tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5519292617097628087.post8962116332215298368..comments2024-01-02T16:09:12.886-07:00Comments on Chinleana: Reintroducing the Phytosaur Genus MachaeoroprosopusBill Parkerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05941940882532354219noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5519292617097628087.post-28625523040484918802013-09-27T08:59:36.359-07:002013-09-27T08:59:36.359-07:00While the names Allosaurus, Coelophysis, Stegosaur...While the names Allosaurus, Coelophysis, Stegosaurus, and Anchisaurus have been entrenched in the public consciousness for a long time, the middle-late Norian pseudopalatines from America have had a rather unstable taxonomic history, being referred to as Phytosaurus, Rutiodon, Machaeroprosopus, Pseudopalatus, and Belodon. But the case of Machaeroprosopus is a different case than that of Allosaurus, Coelophysis, Stegosaurus, and Anchisaurus because the type specimen of Machaeroprosopus buceros is diagnostic and M. validus was tossed as a nomen dubium only because the holotype went missing several years after study, even though UW 3807 appears to be well-preserved enough to preserve diagnostic characters that would uphold the validity of M. validus. Add to that the species now included in the genera Smilosuchus were once assigned to Machaeroprosopus, but later recognized as being more primitive than Machaeroprosopus proper, Nicrosaurus, and Mystriosuchus. Some workers may object to the use of Machaeroprosopus in place of Pseudopalatus, but others will accept this name change by Parker et. al. because they know that phytosaur alpha-taxonomy has been a headache for paleontologists and that Gregory (1962) did not consider the upper Chinle phytosaurs to be distinct from Rutiodon and Phytosaurus. Davidowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06099864739987549261noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5519292617097628087.post-59927200733190829252013-09-26T20:48:45.566-07:002013-09-26T20:48:45.566-07:00Bill, Bill... haven't you been paying attentio...Bill, Bill... haven't you been paying attention to Anchisaurus, Coelophysis, Allosaurus, Stegosaurus, etc.? We don't follow the Code, the Code follows us. The new way to handle these situations is to declare the old remains to be nomina dubia because actually studying them takes work. Then just pick a shiny new specimen as a neotype, and the popular vote makes it so. Then we can continue using the name that's currently popular and everyone's happy. Here we already had everyone using Pseudopalatus and now you've gone and messed that up. It's the same with your Typothorax/Episcoposaurus paper from that volume. You didn't see us theropod workers stoop to describing and illustrating all of Cope's Coelophysis fragments when the Rioarribasaurus situation was brought up. We just knew coelophysoids are all similar and that we wanted the Ghost Ranch taxon to be Coelophysis, so we made it so. You need to stop spending so much effort doing science and just get your desired results by fiat.<br /><br />In all seriousness though, these are both amazing papers that dinosaur workers would be wise to emulate.Mickey Mortimerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08831823442911513851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5519292617097628087.post-8016809506950472962013-09-25T19:55:52.514-07:002013-09-25T19:55:52.514-07:00Actually, Stocker and Butler (2013) listed Machaer...Actually, Stocker and Butler (2013) listed Machaeroprosopus validus and M. andersoni as Phytosauria incertae sedis without commenting on their relationship to Machaeroprosopus buceros and M. pristinus in spite of the fact that M. validus is a pseudopalatine grade phytosaurid judging from the original description of Mehl (1916). And Machaeroprosopus will acquire one more species as the discovery of M. lottorum shows that Redondasaurus is congeneric with Machaeroprosopus (keep in mind that Redondasaurus bermani was recently synonymized with Redondasaurus gregorii by Spielmann and Lucas 2012)*.<br />.<br />*As a side note, since Redondasaurus is congeneric with Machaeroprosopus as per the discovery of Machaeroprosopus lottorum, the presence of Redondasaurus in the lower Wingate Sandstone would make the Redonda Formation and siltstone member partially Revueltian in age because Dromomeron romeri is known from the siltstone member.<br /><br />Spielmann, J. A.& Lucas, S. G. 2012. Tetrapod Fauna of the Upper Triassic Redonda Formation, East-central New Mexico: The Characteristic Assemblage of the Apachean Land-vertebrate Faunachron. New Mexico<br />Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin, 55.Davidowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06099864739987549261noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5519292617097628087.post-40748365132698176492013-09-25T11:46:52.667-07:002013-09-25T11:46:52.667-07:00So this genus now contains seven species!?
They re...So this genus now contains seven species!?<br />They really should be revised...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com