Re: Sarahsaurus - new(ish) sauropodomorph from Arizona

To: DML <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Subject: Re: Sarahsaurus - new(ish) sauropodomorph from Arizona
From: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 11:40:03 +0100
Authentication-results: msg-ironport1.usc.edu; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
In-reply-to: <1291607623.4cfc5e478bc1f@webmail.chariot.com.au>
References: <AANLkTinWhTWeJjSmEPFC1cCq8yPv0Lm3SgOqesTsY2_s@mail.gmail.com> <EC745ACC-C5AC-40FF-B27F-952711FBFC9D@rogers.com> <1291607623.4cfc5e478bc1f@webmail.chariot.com.au>
Reply-to: david.marjanovic@gmx.at
Sender: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu

 As for the generic name; is there no real need to use the feminine
 version of 'saurus' (as in Leaellynasaura) if it is being named
 after a woman?

Whether the lizard is female doesn't depend on whether the person it'snamed for is female.

References:
- Sarahsaurus - new(ish) sauropodomorph from Arizona
  - From: Tim Williams <tijawi@gmail.com>
- Re: Sarahsaurus - new(ish) sauropodomorph from Arizona
  - From: Ronald Orenstein <ron.orenstein@rogers.com>
- Re: Sarahsaurus - new(ish) sauropodomorph from Arizona
  - From: Dann Pigdon <dannj@alphalink.com.au>