Re: Titanoceratops, giant ceratopsian from New Mexico

[Matthew Martyniuk <martyniuk@gmail.com>]

(Whoops, meant to send this to the whole list...)

Since the ICZN doesn't yet recognize online pre-print publication as
valid, "Titanoceratops" is currently a nomen nudum. And unless the
next issue of CR is published today, it will be until likely some time
in 2011.

Matt

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 4:11 PM, David Krentz <ddkrentz@charter.net> wrote:
> In the Wikipedia article is state that it was named in 2011. ÂI guess there 
> is a limitation to how many ceratopsians can be named in a 2010.
>
> D
> On Dec 29, 2010, at 8:09 PM, Tim Williams wrote:
>
>>> In case this new advance publication paper has not been mentioned yet:
>>>
>>> Nicholas R. Longrich (2010) Titanoceratops ouranous, a giant horned 
>>> dinosaur from the
>>> Late Campanian of New Mexico. Cretaceous Research (advance online 
>>> publication)
>>> doi:10.1016/j.cretres.2010.12.007
>>
>>
>> There seems to be a discrepancy in the spelling of the species name
>> between the title of the paper (ouranous) and the body of the paper
>> (ouranos), with the former having an extra (and unnecessary) 'u'.
>> Something to correct before final publication. ÂBTW, the inspiration
>> for the species name is Ouranos, the father of the Titans in Greek
>> mythology. ÂThis is the same dude that gives his name to the planet
>> Uranus. ÂApparently, the etymology is not the same as that of
>> _Ouranosaurus_, which comes from the Tuareg name for monitor lizard
>> ('ourane'), and is cognate with 'varanus'.
>>
>>
>> Anyway, back to _Titanoceratops_ (cool name, IMHO). ÂAside from
>> erecting a new genus for an erstwhile _Pentaceratops_ specimen, the
>> paper puts forward a few more taxonomic changes vis-a-vis
>> _Triceratops_. ÂThe referral of _Torosaurus_ to _Triceratops_ is
>> explicitly rejected; a separate diagnosis is provided for each, and
>> the "absence of intermediate forms argues that the two are not part of
>> an ontogenetic series." Â On the other hand, _Nedoceratops_
>> (=_Diceratops_) and _Ojoceratops_ are referred to _Triceratops_ as
>> junior synonyms. ÂFor the latter: "the broad, squared-off end of the
>> squamosal, putatively a diagnostic feature of â_Ojoceratops_â is
>> approached by at least one specimen of _Triceratops_ (_Triceratops
>> âserratusâ_, AMNH 970)." ÂSo I guess _Ojoceratops_ is the problem.
>> more so than _T. serratus_, which I assume is safe inside
>> _Triceratops_. ÂThe status of another new genus, _Tatankaceratops_, is
>> given as "problematic". ÂIt "preserves a bizarre mixture of characters
>> seen in juvenile and adult _Triceratops_", so the specimen is either
>> an aberrant _Triceratops_ that stopped growing before reaching full
>> size, or a dwarf triceratopsin species. ÂI wouldn't be surprised if
>> more taxonomic convulsions are in stall for the Triceratopsini.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Tim
>
>