[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

RE: Hadrosaur nomenclature

To: "Dinonet" <dinosaur@usc.edu>, <rob_redwing@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Hadrosaur nomenclature
From: "Tracy L. Ford" <dino.hunter@home.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 20:00:54 -0700
In-reply-to: <F554xZgBzx43xRON9jH000080e6@hotmail.com>
Reply-to: dino.hunter@home.com
Sender: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu]On Behalf Of Rob
Gay
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 8:06 PM
To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Hadrosaur nomenclature

>Maiasaura = Brachylophosaurus<
I admit I don't know much about hadrosaurs, so maybe this is old, but I
haven't heard it before. What's the reasoning behind this?
Peace,
Rob

Because the look similar. I'm not being smart. The Mor adult Maiasaura skull
is crushed dorsal-ventrally. ROM has a new uncrushed skull that really
really looks like Brachylophosaurus without that crest in the back.

Tracy L. Ford
P. O. Box 1171
Poway Ca  92074

References:
- Hadrosaur nomenclature
  - From: "Rob Gay" <rob_redwing@hotmail.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Hadrosaur nomenclature
Next by Date: Re: birds DID NOT evolve from therapods
Previous by thread: Hadrosaur nomenclature
Next by thread: Re: Hadrosaur nomenclature
Indexes: