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

Re: Toro babies?



The only specimens in Hunt & Lehman (2008) relevant to the particular 
toro-trike question raised here are the listed cranial elements, and none of 
these are from what might be called "toro babies".

All I can say is, wait for the paper(s)!

 ----------------------------------
Denver Fowler
df9465@yahoo.co.uk
http://www.denverfowler.com
-----------------------------------



----- Original Message ----
From: "Thomas R. Holtz, Jr." <tholtz@umd.edu>
To: GSP1954@aol.com
Cc: dinosaur@usc.edu; vrtpaleo@usc.edu
Sent: Wednesday, 28 October, 2009 18:24:20
Subject: Re: Toro babies?

GSP1954@aol.com wrote:
> Have heard a rumor that at SVP its was announced that juvenile Torosaurus
> have been found showing that the genus is not an adult Triceratops, would
> much appreciate someone letting me know what's up on this (I know about
> the
> abstract etc favoring Toro being mature Triceratops).


The rumor is mixed up. The specimens in question were NOT addressed at
SVP. However, I brought them up on the Dinosaur Mailing List following a
discussion of the Torosaurus-Triceratops situation. The paper and abstract
in question is:

Hunt, R..K. & T.H. Lehman. 2008. Attributes of the Ceratopsian Dinosaur
Torosaurus, and New Material from the Javelina Formation (Maastrichtian) of
Texas. Journal of Paleontology 82(6):1127-1138. doi: 10.1666/06-107.1

Abstract

A bone bed in the middle part of the Javelina Formation (Maastrichtian) in
Texas yielded parts of about 37 identifiable ceratopsid dinosaur bones,
mostly appendicular and limb girdle elements belonging to one juvenile and
two adult individuals of Torosaurus cf. utahensis. The bone bed is a lag
assemblage comprising large immobile parts of the skeletons accumulated in
an abandoned stream channel. In general form and proportions the postcranial
bones are similar to those in Pentaceratops sternbergi and are not as robust
as those in Torosaurus latus or Triceratops horridus. A few cranial elements
are preserved, including parts of a parietal, squamosal, maxilla, and two
dentaries. The 
omparable to that of a more
nearly complete specimen of Torosaurus cf. utahensis collected nearby at
about the same stratigraphic level. The bone bed material provides a basis
for the first skeletal reconstruction of this enigmatic horned dinosaur.
Most characters used in diagnoses of T. utahensis and T. latus are
inadequate. Only the raised bar along the squamosal/parietal suture, present
in T. latus; and the midline epiparietal, absent in T. latus, may
discriminate the two species.


-- 
Thomas R.. Holtz, Jr.
Email: tholtz@umd.edu    Phone: 301-405-4084
Office: Centreville 1216
Senior Lecturer, Vertebrate Paleontology
Dept. of Geology, University of Maryland
http://www.geol.umd.edu/~tholtz/
Fax: 301-314-9661

Faculty Director, Earth, Life & Time Program, College Park Scholars
http://www.geol.umd.edu/~jmerck/eltsite/
Faculty Director, Science & Global Change Program, College Park Scholars
http://www.geol.umd.edu/sgc
Fax: 301-314-9843

Mailing Address:    Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
            Department of Geology
            Building 237, Room 1117
            University of Maryland
            College Park, MD 20742 USA