Re: Cretaceous Dicynodonts was Re Triassic mammal-like reptiles?

[Jean-Michel BENOIT <s.aegyptiacus@wanadoo.fr>]

I said "Temnosdpondyl remains have been found in Cretaceous formations ",
can't remember exactly the period, but I think the genus is *Koolasuchus*
Jean-Michel

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jean-Michel BENOIT" <s.aegyptiacus@wanadoo.fr>
To: <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Cc: <ktdykes@arcor.de>; <rodlox@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 7:36 PM
Subject: Re: Cretaceous Dicynodonts was Re Triassic mammal-like reptiles?


> Hello all,
> IIRC, Temnosdpondyl remains have been found in Cretaceous formations
whereas
> these critters were previously thought to have long disappeared.
> Cheers,
> Jean-Michel
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "K and T Dykes" <ktdykes@arcor.de>
> To: <rodlox@hotmail.com>
> Cc: <dinosaur@usc.edu>
> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 7:09 PM
> Subject: Re: Cretaceous Dicynodonts was Re Triassic mammal-like reptiles?
>
>
> > <<carcasses and bones can be carried downriver  (by water, scavengers,
and
> > such)....could fossilized bones\skeletons be likewise?>>
> >
> > They could to some extent, but if much distance were involved, they
should
> > be heavily damaged to completely wrecked.  What fragments there are,
> happen
> > to be well enough preserved to be show diagnostic characteristics.
> They've
> > also got the appropriate matrix stuck to them.  The authors have it as a
> > late surivivor of a clade involving /Dicynodon/, /Kannemeyeria/ and
> > /Lystrosaurus/.  It's more similar to the first two.  Page 989 has a
quote
> > attesting to their certainty: "In summary, all available evidence
supports
> > identification of the Alderley material as a late-surviving dicynodont,
> and
> > we are unable to find even a single feature that would weaken or
> contradict
> > that identification."
> >
> > <<(if it was a complete Dicynodont skeleton, maybe it'd been a mummified
> > specimen, but the mummy skin was torn off in the Early Cretaceous...by
the
> > above strategy)
> >
> > halfway plausible? *curious*>>
> >
> > There were no mentions I can remember of significant transportation
> damage.
> > All the fragments are pieces of skull, and they're consistent with being
> > from the same skull.  It's a bizarre find.  I live in hope more material
> > will turn up one day.  Oh, and I think they mention an estimate for the
> > complete skull length somewhere of about 40cm.  I've just found where;
> > page987.
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------
> > Wanadoo vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus
mail.
> > Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
> Wanadoo vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail.
> Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.
>
>
>
>