Re: *Oviraptor*

["Jaime A. Headden" <qilongia@yahoo.com>]

BSL wrote:

<What's the general feeling on *Oviraptor* these days?
I'm illustrating a book for kids (8 - 12 y.o.), and
new finds seem to be coming so fast that I'm a bit
lost!>

  Don't be too alarmed: in the very near future, two
papers will be published that help sum up
oviraptorosaur taxonomy and phylogeny, and hopefully
will clear up the specimen and individual assemblage
hoo-doo that has confused many of us. Patience grant
us, and when these are out, just get those quickly,
grab the others at leisure, and there should be little
problem. However, the popular literature should not
become your primary source of information since, until
1995, very, very little was ever published popularly
about oviraptorosaurs: the embryo and nest (and
another from China by Currie and Dong which many
people seem to be forgetting about) changed
everything.

<I have two main questions:

  How closely related is *Oviraptor* to *Caudipteryx*?
(This would affect the feathering I put on the arms
and tail; i.e., short "wings" primarily for display.)>

  Not likely to change anything, since there is
collateral evidence oviraptorosaurs had feathers or
whatever aside from any suggested relationship with
*Caudipteryx;* and incidentally, that has been
challenged and two papers should answer this question,
including one evaluating the possible avian nature of
Caudi.

<How much is really known about the *Oviraptor* tail?
None of the references I have seem to show the tail in
any reconstruction, or it is marked as conjectural.
Now comes along this "National Geographic" article,
showing an "unnamed Oviraptorid from Mongolia". Should
I draw mine with a pygostyle, or a "normal"
theropodian tail?>

  The short tail is on one specimen; the majority of
oviraptorosaurian specimens with marginally or mostly
complete tails or just a few caudal bones indicates
that many (*Oviraptor*, *Ingenia*, possibly
*Conchoraptor*, *Chirostenotes*, and *Microvenator* [I
provisionally call it a oviraptorosaur-related
animal]) oviraptorosaurs had marginal to short tails,
and this new one is unique in the group, with just
22[23] caudals. One specimen of an *Ingenia*-like
skeleton has a nearly [if not] complete tail of around
30 caudals, so shorter than most. The incomplete tail
of one specimen of *Alxasaurus* has more caudals, and
would be around 35 if complete, but still relatively
short. I don't consider therizinosaurs as
oviraptorosaurs, by the way. Except for the _Nat.
Geo._ article and the "proper" paper in _Nature_ (it
should be at the university library about now) no
relatively complete tail of oviraptorosaurs have been
published that actually described them, except for a
photograph in Psihoyos and Knoebbler's book, _Hunting
Dinosaurs_, a fairly well-written popular book.

  Uhm, I'm repeating myself. Check back in the
archives for the "Pygostyle" discussion, make your
own, well informed conclusions.

  Incidentally, this does kinda of vindicate Tracy
Ford's reconstruction of *Chirostenotes* with a really
short tail, and though that animal probably had a
longer tail (per Russell and Currie, 1988), a
"caenagnathid" with an hypotrophied caudal series is
still valid. So kudos to Tracy for his foresight.


=====
Jaime "James" A. Headden

"Come the path that leads us to our fortune."

Qilong---is temporarily out of service.
Check back soon.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com