Re: Scandinavian dinos!!!....aaaaand some spinosaur sruff....

["T. Mike Keesey" <tkeese1@gl.umbc.edu>]

MGibb21521@aol.com wrote: 

> You're absoluteley right.  I think the relationship between Spinosaurus and
> Baryonyx cannot be substantiated at this point.  In fact, I never even though
> of the two being together before.  The spines on Spinosaurus's back must be
> in common with other "Spinosaurs", right?

Not necessarily. High vertebral spines evolved independently across
several dinosaur lineages: _Ouranosaurus_, diplodocimorphs, and some
tetanurines that were once grouped together as "spinosaurids".

All former high-spined "spinosaurids" (except for _Spinosaurus_) now
belong to other groups. _Acrocanthosaurus_ is an allosaur. _Altispinax_ is
a _nomen_dubium_ based on indeterminate teeth. The skeleton formerly
associated with it is now _Becklespinax_, but it is still too
indeterminate to be identified further than Tetanurae incertae sedis.
I'm not sure about _Metriacanthosaurus_ -- AFAIK, Tetanurae incertae
sedis.

Hmmm... what about those two Tetanurae incertae sedis? Could they be
spinosaurs that were wrongly removed?

In keeping with the original title of this thread, ha det bra--

--T. Mike Keesey
tkeese1@gl.umbc.edu
http://umbc.edu/~tkeese1/index.htm -- The Dinosaur Web Pages, Kubrick in 
Simpsons, etc.