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

Re: Allosaurus topotype

To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Re: Allosaurus topotype
From: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 19:50:00 +0100
In-reply-to: <20021118114849.16306.qmail@web40705.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20021118114849.16306.qmail@web40705.mail.yahoo.com>
Reply-to: david.marjanovic@gmx.at
Sender: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu

Original Message
by Stephan Pickering
Monday, 18. November 2002 12:48 

> These converted clade names

There is no such thing as a converted clade (let alone species) name, and it 
will stay that way until "January 1, 200n", when the PhyloCode will be 
implemented; n is not 0, 1, 2 and certainly not 3 either.

> Chure believes the lacrimal horn variations may be due
> to sexual dimorphism. However, enough material is
> known to support my tentative erection of another
> Allosaurus species within this clade.

Does this mean you can show sexual dimorphism within *A. whitei*?

References:
- Re: Allosaurus topotype
  - From: Stephan Pickering <stefanpickering2002@yahoo.com>

Prev by Date: Dinosaur Nat'l Monument Idea
Next by Date: Re: Dinosaur National Monument Idea/Correction
Previous by thread: Re: Allosaurus topotype
Next by thread: Re: Allosaurus topotype
Indexes: