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

Re: A trivial question

From: Ben Creisler

As for horridus, don't forgot Acanthopholis horridus Huxley, 1867.

Note that Latin *horridus* had a number of meanings: "rough, shaggy,
prickly, horrible (inspiring horror)" and used differently in each



Deinodon horridus Leidy is for the "horrible" nature of of the teeth
of a meat-eating dinosaur



Acanthopholis horridus Huxley is for its "prickly" or "bristly"
appearance with spines



Triceratops horridus Marsh (originally as Ceratops horridus) is for
the "rugose" appearance of the bones:

"The vertebrae, and the bones of the limbs and of the feet, are so
much like the corresponding parts of the typical Stegosaurus from the
Jurassic, that it would be difficult to separate the two when in
fragmentary condition, as are most of those from the later formation.
The latter forms, however, are of larger size, and nearly all the
bones have a peculiar rugosity, much less marked in the Jurassic
species. In the form here described, this feature is very conspicuous,
and marks almost every known part of the skeleton."



Just for fun, I might mention a living sowbug (isopod) from Africa
named for a dinosaur: Stegosauroniscus horridus Schmoelzer, 1974

Schmoelzer, K. (1974) Landisopoden aus Zentral - und Ostafrika
(Isopoda, Oniscoidea). Sitzungsberichte Osterreichische Akademie der
Wissenschaften 182(1-5):147-200.

Stegosauroniscus (Stegosaurus + oniscus) is named on page 178 and
illustrated on page 179.


On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Mickey Mortimer
<mickey_mortimer111@msn.com> wrote:
> Thomas Holtz wrote-
>> Plenty are used only once: horridus, ajax, etc.
> Not true, there's Deinodon horridus as well as the Triceratops horridus you 
> were probably thinking about.
> Mickey Mortimer