RE: tyrannosaurs and sauropods

["Tracy Ford" <tlford@ix.netcom.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu]On Behalf Of
Timothy Williams
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 1999 2:37 PM
To: Dinogeorge@aol.com; dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Re: tyrannosaurs and sauropods


Dinogeorge wrote:
>
>Sonorasaurus is named. Or is there still another one?

I had _Sonorasaurus_ down as a brachiosaur (basal titanosauriform).
_Pleurocoelus_ looks like it might be a true titanosaur, based on Salgado et
al. (1997).  If _Sonorasaurus_ is a close relative of _Pleurocoelus_ (not
really discussed by Ratkevich), then it's a third.

The titanosaur I had in mind is from Utah, and has yet to be described -
just mentioned at a recent SVP (Britt et al., 1997).  Abstract mentions
strongly procoelous proximal caudals (other caudals moderately procoelous),
nonbifid cervical spines, dorsals with high neural arches and short spines.
The material includes a braincase!


I can't say much on whether or not Tyrannosaurus interacted with
Alamosaurus, because I now of a site that is being worked on that just might
prove this. I have corrected people in the past about good ole T. rex
attacking Alamosaurus, but now I'll have to change my mind.
It's turning out that Alamosaurus is a very abundant sauropod. Texas, Utah,
New Mexico, etc. Also, there are fragmentary titanosaur vertebrae along with
fragmentary Tyrannosaurid vertebrae from Arizona.
Tracy