Re: "Lazarus" Dinosaurs in the Paleocene!!?

[christian farrell kammerer <cfkammer@midway.uchicago.edu>]

On Wed, 7 Nov 2001, Ken Kinman wrote:

>      First, it would probably be best to continue calling them "Lazarus" 
> dinosaurs, and not abbreviated as "Lazarosaurs".  Otherwise it may generate 
> confusion with the non-dinosaurian genus Lazarussaurus (which were primitive 
> choristoderes or choristodere relatives).

A nitpick here, it's actually _Lazarussuchus_, but I agree with your
point, especially since it would be unfortunate if the name
"Lazarosaurus" starting popping up on various genera lists and the like.

-Christian