DOCSLIB.ORG

India's First Dinosaur, Rediscovered

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
India's First Dinosaur, Rediscovered SCIENTIFIC CORRESPONDENCE Geological Society of India, Bangalore, physics of the Precambrians (ed. Saha, 14. Mondal, N., Problems of superposed Memoir 27, 1994. A. K.), Hindustan Publications, New folding: An experimental study, unpub- 3. Sarkar, S. N. and Saha, A. K., Q. J. Delhi, 1996, pp. 1–14. lished Ph D thesis, Jadavpur University, Geol., Min. Metall. Soc. India, 1962, 34, 10. Mazumdar, S. K., Indian Miner., 1996, 1991. 97–136. 93, 139–174. 4. Sarkar, S. N. and Saha, A. K., Geol. 11. Gupta, A. and Basu, A., North Singhb- Received 12 September 2011; re-revised Mag., 1963, 100, 69–92. hum Proterozoic Mobile Belt, Eastern accepted 20 November 2012 5. Naha, K., Sci. Cult., 1956, 22, 43–45. India – A Review, M. S. Krishnan Cen- 6. Naha, K., Geol. Mag., 1959, 96, 137–140. tenary Volume, Geol. Surv. India Spec. ALOKESH CHATTERJEE* 7. Naha, K., Q. J. Geol., Min. Metall. Soc. Publ. No. 55, 2000, pp. 195–226. SHARMILA BHATTACHARYA India, 1965, 37, 41–95. 12. Haneberg, W. C., Cuspate–lobate folds 8. Bhattacharya, D. S. and Sanyal, P., In along a sedimentary contact, Los Lunas Department of Geology, Precambrian of the Eastern Indian Volcano, New Mexico. New Mexico Shield (ed. Mukhopadhyay, D.), Geo- Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources Presidency University, logical Society of India, Bangalore, Bulletin 137, 1991, pp. 162–163. 86/1 College Street, Memoir 8, 1988, pp. 85–111. 13. Ghosh, S. K., Structural Geology Fun- Kolkata 700 073, India 9. Pradhan, A. K. and Srivastava, D. C., In damentals and Modern Developments, *For correspondence. Recent Researches in Geology and Geo- Pergamon Press, 1993. e-mail: [email protected] India’s first dinosaur, rediscovered ‘Reasoning from analogy at Jubbulpore, sented illustrations of the better preserved whose diagnostic features were eventu- where some of the basaltic cappings of element4. Falconer correctly identified ally made obsolete by the discovery of the hills had evidently been thrown out of the vertebrae as reptilian but refrained more complete remains12,13. The first craters long after this surface had been from coining a name for them, probably such discoveries were made by Charles raised above the waters, and become the because the manuscript, published post- Matley and Durgasankar Bhattacharji in habitation both of vegetable and animal humously, was not intended for publica- the early 1900s (refs 14 and 15). Excava- life, I made the first discovery of fossil tion. It was not until 1877 that Sleeman’s tions near the probable location of Slee- remains in the Nerbudda valley. I went discovery was finally recognized as a man’s original site in Jabalpur produced first to a hill within sight of my house in new genus and species of sauropod dino- the braincase and partial skeleton of Ant- 1828, and searched exactly between the saur called Titanosaurus indicus (‘Indian arctosaurus septentrionalis16 (whose plateau of basalt that covered it, and the titan reptile’) by Richard Lydekker5. He genus name has since been changed to stratum immediately below; and there I named a second species from Jabalpur, Jainosaurus17), a partial postcranial found several small trees with roots, T. blanfordi (‘Blanford’s titan reptile’), skeleton of a second, smaller individual trunks, and branches, all entire, and just two years later6. At that time, only of the same genus18,19, as well as many beautifully petrified. They had been only approximately 115 dinosaur species had isolated bones. Many of the theropod recently uncovered by the washing away been identified, less than 10% of the remains were shipped to London for of a part of the basaltic plateau. I soon 1401 species known by 2004 (ref. 7). preparation and description in 1922 and after found some fossil bones of ani- After passing safely through many 1925; most of them were returned to mals.’ hands for over the course of half a cen- India in 1936, along with a plaster cast of –W. H. Sleeman1 tury, the original remains of T. indicus the partial hind limb of Jainosaurus2. went missing. It is not known exactly There is no manifest for this shipment, so So begins the history of Indian dinosaur when this happened, or even who was the it is not known exactly which specimens studies. The bones that Sleeman col- last to examine them, but we were not made the trip to and from London. Bar- lected from the beds underlying the Dec- able to find mention of first-hand obser- num Brown visited Bara Simla and made can Traps at Jabalpur would soon embark vation of T. indicus bones subsequent to additional collections of theropod20 and on ‘rambles’ of their own2. Sleeman sent Lydekker’s last treatment of them6. A sauropod21,22 remains, which are housed two fossil bones to G. G. Spilsbury, a cast of the specimen is present in the at the American Museum of Natural His- civil surgeon, who himself collected a Natural History Museum, London tory. More recent excavations elsewhere third bone from the same bed. In 1832, (NHMUK OR40867). in India have added to the initial discov- Spilsbury sent all three to Calcutta anti- T. indicus holds a special place as eries of Matley and Bhattacharji at Bara quarian, James Prinsep. By 1862, these India’s first recorded dinosaur, discov- Simla and Chhota Simla (Jabalpur). One fossil bones were presented to Thomas ered only four years after the discovery of most important was an accumulation Oldham, the first Director of the Geo- of the first-named dinosaur Megalosau- of several hundred bones21,23–25 in strata logical Survey of India. Surgeon– rus8 and 14 years before the name ‘Dino- just below a prolific egg-bearing hori- botanist Hugh Falconer, co-discoverer of sauria’ was coined9. Like Megalosaurus zon26,27 in Rahioli, western India. An- the Siwalik vertebrates3, provided the and other early-named dinosaurs such as other such locality was Dongargaon in first description of two bones, which he Iguanodon10 and Cetiosaurus11, Titano- central India, some 335 km south of identified as caudal vertebrae, and pre- saurus was based on limited material Jabalpur. The Dongargaon locality 34 CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 104, NO. 1, 10 JANUARY 2013 SCIENTIFIC CORRESPONDENCE produced the most complete skeleton of skulls bearing narrow tooth crowns36,37, nity to access and study T. indicus is an Indian dinosaur, Isisaurus colberti presacral vertebrae with complex lamina- symptomatic of a larger issue. There are (formerly known as ‘Titanosaurus’ col- tion38 and limbs that were slightly angled several Indian dinosaur specimens that berti), which is known from a braincase, outward in a wide-gauge posture39. Some are currently missing, including both presacral, sacral and caudal vertebrae, titanosaurs even possessed dermal small and large specimens of sauropod girdle bones and limb bones28,29. The armour22,40 that may have functioned as a and theropod dinosaurs. Notable missing more recent discovery of scores of dino- mineral store that allowed them to sur- specimens include the partial postcranial saur bones in Balochistan, Pakistan30–32 vive in stressed environments41. In addi- skeleton of the stocky-limbed, large also represents an important source of tion, Titanosaurus provided the first theropod Lametasaurus indicus44, skull information on dinosaurs of the Indian indications of what Lydekker42 called a materials of both Indosaurus matleyi and subcontinent. ‘remarkable community of type which Indosuchus raptorius, parts of Jainosau- Beyond its historical and patrimonial undoubtedly exists between the faunas of rus septentrionalis and the small no- significance, what is the relevance of T. southern continents of the world’. Recast asaurid theropod Laevisuchus indicus indicus, if the species was based on lim- in today’s mobilist palaeogeographic and many theropod limb bones16 (Figure ited material, now missing, deemed paradigm, the Indian subcontinent takes 1). The nonavailability of these elements insufficient to distinguish it from other on special significance as a large disper- has seriously hindered efforts to under- dinosaurs13? The material is relevant for sal vector43 that began the Mesozoic stand the evolutionary history of Indian several reasons. First, Titanosaurus pro- interlocked with other southern land- dinosaurs and to decode their palaeobio- vided an initial glimpse at, and eventually masses and ended it in isolation prior to geographic connections to other southern became the namesake for, the diverse, docking on Asia sometime in the early landmasses45,46. But are these bones lost, late-surviving sauropod lineage Titano- Tertiary. Large continental tetrapods like or merely misplaced? Are efforts best sauria33. Titanosaurs comprise more than Titanosaurus and other dinosaurs can directed at retrieving these bones in col- 40 genera34, which have been recorded provide insight into India’s relationship lections or finding new bones in the from all continental landmasses, includ- with other landmasses, both southern and field? ing Antarctica35. They are morphologi- northern. Last, and perhaps most signifi- The Geological Survey of India (GSI) cally distinctive sauropods with elongate cantly, inability of the scientific commu- and the University of Michigan have recently embarked on a programme to recover missing fossil bones in museum collections and to collect new bones from field sites. Efforts at the Indian Museum (Kolkata) and GSI repositories have resulted in the recovery of the mis- placed holotypic caudal vertebra of T. indicus (Figure 2). The T. indicus holo- type was stored together with bones of T. blanfordi and with Triassic vertebrates of the ‘Lydekker collection’47, also pre- sumed missing. The bones were recov- ered from the vast fossil vertebrate and Figure 2. Rediscovered holotypic caudal Figure 1. Currently missing Indian dinosaur fossils. a, b, Syntypic skull elements of the large vertebra of India’s first dinosaur, Titanosau- theropod Indosuchus raptorius. a, Skull roof K20/350 in dorsal view. b, Skull roof and braincase rus indicus, in left lateral view.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Partial Skeleton of the Tyrannosaurid Dinosaur Aublysodon the Upper Cretaceous of New Mexico Thomas M
    J. Paleont., 64(6), 1990, pp. 1026-1032 Copyright © 1990, The Paleontological Society 0022-3360/90/0064-1026S03.00 A PARTIAL SKELETON OF THE TYRANNOSAURID DINOSAUR AUBLYSODON THE UPPER CRETACEOUS OF NEW MEXICO THOMAS M. LEHMAN AND KENNETH CARPENTER Department of Geosciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock 79409, and Department of Earth Sciences, Denver Museum of Natural History, City Park, Denver, Colorado 80205 Abstract—A fragmentary tyrannosaurid skull and postcranial skeleton from the Kirtland Shale of northwestern New Mexico is the most complete specimen of a carnivorous dinosaur known from these strata. The specimen is identified as Aublysodon cf. A. mirandus on the basis of its narrow frontals, V-shaped frontal-parietal suture, and nondenticulate incisiform premaxillary tooth. The D-shaped cross section of the premaxillary tooth, rugose postorbital, well-developed footed pubis, and proximally constricted third metatarsal confirm the assignment of Aublysodon to the Tyrannosauridae. The limb bones are gracile and similar in proportions to those of Albertosaurus', however, the tibia and metatarsals are shorter relative to the femur. The distal end of the tibia exhibits a unique medial emargination not reported in other tyrannosaurids. INTRODUCTION imen (OMNH 10131) was collected in San Juan County, New Mexico, northeast of Chaco Canyon in June, 1940, by J. W. arge carnivorous dinosaurs were first reported from Up­ Stovall and D. E. Savage of the University of Oklahoma. The per Cretaceous continental deposits in the San Juan Basin remains comprise several skull fragments, an incomplete den­ Lof northwestern New Mexico by Barnum Brown (1910, p. 268)tary, parts of both femora, a tibia, pubis, metatarsals, several who found “disassociated limb bones ..
    [Show full text]
  • A Troodontid Dinosaur from the Latest Cretaceous of India
    ARTICLE Received 14 Dec 2012 | Accepted 7 Mar 2013 | Published 16 Apr 2013 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms2716 A troodontid dinosaur from the latest Cretaceous of India A. Goswami1,2, G.V.R. Prasad3, O. Verma4, J.J. Flynn5 & R.B.J. Benson6 Troodontid dinosaurs share a close ancestry with birds and were distributed widely across Laurasia during the Cretaceous. Hundreds of occurrences of troodontid bones, and their highly distinctive teeth, are known from North America, Europe and Asia. Thus far, however, they remain unknown from Gondwanan landmasses. Here we report the discovery of a troodontid tooth from the uppermost Cretaceous Kallamedu Formation in the Cauvery Basin of South India. This is the first Gondwanan record for troodontids, extending their geographic range by nearly 10,000 km, and representing the first confirmed non-avian tetanuran dinosaur from the Indian subcontinent. This small-bodied maniraptoran dinosaur is an unexpected and distinctly ‘Laurasian’ component of an otherwise typical ‘Gondwanan’ tetrapod assemblage, including notosuchian crocodiles, abelisauroid dinosaurs and gondwanathere mammals. This discovery raises the question of whether troodontids dispersed to India from Laurasia in the Late Cretaceous, or whether a broader Gondwanan distribution of troodontids remains to be discovered. 1 Department of Genetics, Evolution, and Environment, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK. 2 Department of Earth Sciences, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK. 3 Department of Geology, Centre for Advanced Studies, University of Delhi, New Delhi 110 007, India. 4 Geology Discipline Group, School of Sciences, Indira Gandhi National Open University, New Delhi 110 068, India. 5 Division of Paleontology and Richard Gilder Graduate School, American Museum of Natural History, New York, New York 10024, USA.
    [Show full text]
  • Implications for Predatory Dinosaur Macroecology and Ontogeny in Later Late Cretaceous Asiamerica
    Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences Theropod Guild Structure and the Tyrannosaurid Niche Assimilation Hypothesis: Implications for Predatory Dinosaur Macroecology and Ontogeny in later Late Cretaceous Asiamerica Journal: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences Manuscript ID cjes-2020-0174.R1 Manuscript Type: Article Date Submitted by the 04-Jan-2021 Author: Complete List of Authors: Holtz, Thomas; University of Maryland at College Park, Department of Geology; NationalDraft Museum of Natural History, Department of Geology Keyword: Dinosaur, Ontogeny, Theropod, Paleocology, Mesozoic, Tyrannosauridae Is the invited manuscript for consideration in a Special Tribute to Dale Russell Issue? : © The Author(s) or their Institution(s) Page 1 of 91 Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 1 Theropod Guild Structure and the Tyrannosaurid Niche Assimilation Hypothesis: 2 Implications for Predatory Dinosaur Macroecology and Ontogeny in later Late Cretaceous 3 Asiamerica 4 5 6 Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. 7 8 Department of Geology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 USA 9 Department of Paleobiology, National Museum of Natural History, Washington, DC 20013 USA 10 Email address: [email protected] 11 ORCID: 0000-0002-2906-4900 Draft 12 13 Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. 14 Department of Geology 15 8000 Regents Drive 16 University of Maryland 17 College Park, MD 20742 18 USA 19 Phone: 1-301-405-4084 20 Fax: 1-301-314-9661 21 Email address: [email protected] 22 23 1 © The Author(s) or their Institution(s) Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences Page 2 of 91 24 ABSTRACT 25 Well-sampled dinosaur communities from the Jurassic through the early Late Cretaceous show 26 greater taxonomic diversity among larger (>50kg) theropod taxa than communities of the 27 Campano-Maastrichtian, particularly to those of eastern/central Asia and Laramidia.
    [Show full text]
  • Dinosaur Species List E to M
    Dinosaur Species List E to M E F G • Echinodon becklesii • Fabrosaurus australis • Gallimimus bullatus • Edmarka rex • Frenguellisaurus • Garudimimus brevipes • Edmontonia longiceps ischigualastensis • Gasosaurus constructus • Edmontonia rugosidens • Fulengia youngi • Gasparinisaura • Edmontosaurus annectens • Fulgurotherium australe cincosaltensis • Edmontosaurus regalis • Genusaurus sisteronis • Edmontosaurus • Genyodectes serus saskatchewanensis • Geranosaurus atavus • Einiosaurus procurvicornis • Gigantosaurus africanus • Elaphrosaurus bambergi • Giganotosaurus carolinii • Elaphrosaurus gautieri • Gigantosaurus dixeyi • Elaphrosaurus iguidiensis • Gigantosaurus megalonyx • Elmisaurus elegans • Gigantosaurus robustus • Elmisaurus rarus • Gigantoscelus • Elopteryx nopcsai molengraaffi • Elosaurus parvus • Gilmoreosaurus • Emausaurus ernsti mongoliensis • Embasaurus minax • Giraffotitan altithorax • Enigmosaurus • Gongbusaurus shiyii mongoliensis • Gongbusaurus • Eoceratops canadensis wucaiwanensis • Eoraptor lunensis • Gorgosaurus lancensis • Epachthosaurus sciuttoi • Gorgosaurus lancinator • Epanterias amplexus • Gorgosaurus libratus • Erectopus sauvagei • "Gorgosaurus" novojilovi • Erectopus superbus • Gorgosaurus sternbergi • Erlikosaurus andrewsi • Goyocephale lattimorei • Eucamerotus foxi • Gravitholus albertae • Eucercosaurus • Gresslyosaurus ingens tanyspondylus • Gresslyosaurus robustus • Eucnemesaurus fortis • Gresslyosaurus torgeri • Euhelopus zdanskyi • Gryponyx africanus • Euoplocephalus tutus • Gryponyx taylori • Euronychodon
    [Show full text]
  • Back Matter (PDF)
    Index Note: Page numbers in italic denote figures. Page numbers in bold denote tables. Abel, Othenio (1875–1946) Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, Robert Plot 7 arboreal theory 244 Astrodon 363, 365 Geschichte und Methode der Rekonstruktion... Atlantosaurus 365, 366 (1925) 328–329, 330 Augusta, Josef (1903–1968) 222–223, 331 Action comic 343 Aulocetus sammarinensis 80 Actualism, work of Capellini 82, 87 Azara, Don Felix de (1746–1821) 34, 40–41 Aepisaurus 363 Azhdarchidae 318, 319 Agassiz, Louis (1807–1873) 80, 81 Azhdarcho 319 Agustinia 380 Alexander, Annie Montague (1867–1950) 142–143, 143, Bakker, Robert. T. 145, 146 ‘dinosaur renaissance’ 375–376, 377 Alf, Karen (1954–2000), illustrator 139–140 Dinosaurian monophyly 93, 246 Algoasaurus 365 influence on graphic art 335, 343, 350 Allosaurus, digits 267, 271, 273 Bara Simla, dinosaur discoveries 164, 166–169 Allosaurus fragilis 85 Baryonyx walkeri Altispinax, pneumaticity 230–231 relation to Spinosaurus 175, 177–178, 178, 181, 183 Alum Shale Member, Parapsicephalus purdoni 195 work of Charig 94, 95, 102, 103 Amargasaurus 380 Beasley, Henry Charles (1836–1919) Amphicoelias 365, 366, 368, 370 Chirotherium 214–215, 219 amphisbaenians, work of Charig 95 environment 219–220 anatomy, comparative 23 Beaux, E. Cecilia (1855–1942), illustrator 138, 139, 146 Andrews, Roy Chapman (1884–1960) 69, 122 Becklespinax altispinax, pneumaticity 230–231, Andrews, Yvette 122 232, 363 Anning, Joseph (1796–1849) 14 belemnites, Oxford Clay Formation, Peterborough Anning, Mary (1799–1847) 24, 25, 113–116, 114, brick pits 53 145, 146, 147, 288 Benett, Etheldred (1776–1845) 117, 146 Dimorphodon macronyx 14, 115, 294 Bhattacharji, Durgansankar 166 Hawker’s ‘Crocodile’ 14 Birch, Lt.
    [Show full text]
  • THE GENERA of REPTILES. By
    T he Genera of Re pt il e s. By BARON FRANCIS NOPCSA (Budapest). (Eingelangt am 11. Mai 1927.) Among all the Paleontologists living none has dealt with the recent and fossil reptiles with a wider grasp than Prof. L. D o l l o and at his anniversary it seems quite appropriate to review their whole array. The classification used in the following enumeration of all genera of reptiles is much the same as in my hook „Die Familien der Reptilien“; at this instance however an effort has been made to give a precise definition of every systematic unit. Alteration of the classification became necessary among the Dino- cephalians, the Nothosaurians, the Lacertilians (called here Sauroidea), the Coelurosauroidea and the Crocodilia. The new classification of the Sauroidea is intermediate between the classifications proposed by B o u l e n g e r and C a m p . Naturally as a rule only those fossil genera are referred to, that are more than simple catalogue numbers that facilitate the finding of the respective piece in a collection; indeterminable problematic genera of small interest have mostly been omitted. Extinct units and genera are marked in the lists with a cross ("j*). Difficulties of classification have been encountered in the Lacertilia and Ophidia, for in the new system the conventional families of recent Lizards and Serpents has been given subfamily rank and conse­ quently the different recent subfamilies had to be dropped. Instead of these subfamilies the minor units were separated by greek letters. — The tedious and complicated revision of the genera of recent Lizards and Snakes was done by Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Biogeography of the Late Cretaceous Vertebrates of India: Comparison of Geophysical and Paleontological Data
    Khosla, A. and Lucas, S.G., eds., 2016, Cretaceous Period: Biotic Diversity and Biogeography. New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin 71. 317 HISTORICAL BIOGEOGRAPHY OF THE LATE CRETACEOUS VERTEBRATES OF INDIA: COMPARISON OF GEOPHYSICAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL DATA OMKAR VERMA1, ASHU KHOSLA2, FRANCISCO J. GOIN3 AND JASDEEP KAUR2 1Geology Discipline Group, School of Sciences, Indira Gandhi National Open University, New Delhi – 110 068, India, e-mail: omkarverma@ ignou.ac.in; 2Department of Geology, Centre for Advanced Studies, Panjab University, Sector-14, Chandigarh – 160014, India, e-mail: [email protected], e-mail: [email protected]; 3Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas and División Paleontología Vertebrados, Museo de Ciencias Naturales de La Plata, B1900FWA La Plata, Argentina, e-mail: [email protected] Abstract—The Cretaceous was a special time for the Indian plate as it was separated from Gondwana landmasses and started its northward journey across the Tethys Sea towards the Equator. The northward movement of this plate implied shifting latitudes and climate belts, until it finally collided with Asia during the early Cenozoic. Geophysical data and plate tectonic models show that after splitting from Gondwana, the Indian plate remained as an isolated continent for more than 45 Ma during the Cretaceous; thus, it predicts a remarkable biotic endemism for the continent. Paleontological data on the Cretaceous vertebrates of India is best known for Maastrichtian time; in turn, the pre-Maastrichtian record is very poor—it contains very few fossils of fishes and marine reptiles. The Maastrichtian fossil record comprises vertebrates of Gondwana and Laurasian affinities and some endemic, ancient lineages as well.
    [Show full text]
  • Geological Society, London, Special Publications the History of Dinosaur Collecting in Central India, 1828 1947 Matthew T
    Geological Society, London, Special Publications The history of dinosaur collecting in central India, 1828 1947 Matthew T. Carrano, Jeffrey A. Wilson and Paul M. Barrett Geological Society, London, Special Publications 2010; v. 343; p. 161-173 doi:10.1144/SP343.9 Email alerting click here to receive free email alerts when new articles cite this service article Permission click here to seek permission to re-use all or part of this article request Subscribe click here to subscribe to Geological Society, London, Special Publications or the Lyell Collection Notes Downloaded by Smithsonian Institution Libraries on 6 October 2010 © 2010 Geological Society of Lyell London Collection The history of dinosaur collecting in central India, 1828-1947 MATTHEW T. CARRANO1*, JEFFREY A. WILSON2 & PAUL M. BARRETT3 Department of Paleobiology, Smithsonian Institution, P.O. Box 37012, MRC 121, Washington, DC 2007.3-7072, T/&4 Museum of Paleontology and Department of Geological Sciences, University of Michigan, 7709 Geddea 7?<x%7, A^m Arbor, M7 48709-7079, T/&4 Department of Palaeontology, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK ^Corresponding author (e-mail: carranom®si.edu) Abstract: The history of dinosaur collecting in central India (former Central Provinces and Central India Agency) began in 1828 when W. H. Sleeman discovered isolated sauropod caudal vertebrae in the Lameta Formation near Jabalpur. Subsequently, the area became a focal point for fossil collection, leading to a series of further discoveries that continues today. The earliest discoveries were made by numerous collectors for whom palaeontology was a sec- ondary pursuit, and who were employed in the armed forces (W.
    [Show full text]
  • Download a PDF of This Web Page Here. Visit
    Dinosaur Genera List Page 1 of 42 You are visitor number— Zales Jewelry —as of November 7, 2008 The Dinosaur Genera List became a standalone website on December 4, 2000 on America Online’s Hometown domain. AOL closed the domain down on Halloween, 2008, so the List was carried over to the www.polychora.com domain in early November, 2008. The final visitor count before AOL Hometown was closed down was 93661, on October 30, 2008. List last updated 12/15/17 Additions and corrections entered since the last update are in green. Genera counts (but not totals) changed since the last update appear in green cells. Download a PDF of this web page here. Visit my Go Fund Me web page here. Go ahead, contribute a few bucks to the cause! Visit my eBay Store here. Search for “paleontology.” Unfortunately, as of May 2011, Adobe changed its PDF-creation website and no longer supports making PDFs directly from HTML files. I finally figured out a way around this problem, but the PDF no longer preserves background colors, such as the green backgrounds in the genera counts. Win some, lose some. Return to Dinogeorge’s Home Page. Generic Name Counts Scientifically Valid Names Scientifically Invalid Names Non- Letter Well Junior Rejected/ dinosaurian Doubtful Preoccupied Vernacular Totals (click) established synonyms forgotten (valid or invalid) file://C:\Documents and Settings\George\Desktop\Paleo Papers\dinolist.html 12/15/2017 Dinosaur Genera List Page 2 of 42 A 117 20 8 2 1 8 15 171 B 56 5 1 0 0 11 5 78 C 70 15 5 6 0 10 9 115 D 55 12 7 2 0 5 6 87 E 48 4 3
    [Show full text]
  • Dinosaur Genera
    DINOSAUR GENERA since: 28-October-1995 / last updated: 29-September-2021 Thank you to George Olshevsky ("Mesozoic Meanderings #3") for the original listing on 23-October-1995 and the help to keep this list current; and also to all the other contributors from the Dinosaur Mailing List. NOW available: d-genera.pdf Genera count = 1742 (including 114 not presently considered to be dinosaurian) [nomen ex dissertatione] = name appears in a dissertation [nomen manuscriptum] = unpublished name in a manuscript for publication [nomen dubium] = name usually based on more than one type specimen [nomen nudum] = name lacking a description and/or a type specimen [nomen oblitum] = name forgotten for at least 50 years [nomen rejectum] = name rejected by the ICZN non = incorrect reference by the first to a name by the second author vide = name attributed to the first author by the second author / = name preoccupied by the second author JOS → Junior Objective Synonym of the indicated genus JSS → Junior Subjective Synonym of the indicated genus PSS → Possible Subjective Synonym of the indicated genus SSS → Suppressed Senior Synonym of the indicated genus • Aardonyx: A.M. Yates, M.F. Bonnan, J. Neveling, A. Chinsamy & M.G. Blackbeard, 2009 • "Abdallahsaurus": G. Maier, 2003 [nomen nudum → Giraffatitan] • Abdarainurus: A.O. Averianov & A.V. Lopatin, 2020 • Abelisaurus: J.F. Bonaparte & F.E. Novas, 1985 • Abrictosaurus: J.A. Hopson, 1975 • Abrosaurus: Ouyang H, 1989 • Abydosaurus: D. Chure, B.B. Britt, J.A. Whitlock & J.A. Wilson, 2010 • Acantholipan: H.E. Rivera-Sylva, E. Frey, W. Stinnesbeck, G. Carbot-Chanona, I.E. Sanchez-Uribe & J.R. Guzmán-Gutiérrez, 2018 • Acanthopholis: T.H.
    [Show full text]
  • Isolated Theropod Teeth Associated with a Sauropod Skeleton from the Late Cretaceous Allen Formation of Río Negro, Patagonia, Argentina
    Isolated theropod teeth associated with a sauropod skeleton from the Late Cretaceous Allen Formation of Río Negro, Patagonia, Argentina JORGE G. MESO, CHRISTOPHE HENDRICKX, MATTIA A. BAIANO, JUAN I. CANALE, LEONARDO SALGADO, and IGNACIO DÍAZ-MARTÍNEZ Meso, J.G., Hendrickx, C., Baiano, M.A., Canale, J.I., Salgado, L., and Díaz-Martínez, I. 2021. Isolated theropod teeth associated with a sauropod skeleton from the Late Cretaceous Allen Formation of Río Negro, Patagonia, Argentina. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 66 (2): 409–423. The discovery of theropod shed teeth associated with sauropod remains is relatively common in Cretaceous deposits of Patagonia. However, only a handful of studies have thoroughly explored the phylogenetic affinities of the theropod dental material. Here, we describe and identify twelve theropod shed teeth associated with a partially complete skeleton of a titanosaur sauropod from the Allen Formation (middle Campanian–lower Maastrichtian; Upper Cretaceous) of Paso Córdoba, Río Negro, Argentina. Using three methods, namely a cladistic analysis performed on a dentition-based data matrix, and a discriminant and cluster analyses conducted on a large dataset of theropod teeth measurements, we identify three dental morphotypes which are confidently referred to abelisaurid theropods. Whether the morphotypes represent different abelisaurid subclades or different positional entities within the jaw of the same abelisaurid species, is unknown. Such an identification, nevertheless, provides additional evidence of abelisaurids feeding on sauropod carcasses. This study highlights the importance of using combined qualitative and quantitative methodologies to identify isolated thero- pod teeth, especially those that can provide direct information on feeding ecology. Key words: Dinosauria, Abelisauridae, shed teeth, morphotypes, Cretaceous, Patagonia.
    [Show full text]
  • Cranial Anatomy of Tyrannosaurid Dinosaurs from the Late Cretaceous of Alberta, Canada
    Cranial anatomy of tyrannosaurid dinosaurs from the Late Cretaceous of Alberta, Canada PHILIP J. CURRIE Currie, P.J. 2003. Cranial anatomy of tyrannosaurid dinosaurs from the Late Cretaceous of Alberta, Canada. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 48 (2): 191–226. Beautifully preserved, nearly complete theropod skeletons from Alberta (Canada) allow re−evaluation of the taxonomic status of North American tyrannosaurids. It is concluded that the most parsimonious interpretation of relationships leads to the separation of the two species of Albertosaurus (sensu Russell 1970) into Gorgosaurus libratus from the Campanian Dinosaur Park Formation and Albertosaurus sarcophagus from the upper Campanian/lower Maastrichtian Horseshoe Canyon Formation. Albertosaurus and Gorgosaurus are closely related, but can be distinguished from each other by more characters than are known to justify generic distinction within another tyrannosaurid clade that includes Daspletosaurus, Tarbosaurus and Tyrannosaurus. Daspletosaurus is known from multiple species that cover extensive geographic, eco− logical and temporal ranges, and it is sensible to maintain its generic distinction from Tyrannosaurus. All tyrannosaurid species have consistent ontogenetic trends. However, one needs to be cautious in assessing ontogenetic stage because many characters are size−dependent rather than age−dependent. There are relatively few osteological differences that can distinguish tyrannosaurid species at any age. For example, Nanotyrannus lancensis is probably a distinct species from Tyrannosaurus rex because there is no evidence of ontogenetic reduction of tooth counts in any other tyrannosaurid spe− cies. Some characters that are good for separating mature tyrannosaurids, such as differences in the sizes and shapes of maxillary fenestrae, are not useful for identifying the species of juveniles.
    [Show full text]