Re: Tyrannosaurus bataar eggs

[Stan Friesen <swf@ElSegundoCA.ATTGIS.COM>]

>From: Crpntr@ix.netcom.com (Kenneth Carpenter)
 > 
 > > They were found in the Gaugao formation, Xixia county, Henan 
 > >Province, China.  The formation is (lower?) Cretaceous. 
 >    part deleted
 > >The eggs are definitely theropodous, probably tyrannosaurid, and maybe 
 > >Tyrannosaurus bataar in origin. (They were originally considered 
 > >to be Tarbosaurus bataar, but tarbosaurs have been refered to the 
 > >Tyrannosauridae.) 

Tarbosaurs have always been considered part of Tyrannosauridae,
but they are now considered synonyms of Tyrannosaurus itself by
many workers.
 > 
 > It is the lower Cretaceous age of the strata that makes me skeptical 
 > that the eggs are those of Tyrannosaurus bataar.  The age is some 25+ my 
 > older than known T. bataar skeletons.  On the other hand, I have also 
 > seen an Upper Cretaceous age assigned to the same formation. 

Hmm, what is the relationship of this formation to the one in
which Alectrosaurus was found?

[If I remember my names correctly, Alectrosaurus is the earliest
known tyrannosaurid - being Lower Cretaceous].

swf@elsegundoca.attgis.com              sarima@netcom.com

The peace of God be with you.