Re: Rugops and Spinostropheus in USA Today

[Mark Van Tomme <markvantomme@yahoo.com>]

> Mickey Mortimer wrote:
 
> What's the reference for this study?
> Even if the teeth were too late to be considered
> congeneric with Irritator,
> they could always be more closely related to
> Irritator than to Spinosaurus.
> And since Giganotosaurus is from the Early
> Cenomanian, I see no reason at
> all to doubt the Alcantara teeth belong to it.
> 
> Mickey Mortimer

Unfortunately the reference on this is in
Portuguese,its the following:

Medeiros, M.A.(2001)A lage do coringa (Ilha do
Cajual,Bacia de São Luiz,Baia de São Marcos,MA):
Conteúdo fossilífero,bioestratinomia, diagênese e
implicações do Mesocretáceo do nordeste
brasileiro.Tese de doutorado UFRGS.

The author recognizes the attribution of some
vertebral centra to the genus Carcharodontosaurus is
unconclusive but assumes there's enough evidence to
support the assignement of some teeth to that genus.
In wich Spinosaurid material is concerned.The author
remembers the existence of a similiar genus not far
from there (Angaturama limai in that paper)but points
out the faunistical similarities between that region
and North Africa during the Cenomanian(i.g:
Mawsonia,Lepidotes,Neoceratodus africanus and others)
and find more prudent to attribute them to
Spinosaurus.

Mark











        
                
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/