Christopher Pearsoll wrote:
I was not aware that Diplodocus had that distinctive down turn in the first third of the tail vertebrae the way Seismosaurus has. And then there is the considerable size differential between Seismosaurus hallorum and Diplodocus carnegii. I will grant the dinosaurs probably grew throughout their lives, but this is a bit much. I would have to say that Seismosaurus is most likely a valid genus.
Again, this may come down to the difference between what constitutes a valid species and what constitutes a valid genus. If _Seismosaurus hallorum_ does get sunk into _Diplodocus_, then it most likely will be retained as a separate species. The "kink" and its overall larger body size may be incorporated into the diagnosis of this new _Diplodocus_ species.
Tim
------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Williams
USDA/ARS Researcher Agronomy Hall Iowa State University Ames IA 50014
Phone: 515 294 9233 Fax: 515 294 3163
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
--- Begin Message ---
- To: dinosaur@usc.edu
- Subject: Re: Morrison Sauropods\etc.
- From: "Christopher Pearsoll" <c_pearsoll@hotmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 17:52:21 -0600
- Reply-to: c_pearsoll@hotmail.com
- Sender: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu
>published, though AFAIK the new combination _Diplodocus hallorum_ >has yet to >officially come into existence).Tim wrote...
>_Seismosaurus_ looks like it will be sunk into _Diplodocus_. (This
>has been
I was not aware that Diplodocus had that distinctive down turn in the first third of the tail vertebrae the way Seismosaurus has. And then there is the considerable size differential between Seismosaurus hallorum and Diplodocus carnegii. I will grant the dinosaurs probably grew throughout their lives, but this is a bit much. I would have to say that Seismosaurus is most likely a valid genus.
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
--- End Message ---