Re: Laelaps and Brontosauria (was Re: Resending)

[Tim Williams <twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com>]

Mike Taylor wrote:

> >> However who use's Brontosauria in the literature?
> >
> > Absolutely nobody.
>
> ... except Bakker, of course.  See for example Bakker, R. T.  1994.
> The Bite of the Bronto.  Earth 3 (6): 26-35.  This refers to
> "brontosaurs" throughout.

But doesn't he just use "brontosaur" in an informal sense, without using the 
formal term "Brontosauria"?

> (It also include a skull reconstruction of... *tah-dah* 
> _Haplocanthosaurus_.  Excuse me.)

Wow, I'm impressed!  :-)

Jay <sappororaptor@yahoo.com> wrote:

> The relationship between Sinraptor + Yangchuanosaurus is quite 
> stable/strong and so warrants a name.

According to Rauhut (and he isn't the only one), _Sinraptor_ and 
_Yangchuanosaurus_ are so similar that they are actually the same genus, so 
this taxon would take the name _Yangchuanosaurus_ (with _Sinraptor_ as a 
subjective junior synonym).  Thus, a Sinraptoridae defined as _Sinraptor_ + 
_Yangchuanosaurus_ would effectively be monotypic.

> It can't be helped that Metriacanthosaurus's relationship was subsequently 
> revealed.  It may not
> even be an sinraptorid. Is it an Allosauroid?

AFAIK, _Metriacanthosaurus_ is difficult to pin down phylogenetically owing 
(in part) to the incompleteness of the material.  Other theropods have been 
touted as possible "sinraptorids", such as _Siamotyrannus_ and 
_Marshosaurus_.  I don't think it's advisable to anchor any suprageneric 
clade in the genus _Metriacanthosaurus_.  Sinraptoridae could be defined as 
something like "theropods closer to _Sinraptor_ than to _Allosaurus_ or 
_Torvosaurus_".

Cheers

Tim