[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: tyrannosaurus eggs
> there is no proof that the referred unnamed elongoolithid eggs from
> China are those of Tyrannosaurus. Peter Larson has suggested
that, but
> embryonic bones have not yet been described. The eggs are about
40+cm
> long, 16+cm wide and have a coarse
linerartuberculate-ramotuberculate
> sculpture.
>
>
Sounds similar to what, until recently, was considered to be the egg
of a _Protoceratops_ only much larger. I think I am right in saying
that not all the eggs identified as _Protoceratops_ eggs are now
considered as _Oviraptor_ eggs? Is it not possible that rather than
being the eggs of a _T. rex_ (or similar), the eggs could represent
some larger ceratopian dinosaur. I guess calling them tyrannosaur
eggs increases their value to the collector? I have one of these eggs
too and it appears unhatched, but I don't think that the embryo was at
a sufficiently advanced state of development to produce bones. In
fact it may be an infertile egg. Oh, well....back to square one.
Neil
Neil Clark
Curator of Palaeontology
Hunterian Museum
University of Glasgow
email: NCLARK@museum.gla.ac.uk
Mountains are found in erogenous zones.
(Geological Howlers - ed. WDI Rolfe)