Re: Monoclonius

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 96-01-31 02:36:49 EST, endocrin@desktop.com.au writes:

>I've become rather confused about the status of Monoclonius. It doesn't seem
>so long ago that some authors were trying their hardest to put Avaceratops,
>Brachyceratops etc into Monoclonius, but recent postings to this list
>suggest strongly that Monoclonius species are likely to be juveniles of
>other ceratopian species. So, just what is the current position? If
>Monoclonius is juvenile of other unknown species, is Monoclonius retained as
>a genus until the "unknowns" are identified; does it become a nomen dubium,
>or what? And why the change? Is it due to new material, or re-investigation
>of old stuff (after all, Monoclonius material has been around for a long
>time)?

_Monoclonius_ is retained as a separate but indeterminate genus in subfamily
Pachyrhinosaurinae (other people's Centrosaurinae). Because of its antiquity,
it has priority over virtually every other genus in the family. Scott Sampson
tells me that none of the species presently referred to _Monoclonius_ is
based on determinate material; they're all _nomina dubia_.