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

Re: Austrocheirus isasii - new Late Cretaceous abelisauroid



Brad McFeeters wrote:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*         ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED---            *
*     This post contains a forbidden message format       *
*  (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting)  *
*    This Mail List at USC.EDU only accepts PLAIN TEXT    *
* If your postings display this message your mail program *
* is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting  *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Or rather:

> The evidence provided here suggests that the strong reduction of the foreli=
> mb recorded in derived abelisaurids is not directly correlated with their i=
> ncreased body-size=2C but it seems to be an evolutionary event exclusive to=
> this lineage within Ceratosauria."
>=20

So is _Limusaurus_ no longer classified as a ceratosaur=2C or does its fore=
limb not qualify as "strongly reduced"?


*Limusaurus* was probably published while *Australocheirus* was in press or in review.

Of course, by being small and nonetheless having reduced forelimbs, it supports the same point that forelimb reduction and increased body size aren't perfectly correlated among ceratosaurs.