[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Lagosuchus (was RE: PDF-request: Original description of Lagosuchus and/or Marasuchus)
Jaime Headden <email@example.com> wrote:
> It was the argument of Sereno and Arcucci that
> *Lagosuchus chanarensis* lacked apomorphies which would
> allow any other species/specimen to be attributed to
> *Lagosuchus*, prompting the move. This argument has been
> followed, but not tested, in print since it's conception.
As mentioned, Jaime meant to say _Lagosuchus talampayensis_ here (_L.
talampayensis_ being the type species for _Lagosuchus_). But I agree that we
shouldn't give up on _Lagosuchus_.
Sereno and Arcucci (1994) regarded _Lagosuchus_ as a nomen dubium, because the
holotype (UPLR 09) is a fragmentary (but largely articulated) postcranium that
However, it is possible that _Lagosuchus_ can be diagnosed by a unique
combination of characters. The _Lagosuchus_ holotype (UPLR 09) can certainly
be distinguished from _Marasuchus_, especially in the shape of the scapula.
(This assumes that the referred forelimb material indeed belongs to the
holotype; but this seems highly likely based on its size, morphology, and
preserved position relative to the rest of the skeleton; see Sereno and
Arcucci, 1994 Fig. 1).
So maybe all is not lost for _Lagosuchus_. Although it appears to have no
unique characters, I'd like to see if it can be diagnosed based on a unique
*combination* of characters.