[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Dalianraptor - a composite?
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Dalianraptor - a composite?
- From: Tim Williams <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 13:38:13 +1000
- In-reply-to: <5B0CB82814484A259861027FC32F59A4@children>
- References: <CA+nnY_G8Jv0StE8qOvQSE9gKFYP4ZtPada9-Q=qCa1yvi1FGbA@mail.gmail.com> <2DF18F7ED620428C82F8432EFE3BACDD@children>
- Reply-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Sender: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu
Thomas <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Does this mean that somewhere out there there is a specimen of a
> > small, non-avian theropod with its arms hacked off?
> Uhh, no, I was thinking of Archaeoraptor, which was a big scandal back in
Yes, I was thinking of "Archaeoraptor" too. This was assembled from
broken pieces of different specimens. Rowe et al. (2001; Nature 410:
539-540) is a nice review.
So if (and I stress *if*) _Dalianraptor_ is a composite as well, and
assembled from most of a _Jeholornis_ specimen plus the forelimbs of a
non-avian theropod, then at least one specimen was presumably broken
up in order to fashion this composite. If the forelimbs don't belong
to the same animal as the rest of _Dalianraptor_, I'm curious from
what animal they actually came from.
I'm choosing my words carefully here; this issue is still playing out,
and I'm reluctant to use words like fake and forgery until we have all
the facts on the table.