Re: paleoart idea!

[chris brochu <cbrochu@fmppr.fmnh.org>]

Patrick Norton wrote:
> 
> >I can't comment on Dyslocosaurus, as I don't know much about it.  But I
> >was including the North Horn along with "non-northwestern US" localities
> >- Alamosaurus seems not to have gotten as far north as the area
> >currently producing the Hell Creek or Scollard Formations, which is
> >where T. rex is primarily known from.>
> 
> Sure.  But T. rex is known from Montana to New Mexico, even from the
> Javalina formation in Texas I think, so its range seems to have overlapped
> those of Alamosaurus and Dyslocosaurus.

More accurately, tyrannosaurids are known from Montana (Saskatchewan,
too) to New Mexico (and southwestern Texas).  The southern putative T.
rexes are a lot less complete, and I am not convinced that we can
identify them to the specific level.  The Javelina tyrannosaurid is
known from a maxilla and isolated teeth - the maxilla is certainly more
Tyrannosaurus/Tarbosaurus/Daspletosaurus-like than Albertosaurus-like,
but it could be a different form.

Please note, I am not saying these are NOT T. rex.  THey might very well
be - certainly, the isolated footprint from New Mexico is big enough to
have come from T. rex - but maybe they're not.

chris



-- 
----------------------
Christopher A. Brochu
Department of Geology
Field Museum of Natural History
Roosevelt Road at Lake Shore Drive
Chicago, IL 60605

voice: 312-665-7633  (NEW)
fax: 312-665-7641 (NEW)
electronic:  cbrochu@fmppr.fmnh.org