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

Re: Falcarius query

> Eshanosaurus was not included in the matrix
> TMK. If it was, it would probably be the most basal
> therizinosaur (Barrett 2009).


_Eshanosaurus_ might actually come out as more derived than _Falcarius_.  This 
is why _Eshanosaurus_ is so perplexing.  Not only is the dentary very 
therizinosaur-like, but certain features mark it as a fairly derived 
therizinosaur.

According to Barrett (2009): "Some of the features present in _Eshanosaurus_ 
(e.g. the lateral shelf and the ventrally deflected rostral end of the dentary) 
indicate that this taxon is more derived than the Early Cretaceous 
therizinosauroid _Falcarius_ (Kirkland et al. 2005)."



Cheers

Tim