Re: OPISTHOCOELICAUDIA AGAIN

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 96-01-23 17:15:53 EST, Thomas_R_HOLTZ@umail.umd.edu (th81)
writes:

>Paul Upchurch's work convinces me otherwise.  It seemed strange at first,
>but it's grown on me.

He doesn't really address the problem of the andesaurids in his paper. And
there's the problem of the bifid neural spines: how many times did they arise
among sauropods? _O._ has them, titanosaurids and andesaurids don't. It seems
simpler to keep _O._ somewhere in the vicinity of euhelopodids in the
sauropod cladogram, and to pretend that bifid neural spines arose just once
(or maybe twice at most).