Re: Long-necked stegosaur coming out in Proceedings B

[Tim Williams <tijawi@yahoo.com>]

David Marjanovic wrote:

> I'm told the extra spines of *K.* must really have been on
> the hip, because they would have been stable there, while
> there's no way to connect them to the shoulder girdle. 

Isn't that where the original reconstructions of _Kentrosaurus_ put the spines 
- on the hips, not the shoulders?


> The
> base of these spines is, after all, drastically different
> from what's seen in online photos of the _still_ unpublished
> "*Gigant(o)spinosaurus*".


So _Kentrosaurus_ had paired spines on the hips, and 'Gigantspinosaurus' had 
them on the shoulders?

BTW, isn't the name 'Gigantspinosaurus' a valid genus?  I had thought the 
original description (by Ouyang) is considered to be valid, including by 
Susannah Maidment's recent stegosaur papers.

Of course, if 'Gigantspinosaurus' is NOT a nomenclaturally valid genus (i.e., a 
nomen nudum), then it provides an opportunity to spell the name correctly - 
e.g., as you say, 'Gigantospinosaurus'.



Cheers

Tim