Explore 35(3) Summer 2013 CULTURE CONNECT
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
MEET the DINOSAURS! WHAT’S in a NAME? a LOT If You Are a Dinosaur!
MEET THE DINOSAURS! WHAT’S IN A NAME? A LOT if you are a dinosaur! I will call you Dyoplosaurus! Most dinosaurs get their names from the ancient Greek and Latin languages. And I will call you Mojoceratops! And sometimes they are named after a defining feature on their body. Their names are made up of word parts that describe the dinosaur. The name must be sent to a special group of people called the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to be approved! Did You The word DINOSAUR comes from the Greek word meaning terrible lizard and was first said by Know? Sir Richard Owen in 1841. © 2013 Omaha’s Henry Doorly Zoo & Aquarium® | 3 SEE IF YOU CAN FIND OUT THE MEANING OF SOME OF OUR DINOSAUR’S NAMES. Dinosaur names are not just tough to pronounce, they often have meaning. Dinosaur Name MEANING of Dinosaur Name Carnotaurus (KAR-no-TORE-us) Means “flesh-eating bull” Spinosaurus (SPY-nuh-SORE-us) Dyoplosaurus (die-o-pluh-SOR-us) Amargasaurus (ah-MAR-guh-SORE-us) Omeisaurus (Oh-MY-ee-SORE-us) Pachycephalosaurus (pak-ee-SEF-uh-low-SORE-us) Tuojiangosaurus (toh-HWANG-uh-SORE-us) Yangchuanosaurus (Yang-chew-ON-uh-SORE-us) Quetzalcoatlus (KWET-zal-coe-AT-lus) Ouranosaurus (ooh-RAN-uh-SORE-us) Parasaurolophus (PAIR-uh-so-ROL-uh-PHUS) Kosmoceratops (KOZ-mo-SARA-tops) Mojoceratops (moe-joe-SEH-rah-tops) Triceratops (try-SER-uh-TOPS) Tyrannosaurus rex (tuh-RAN-uh-SORE-us) Find the answers by visiting the Resource Library at Carnotaurus A: www.OmahaZoo.com/Education. Search word: Dinosaurs 4 | © 2013 Omaha’s Henry Doorly Zoo & Aquarium® DINO DEFENSE All animals in the wild have to protect themselves. -
Late Jurassic Theropod Dinosaur Bones from the Langenberg Quarry
Late Jurassic theropod dinosaur bones from the Langenberg Quarry (Lower Saxony, Germany) provide evidence for several theropod lineages in the central European archipelago Serjoscha W. Evers1 and Oliver Wings2 1 Department of Geosciences, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland 2 Zentralmagazin Naturwissenschaftlicher Sammlungen, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany ABSTRACT Marine limestones and marls in the Langenberg Quarry provide unique insights into a Late Jurassic island ecosystem in central Europe. The beds yield a varied assemblage of terrestrial vertebrates including extremely rare bones of theropod from theropod dinosaurs, which we describe here for the first time. All of the theropod bones belong to relatively small individuals but represent a wide taxonomic range. The material comprises an allosauroid small pedal ungual and pedal phalanx, a ceratosaurian anterior chevron, a left fibula of a megalosauroid, and a distal caudal vertebra of a tetanuran. Additionally, a small pedal phalanx III-1 and the proximal part of a small right fibula can be assigned to indeterminate theropods. The ontogenetic stages of the material are currently unknown, although the assignment of some of the bones to juvenile individuals is plausible. The finds confirm the presence of several taxa of theropod dinosaurs in the archipelago and add to our growing understanding of theropod diversity and evolution during the Late Jurassic of Europe. Submitted 13 November 2019 Accepted 19 December 2019 Subjects Paleontology, -
At Carowinds
at Carowinds EDUCATOR’S GUIDE CLASSROOM LESSON PLANS & FIELD TRIP ACTIVITIES Table of Contents at Carowinds Introduction The Field Trip ................................... 2 The Educator’s Guide ....................... 3 Field Trip Activity .................................. 4 Lesson Plans Lesson 1: Form and Function ........... 6 Lesson 2: Dinosaur Detectives ....... 10 Lesson 3: Mesozoic Math .............. 14 Lesson 4: Fossil Stories.................. 22 Games & Puzzles Crossword Puzzles ......................... 29 Logic Puzzles ................................. 32 Word Searches ............................... 37 Answer Keys ...................................... 39 Additional Resources © 2012 Dinosaurs Unearthed Recommended Reading ................. 44 All rights reserved. Except for educational fair use, no portion of this guide may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any Dinosaur Data ................................ 45 means—electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other without Discovering Dinosaurs .................... 52 explicit prior permission from Dinosaurs Unearthed. Multiple copies may only be made by or for the teacher for class use. Glossary .............................................. 54 Content co-created by TurnKey Education, Inc. and Dinosaurs Unearthed, 2012 Standards www.turnkeyeducation.net www.dinosaursunearthed.com Curriculum Standards .................... 59 Introduction The Field Trip From the time of the first exhibition unveiled in 1854 at the Crystal -
Zootaxa, Type Specimens, Samples of Live Individuals and the Galapagos
Zootaxa 2201: 12–20 (2009) ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Editorial ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2009 · Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) Type specimens, samples of live individuals and the Galapagos Pink Land Iguana THOMAS M. DONEGAN 1 1 Fundación ProAves, 33 Blenheim Road, Caversham, Reading, RG4 7RT, UK [email protected] or [email protected] Abstract The nomenclatural implications of Gentile & Snell (2009)'s innovations in the designation of a type specimen - that is sampled and tagged but not killed - are discussed. The paper also responds to Nemésio (2009)'s criticism of Donegan (2008), where I argued that descriptions based on samples of live individuals are valid. I also discuss whether recent descriptions of such a nature involve a different degree of scientific rigour to other descriptions. Key words: Nomenclatural availability, vouchers, collecting, specimen, type specimen, sample, ethics, framework, Code, Commission, Conolophus marthae. Introduction In this issue of Zootaxa, Gentile & Snell (2009) describe a critically endangered new species of land iguana from the Gálapagos islands, named Conolophus marthae. Aside from being an important discovery, this description includes noteworthy innovations in the designation of a type specimen based on a live individual. In a recent exchange of papers in Zootaxa, the validity of descriptions based on a holotype which is not a full, dead specimen (such as this) have been discussed (Dubois & Nemésio 2007, Donegan 2008, Nemésio 2009). Dubois and Nemésio have expressed the viewpoint that descriptions based on live individuals are not valid nomenclatural acts. I have expressed the contrary view. Other recent descriptions based on holotypes which are not killed have relied solely upon photographs and, in some instances, samples taken from live individuals (see discussion in Donegan 2008). -
Note on the Sauropod and Theropod Dinosaurs from the Upper Cretaceous of Madagascar*
EXTRACT FROM THE BULLETIN DE LA SOCIÉTÉ GÉOLOGIQUE DE FRANCE 3rd series, volume XXIV, page 176, 1896. NOTE ON THE SAUROPOD AND THEROPOD DINOSAURS FROM THE UPPER CRETACEOUS OF MADAGASCAR* by Charles DEPÉRET. (PLATE VI). Translated by Matthew Carrano Department of Anatomical Sciences SUNY at Stony Brook, September 1999 The bones of large dinosaurian reptiles described in this work were brought to me by my good friend, Mr. Dr. Félix Salètes, primary physician for the Madagascar expedition, from the environs of Maevarana, where he was charged with installing a provisional hospital. This locality is situated on the right bank of the eastern arm of the Betsiboka, 46 kilometers south of Majunga, on the northwest coast of the island of Madagascar. Not having the time to occupy himself with paleontological studies, Dr. Salètes charged one of his auxiliary agents, Mr. Landillon, company sergeant-major of the marines, with researching the fossils in the environs of the Maevarana post. Thanks to the zeal and activity of Mr. Landillon, who was not afraid to gravely expose his health in these researches, I have been able to receive the precious bones of terrestrial reptiles that are the object of this note, along with an important series of fossil marine shells. I eagerly seize the opportunity here to thank Mr. Landillon for his important shipment and for the very precise geological data which he communicated to me concerning the environs of Maevarana, and of which I will now give a short sketch. 1st. Geology of Maevarana and placement of the localities. * Original reference: Depéret, C. -
Dinosaurs British Isles
DINOSAURS of the BRITISH ISLES Dean R. Lomax & Nobumichi Tamura Foreword by Dr Paul M. Barrett (Natural History Museum, London) Skeletal reconstructions by Scott Hartman, Jaime A. Headden & Gregory S. Paul Life and scene reconstructions by Nobumichi Tamura & James McKay CONTENTS Foreword by Dr Paul M. Barrett.............................................................................10 Foreword by the authors........................................................................................11 Acknowledgements................................................................................................12 Museum and institutional abbreviations...............................................................13 Introduction: An age-old interest..........................................................................16 What is a dinosaur?................................................................................................18 The question of birds and the ‘extinction’ of the dinosaurs..................................25 The age of dinosaurs..............................................................................................30 Taxonomy: The naming of species.......................................................................34 Dinosaur classification...........................................................................................37 Saurischian dinosaurs............................................................................................39 Theropoda............................................................................................................39 -
Cranial Anatomy of Allosaurus Jimmadseni, a New Species from the Lower Part of the Morrison Formation (Upper Jurassic) of Western North America
Cranial anatomy of Allosaurus jimmadseni, a new species from the lower part of the Morrison Formation (Upper Jurassic) of Western North America Daniel J. Chure1,2,* and Mark A. Loewen3,4,* 1 Dinosaur National Monument (retired), Jensen, UT, USA 2 Independent Researcher, Jensen, UT, USA 3 Natural History Museum of Utah, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA 4 Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA * These authors contributed equally to this work. ABSTRACT Allosaurus is one of the best known theropod dinosaurs from the Jurassic and a crucial taxon in phylogenetic analyses. On the basis of an in-depth, firsthand study of the bulk of Allosaurus specimens housed in North American institutions, we describe here a new theropod dinosaur from the Upper Jurassic Morrison Formation of Western North America, Allosaurus jimmadseni sp. nov., based upon a remarkably complete articulated skeleton and skull and a second specimen with an articulated skull and associated skeleton. The present study also assigns several other specimens to this new species, Allosaurus jimmadseni, which is characterized by a number of autapomorphies present on the dermal skull roof and additional characters present in the postcrania. In particular, whereas the ventral margin of the jugal of Allosaurus fragilis has pronounced sigmoidal convexity, the ventral margin is virtually straight in Allosaurus jimmadseni. The paired nasals of Allosaurus jimmadseni possess bilateral, blade-like crests along the lateral margin, forming a pronounced nasolacrimal crest that is absent in Allosaurus fragilis. Submitted 20 July 2018 Accepted 31 August 2019 Subjects Paleontology, Taxonomy Published 24 January 2020 Keywords Allosaurus, Allosaurus jimmadseni, Dinosaur, Theropod, Morrison Formation, Jurassic, Corresponding author Cranial anatomy Mark A. -
New Tyrannosaur from the Mid-Cretaceous of Uzbekistan Clarifies Evolution of Giant Body Sizes and Advanced Senses in Tyrant Dinosaurs
New tyrannosaur from the mid-Cretaceous of Uzbekistan clarifies evolution of giant body sizes and advanced senses in tyrant dinosaurs Stephen L. Brusattea,1, Alexander Averianovb,c, Hans-Dieter Suesd, Amy Muira, and Ian B. Butlera aSchool of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3FE, United Kingdom; bZoological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg 199034, Russia; cDepartment of Sedimentary Geology, Saint Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg 199178, Russia; and dDepartment of Paleobiology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20560 Edited by Neil H. Shubin, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, and approved January 29, 2016 (received for review January 5, 2016) Tyrannosaurids—the familiar group of carnivorous dinosaurs in- We here report the first diagnostic tyrannosauroid from the mid- cluding Tyrannosaurus and Albertosaurus—were the apex predators Cretaceous, a new species from the Turonian (ca. 90–92 million in continental ecosystems in Asia and North America during the years ago) Bissekty Formation of Uzbekistan. This formation has latest Cretaceous (ca. 80–66 million years ago). Their colossal sizes recently emerged as one of the most important records of mid- and keen senses are considered key to their evolutionary and eco- Cretaceous dinosaurs globally (9–11). Possible tyrannosauroid logical success, but little is known about how these features devel- specimens from the Bissekty Formation were reported more than oped as tyrannosaurids evolved from smaller basal tyrannosauroids a half century ago (12), and, more recently, several isolated fossils that first appeared in the fossil record in the Middle Jurassic (ca. 170 were assigned to the group (9, 13), but none of these has been million years ago). -
Body-Size Evolution in the Dinosauria
8 Body-Size Evolution in the Dinosauria Matthew T. Carrano Introduction The evolution of body size and its influence on organismal biology have received scientific attention since the earliest decades of evolutionary study (e.g., Cope, 1887, 1896; Thompson, 1917). Both paleontologists and neontologists have attempted to determine correlations between body size and numerous aspects of life history, with the ultimate goal of docu- menting both the predictive and causal connections involved (LaBarbera, 1986, 1989). These studies have generated an appreciation for the thor- oughgoing interrelationships between body size and nearly every sig- nificant facet of organismal biology, including metabolism (Lindstedt & Calder, 1981; Schmidt-Nielsen, 1984; McNab, 1989), population ecology (Damuth, 1981; Juanes, 1986; Gittleman & Purvis, 1998), locomotion (Mc- Mahon, 1975; Biewener, 1989; Alexander, 1996), and reproduction (Alex- ander, 1996). An enduring focus of these studies has been Cope’s Rule, the notion that body size tends to increase over time within lineages (Kurtén, 1953; Stanley, 1973; Polly, 1998). Such an observation has been made regarding many different clades but has been examined specifically in only a few (MacFadden, 1986; Arnold et al., 1995; Jablonski, 1996, 1997; Trammer & Kaim, 1997, 1999; Alroy, 1998). The discordant results of such analyses have underscored two points: (1) Cope’s Rule does not apply universally to all groups; and (2) even when present, size increases in different clades may reflect very different underlying processes. Thus, the question, “does Cope’s Rule exist?” is better parsed into two questions: “to which groups does Cope’s Rule apply?” and “what process is responsible for it in each?” Several recent works (McShea, 1994, 2000; Jablonski, 1997; Alroy, 1998, 2000a, 2000b) have begun to address these more specific questions, attempting to quantify patterns of body-size evolution in a phylogenetic (rather than strictly temporal) context, as well as developing methods for interpreting the resultant patterns. -
Describing Species
DESCRIBING SPECIES Practical Taxonomic Procedure for Biologists Judith E. Winston COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS NEW YORK Columbia University Press Publishers Since 1893 New York Chichester, West Sussex Copyright © 1999 Columbia University Press All rights reserved Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data © Winston, Judith E. Describing species : practical taxonomic procedure for biologists / Judith E. Winston, p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-231-06824-7 (alk. paper)—0-231-06825-5 (pbk.: alk. paper) 1. Biology—Classification. 2. Species. I. Title. QH83.W57 1999 570'.1'2—dc21 99-14019 Casebound editions of Columbia University Press books are printed on permanent and durable acid-free paper. Printed in the United States of America c 10 98765432 p 10 98765432 The Far Side by Gary Larson "I'm one of those species they describe as 'awkward on land." Gary Larson cartoon celebrates species description, an important and still unfinished aspect of taxonomy. THE FAR SIDE © 1988 FARWORKS, INC. Used by permission. All rights reserved. Universal Press Syndicate DESCRIBING SPECIES For my daughter, Eliza, who has grown up (andput up) with this book Contents List of Illustrations xiii List of Tables xvii Preface xix Part One: Introduction 1 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 3 Describing the Living World 3 Why Is Species Description Necessary? 4 How New Species Are Described 8 Scope and Organization of This Book 12 The Pleasures of Systematics 14 Sources CHAPTER 2. BIOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 19 Humans as Taxonomists 19 Biological Nomenclature 21 Folk Taxonomy 23 Binomial Nomenclature 25 Development of Codes of Nomenclature 26 The Current Codes of Nomenclature 50 Future of the Codes 36 Sources 39 Part Two: Recognizing Species 41 CHAPTER 3. -
Botanical Classification and Nomenclature an Introduction —
Botanical classification and nomenclature an introduction — Marc S.M. Sosef Jérôme Degreef Henry Engledow Pierre Meerts Botanical classification and nomenclature an introduction — Marc S.M. Sosef Jérôme Degreef Henry Engledow Pierre Meerts by Marc S.M. Sosef1, Jérôme Degreef1,2, Henry Engledow1 & Pierre Meerts3 1 Meise Botanic Garden, Nieuwelaan 38, B-1860 Meise, Belgium 2 Service Général de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche scientifique, Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles, Rue A. Lavallée 1, B-1080 Brussels, Belgium 3 Herbarium et bibliothèque de botanique africaine, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Av. F.D. Roosevelt 50, CP 265, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium Copyright © 2020 Meise Botanic Garden, Nieuwelaan 38, 1860 Meise, Belgium. Printed in Belgium by Gewadrupo, Arendonk. This publication is published and distributed in Open Access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. A PDF file of this publication can be ordered, free of charge (send an email to [email protected]), or downloaded from the webshop of Meise Botanic Garden at http://shopbotanicgarden.weezbe.com. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3706707 CIP Royal Library Albert I, Brussels Botanical classification and nomenclature, an introduction. Marc S.M. Sosef, Jérôme Degreef, Henry Engledow & Pierre Meerts - Meise, Meise Botanic Garden, 2020. - 72 p.; ill.; 22 x 15 cm. ISBN 9789492663207 Subject: Botany D/2020/0325/002 Content Introduction . 5 1. The history of classification . 9 1.1 Theophrastus to the Middle Ages . 11 1.2 Renaissance, Pre-Linnean period . 13 1.3 Linnaeus and the Linnaeans . -
The Origin and Evolution of the Dinosaur Infraorder Carnosauria*
PALEONTOLOGICHESKIY ZHURNAL 1989 No. 4 KURZANOV S. M. THE ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OF THE DINOSAUR INFRAORDER CARNOSAURIA* Paleontological Institute of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR Based on a revision of the systematic composition of the carnosaur families, a new diagram of the phylogenetic relationships within the infraorder is proposed. The question of carnosaurs cannot be considered to be resolved. Excluding the Triassic forms, carnosaurs in the broad or narrow sense have always been considered to be a group of theropods because they are only slightly different from them in fundamental features associated with large body size and a predatory lifestyle. The Late Triassic genera, such as Teratosaurus and Sinosaurus [33], were assigned to these on the basis of extremely meager material and without sufficient justification. This assignment has subsequently been rejected by most authors [13, 16, 17, 24, 25]. Huene [23] suggested that, along with the Sauropoda and Prosauropoda, the carnosaurs form a natural group Pachypodosauria, within which they are thought to be direct descendants of the prosauropods (the carnosaurs proceed directly from Teratosaurus through Magnosaurus). Studies of abundant cranial material (which actually belongs to Sellosaurus gracilis Huene) gave reason to think that the first species had been a prosauropod, whereas typical material (maxilla, ischium) belong to thecodonts from the family Poposauridae [24]. Huene’s diagram, which initially did not receive support, was widely propagated by the discovery of an unusual carnosaur Torvosaurus tanneri Galton et Jensen in the Upper Triassic deposits of Colorado [25]. The exceptionally plesiomorphic nature of some of its features, in the authors’ opinion, gave sufficient justification for removing them from the prosauropods.