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

RE: Dilophosaurus

> I was wondering, what is up with 'DIlophosaurus sinensis' 
> that obviously is different? Is it be a new genus or what? 

It is not Dilophosaurus. Whether it is a new genus or a very old one remains to 
be published... :-) (There is such a study in the

> And are coelophysids still ceratosaurs or something else? 

Something else: basal to the dilophosaur + (ceratosaur + tetanurine) clade. 
Probably. Although some studies do find a good
old-fashioned Coelophysoide sensu me.

> Because removing them from ceratosauria leaves the ceratosaur 
> appearing out of no where in the Mid jurassic 

It now appears that the coelophysoids of old are a paraphyletic series with 
regards to Averostra (Ceratosauria + Tetanurae). So some
of the old-style "coelophysoids" probably actually contain the ancestors of 
ceratosaurs and tetanurines.

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
Fax: 301-314-9661               

Faculty Director, Science & Global Change Program, College Park Scholars
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