Re: Dinosaur Genera List corrections #148

["T. Mike Keesey" <tmk@dinosauricon.com>]

On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 Dinogeorge@aol.com wrote:

> Stegopeltinae: new >ankylosaurid< subfamily introduced in Tracy's paper. I 
> had a feeling that would arouse a bit of interest... Comprises Stegopelta, 
> Glyptodontopelta, and a new genus in press (the San Diego "nodosaurid," which 
> is actually an ankylosaurid after all). Tracy also uses Syrmosaurinae as the 
> oldest available name for the ankylosaurid subfamily that comprises 
> Amtosaurus, Nodocephalosaurus, Pinacosaurus (senior synonym of Syrmosaurus), 
> Saichania, Shanxia, Talarurus, Tarchia, and Tianzhenosaurus.

Which sense of Ankylosauridae is this, _sensu lato_ (including
Polacanthinae), or _sensu stricto_?

I use the former definition on my site, and it seems as though these
"-inae"'s would be changed to "-ini"'s under that system:

--+--Nodosauridae
  `--Ankylosauridae
     |--Polacanthinae
     `--+--Shamosaurinae
        `--Ankylosaurinae
           |--_Tsagantegia_
           `--+--Ankylosaurini
              |  |--_Ankylosaurus_
              |  `--_Euoplocephalus_
              |?-Stegopeltini
              |  |--unnamed San Diego form
              |  |--_Glyptodontopelta_
              |  `--_Stegopelta_
              `--Syrmosaurini
                 |--_Amtosaurus_  
                 |--_Pinacosaurus_
                 |--_Shanxia_
                 |--_Talarurus_
                 `--+?-_Nodocephalosaurus_
                    |--_Saichania_
                    `--_Tarchia_

Is this correct? And where do _Maleevus_ and _Sauroplites_ go?

_____________________________________________________________________________
T. Michael Keesey.........<tmk@dinosauricon.com>.........<keesey@bigfoot.com>
AIM <Ric Blayze>..............ICQ <77314901>...........Yahoo!M <Mighty Odinn>
Home Page (includes The Dinosauricon)........<http://dinosauricon.com/keesey>