is no histological analysis of the bones to attempt ID of an EFS, nor is 
the condition of neural arch fusion stated (although this is not entirely 
reliable as a maturity indicator anyway). Sacral count seems low for a 
hadrosauroid (consistent with juve status), and the skull seems unfused. Hence 
a non-juvenile status cannot be supported from the evidence presented. 

A "mixture of derived... and primitive characters" is often a good indication 
of non-maturity in dinosaurs (as Padian said in his ?2007 or 2008? SVP talk). 
If indeed the specimen is a dwarf, then this may explain juvenile characters, 
but a dwarf adult should show an EFS and the paper does not address this.  

Maybe this is addressed in the follow-up description of the postcrania.

Denver Fowler

----- Original Message ----
From: "heby@libero.it" <heby@libero.it>
To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Sent: Mon, 14 December, 2009 5:17:32
Subject: R: The new dinosaur Tethyshadros insularis

Here's some info:



Lukas Panzarin