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

RE: New theropod material from Cretaceous of Brazil



Two points.  First, I have no issue with non-literal titles when there is some 
sort of joke, metaphor, etc. involved.  If you really think "First Brazilian 
carcharodontosaurid and other new theropod dinosaur fossils from the 
Campanian–Maastrichtian Presidente Prudente Formation, São Paulo State, 
southeastern Brazil" is such a title, I don't think many will agree with you.  
Sounds like a straightforward factual title to me.  If you think titles should 
be allowed to "entice" by lying about the primacy of their finds, I again think 
you're in the minority.

Second, as for the SVP abstract, that was merely the FIRST published 
carcharodontosaurid from Brazil.  Why did you assume it was the only one until 
now?  There are others, and the new paper seems to know about them as it says 
"Previous theropod records from the Bauru Basin comprise Abelisauridae and 
Tetanurae and in São Paulo state these have been represented by only a right 
premaxilla of an abelisaurid and isolated abelisaurid and carcharodontosaurid 
teeth" in the abstract.  There's-

undescribed carcharodontosaurid (Medeiros and Schultz, 2002)
Cenomanian, Late Cretaceous
Alcantara Formation of the Itapecuru Group, Brazil
Material- teeth
Comments- Referred to Carcharodontosaurus sp. by Medeiros and  Schultz (2002), 
but this is unlikely given the location.
References- Medeiros and Schultz, 2002. The dinosaurian fauna of "Laje do 
Coringa", middle Cretaceous of northeastern Brazil. Arquivos do Museu 
  Nacional, Rio de Janeiro. 60(3), 155-162.
Castro, Bertini, Santucci and Medeiros, 2005. Fossils from the Coroata 
Locality, undifferentiated geological unity, Itapecuru Group, Lower/Middle 
Albian from  the Sao Luis-Grajau Basin, Maranhao State, North/Northeastern 
Brazil. In Kellner, Hentiques and Rodrigues (eds.). II  Congresso 
Latino-Americano de Paleontologia de Vertebrados, Rio De Janeiro Museu 
Nacional. Boletim de Resumos. 75-76.
Elais, Bertini and Medeiros, 2005. Review of the occurrences concerning 
isolated amniotes teeth, in the Cretaceous deposits from the Maranhao State. In 
Kellner, Hentiques and Rodrigues (eds.). II  Congresso 
Latino-Americano de Paleontologia de Vertebrados, Rio De Janeiro Museu 
Nacional. Boletim de Resumos. 99-100.

undescribed Carcharodontosauridae (Kellner and Campos, 1998)
Turonian-Santonian, Late Cretaceous
Adamantina Formation of the Bauru Group, Brazil
Material- (MMR/UFU-PV 005) tooth (Candeiro et al., 2006)
(UFRJ-DG 379-Rd) tooth (Candeiro et al., 2004)
References- Kellner and Campos, 1998. Review of Cretaceous theropods and 
sauropods from Brazil. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 8(3), 55A.
Silva and Kellner, 1999. Novos dentes de Theropoda do Cretaceo continental do 
  Brasil. Paleontologia em Destaque, Boletim Informativo da Sociedade 
Brasileira 
  de Paleontologia. 14(26). 

  Candeiro, Abranches, Abrantes, Avilla, Martins, Moreira, Torres and 
Bergqvist, 
  2004. Dinosaurs remains from western São Paulo state, Brazil (Bauru Basin, 
  Adamantina Formation, Upper Cretaceous). Journal of South American Earth 
Sciences. 
  18, 1-10.

  Candeiro, Martinelli, Avilla and Rich, 2006. Tetrapods from the Upper 
Cretaceous 
  (Turonian-Maastrichtian) Bauru Group of Brazil: a reappraisal. Cretaceous 
Research. 
  27(6), 923–946.

  Candeiro, Santos, Rich, Marinho and Oliveira, 2006. Vertebrate fossils from 
  the Adamantina Formation (Late Cretaceous), Prata paleontological district, 
  Minas Gerais State, Brazil. Geobios. 39, 319-327.

undescribed Carcharodontosauridae (Candeiro, Martinelli, Avilla and Rich, 2006)
Late Maastrichtian, Late Cretaceous
Marilia Formation of the Bauru Group, Brazil
Material- (CPP 124, 127, 129a, 152, 156, 197, 199, 200, 208, 216, 241, 
  375/1, 376, 447-449, 474, 475) eighteen teeth
Reference- Candeiro, Martinelli, Avilla and Rich, 2006. Tetrapods from 
  the Upper Cretaceous (Turonian-Maastrichtian) Bauru Group of Brazil: a 
reappraisal. 
  Cretaceous Research. 27(6), 923–946.

Mickey Mortimer

----------------------------------------
> From: qi_leong@hotmail.com
> To: david.marjanovic@gmx.at; dinosaur@usc.edu; mickey_mortimer11@@msn.com
> Subject: RE: New theropod material from Cretaceous of Brazil
> Date: Fri, 7  Jul 012  0::9::5  -600<
>
>
> My referrence to poetry was, I think, quite relevant. I've read more than 
> just a few titles of papers consisting of jokes, quotations, and 
> side-references without clarification. The abstract often has far more 
> information, but when you are hitting //  or more of your abstract's length 
> to qualify the title's use of some nouns, one must begin questioning whether 
> you should leave that stuff in the abstract, and try for something more artsy 
> in the title. One can also be rhetorical, use sentence fragments, hanging 
> participles, etc., in order to create a title whose purpose is to entice, 
> rather than inform -- that is the abstract's job. If I find myself puzzled at 
> something in the title, then I read the abstract. If the abstract doesn't 
> inform, I read the poster's discussion, or attend the talk, or talk to the 
> author(s). Then, if it gets published, I read the paper.
>
> All of this, of course, is merely reinforcing my opinion that abstracts from 
> SVP (or frankly any conference proceedings) shouldn't be cited. Ever.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jaime A. Headden
> The Bite Stuff (site v))
> http://qilong.wordpress.com/
>
> "Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (969))
>
>
> "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: Fri, 7  Jul 012  5::8::2  +200<
> > From: david.marjanovic@gmx.at
> > To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> > Subject: RE: New theropod material from Cretaceous of Brazil
> >
> > > It's not just the grammar, but the pointlessness of stating a Brazilian
> > > carcharodontosaurid was the first one found from a formation in
> > > Brazil. But with your statement in mind, perhaps it's just a case of
> > > English not being the authors' first language as opposed to
> > > an attempt to artificially increase the importance of their finding.
> > >
> > > Mickey Mortimer
> >
> > No, that can't be it.
> >
> > And comparisons to poetry are obviously irrelevant, Jaime. Titles of 
> > scientific articles should be, and are expected to be, as bluntly clear as 
> > possible.
> >
> > However, I don't think the authors or the reviewers should be expected to 
> > know every potentially relevant SVP meeting abstract, especially if it 
> > hasn't resulted in a publication in so many years. Maybe the very fact that 
> > it has never led to a publication means it was actually an error?
>