[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Spinosaurus - the authors respond
This may be an ignorant question but: is it not true that semiaquatic animals
are more likely, in the scheme of things, to fossilize than purely terrestrial
ones - and if so, why is Spinosaurus so little known? Might it have been
genuinely rare in life?
1825 Shady Creek Court
Canada L5L 3W2
> On Sep 21, 2014, at 4:55 AM, "Thomas R. Holtz, Jr." <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, September 20, 2014 4:09 pm, dale mcinnes wrote:
>> How much spinosaur material is actually known from L. Cret. sediments in
>> during/ after Campanian ? Is there enough time towards termination of
> the Mesozoic
>> to give rise to more highly derived spinosaurs ?
> Very, very little is known of continental African faunas above the
> Cenomanian. Some new stuff is coming out soon, but not yet published.
> But no spinosaurine material yet. And in fact none of the rare
> post-Cenomanian spinosaurid material anywhere is complete enough to say
> anything about how derived the critters were relative to Spinosaurus.
> Face it: if we knew about such things, they would already be news!!
> And of course there was enough time. Keep in mind, whales go from fully
> terrestrial animals to Basilosaurus in 15 million years or so.
> Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
> Email: email@example.com 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