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

Re: Original Titanosaurus type specimen vertebra rediscovered in India (news story)



Ben Creisler <bcreisler@gmail.com> wrote:


> I did a bit more checking and this is apparently not a fresh news item
> . See the following pdf:
>
>
> http://www.portal.gsi.gov.in/gsiImages/information/rediscovery-firstdinosaur.pdf


It's great news the _Titanosaurus indicus_ type has been found.
Personally, I think there is hope that _T. indicus_ is a valid genus
and species of titanosaur, rather than a _nomen dubium_.


The article does appear a bit confused on some points, however.
Firstly, although only one caudal vertebra is figured as the
"rediscovered holotype", the article mentions "caudal vertebrae"
(i.e., plural).  This makes sense, because the type series for _T.
indicus_ includes TWO caudal vertebrae - I guess this would constitute
2193 and 2194 (the specimen numbers mentioned in the article).  (The
type series also originally included a femur; but this was unearthed
in a different horizon to the caudals, and was later excluded from the
_T. indicus_ type).


Secondly, the article states "The specimen represents a left [sic]
caudal vertebrae...".   ;-)


Another minor correction to the PDF:

"During its sojourn from 1828 to 1877, it went
through many hands including Dr. G.G. Spilsbury, James Princeps, Dr.
Thomas Oldham and H.
Falconer, before it could formally become a holotype for _T. indicus_
in 1877. It is the first
titanosaur dinosaur described in the world and hence a critical
specimen for the global
research on evolutionary history of titanosaurs."


The British titanosaur _Macrurosaurus semnus_ was actually described
the year *before* _Titanosaurus indicus_ (Seeley, 1876).  When he
named and described _T. indicus_, Lydekker (1877) was aware of _M.
semnus_; but he doubted that it was a dinosaur, even though Seeley had
described it as such.






Cheers

Tim