Oviraptor

[Stang1996@aol.com]

     Greg Paul's _Predatory Dinosaurs of the World_ has the only Ovirapto=
r
species (philoceratops) reconstructed with the large axe-nosed crest and
gives no mention to the hook-nosed crested skull.

    In _The Illustrated Encyclop=E6dia of Dinosaurs_, David Norman has bo=
th
skulls illustrated and both being labelled Oviraptor philoceratops.  Besi=
des
the obvious differences in the shapes of the crests, hook-nose's lower ja=
w
seems to deflect downwards while axe-nose's deflects downwards, then curv=
es
up sharply.  Hook-nose also seems to have another fenestra in the lower j=
aw
behind the Large, =93heart-shaped=84 one characteristic of Oviraptors whi=
le
axe-nose does not.  Hook-nose's premaxila seems to be broken off also bec=
ause
she looks like an old man who took out his dentures.  Hook-nose's brainca=
se
looks quite a bit larger than axe-nose's and seems to arch up over the up=
er
temporal fenestrae while axe-nose's skull seems to slope gently downwards=

from the top of the crest to the base of the neck.  Hook-nose's Quadrate
looks like a =ABJ=BB, while axe-nose's looks shorter; sort of  backwards =
=ABL=BB
shaped (in left side lateral view).

    Noman writes: =ABOviraptor Skulls (Right)
Several skulls belonging to this genus have been described and they exhib=
it
quite a lot of variety.  The top two skulls have been assigned to the spe=
cies
philoceratops, yet one has a small bump in the nasal region [hook-nose],
while the other has a large crest [axe-nose] =85=BB

    So, what's the deal?  is hook-nose another species, or was it prepare=
d
wrong?  Which skull has priority over philoceratops?

Peter Buchholz
Satng1996@aol.com