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

Re: New Chinese coelophysid (unnamed) photos



 Where's the fun in that?

Dan

On 10/11/2010 8:09 AM, William Parker wrote:
Seems we'll simply have to (to quote Tom Holtz)  "wait for the paper".

On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Jaime Headden<qi_leong@hotmail.com>  wrote:
I agree with Mickey that the skull appears to be preserved to the tip, due to 
the mandible's preservation (or that they are equally truncated, then separated 
in post mortem position). However, the preservation of the material (and 
possibly the incomplete preparation) makes assessing the morphology of the 
snout difficult; I cannot even see a distinct margin for the external naris, 
much less the shape of the premaxilla.

Cheers,

Jaime A. Headden
The Bite Stuff (site v2)
http://qilong.wordpress.com/

"Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969)


"Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a
different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race
has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or
his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion 
Backs)





----------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2010 15:59:27 -0700
From: mickey_mortimer111@msn.com
To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: RE: New Chinese coelophysid (unnamed) photos


Augusto Haro wrote-

It seems to me that the premaxilla is not preserved...
I considered that possibility, but it seems odd that the mandible would also 
have its anterior end unpreserved, especially since the mandible is 
perpendicular to the skull.  Could be true though, and in that case I wouldn't 
have an issue with the specimen being coelophysoid.

Mickey Mortimer