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

Re: Avaceratops and Ceratops (was RE: First International Phylogenetic Nom...)



Paul Penkalski wrote:

Here's my 2 cents on this. In our 1999 paper, Dodson and i concluded that _Ceratops_ is a nomen dubium because the material - essentially just two horncores - is insufficient for diagnosis. So even if Avaceratops were really Ceratops, it is doubtful one would ever be able to demonstrate it. (at
least not in this lifetime). Still, it's a fun puzzle to play with.

Thanks for the reply, Paul. It's nice to get info straight from the horse's mouth (so to speak).


Yeah, _Ceratops montanus_ is toast. The type material (two postorbital horncores, occipital condyle is probably non-diagnostic. The horncores of _Ceratops_ are a little strange in the way they twist outwards, but the range of variation in horncores within a neoceratopsian species seems fairly high anyway. _C. montanus_ is probably best regarded as a _nomen dubium_.

However, there is a glimmer of a chance that the genus _Ceratops_ could be salvaged, if topotypic material is found. I keep on hearing that the type locality was re-located, and/or ceratopsian material from the Milk River Formation might be referrable to _Ceratops montanus_. I don't know anything more than this.



Tim

_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963