Re: Sauropods and Cycads??

["RAY STANFORD" <STARSONG@prodigy.net>]

Thomas R. Holtz, Jr., Ph.D., wrote (first reproducing a portion of my post
regarding Cycadeoidea marylandica):


> From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu]On Behalf Of
> RAY STANFORD
>     At the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History in Washington,
> D.C., there has for years been on display a magnificent, multi-trunk
> specimen of Cycadiodea marylandica that unquestionably came out
> of the late Early Cretaceous of Maryland.

Holtz then correctly pointed out that:

     "Although _Cycadeoidea marylandica_ is a source of paleobotanical pride
for the Old Line State (second only to the Early Cretaceous flowers, also
from
the Potomac Group), it isn't a cycad..."

    I respectfully point out, that, personally  I have long been aware that
Cycadeoidea marylandica is not a Cycad.   That's why I gave the proper name
of the plant, but it seems a lot of persons confuse Cycadeoidea for Cycad,
so Holtz has a good point of emphasis.

    Dr. Holtz is ever the teacher and one of this list's best sources of
information, accuracy, details, and correction -- whether the topic is
dinosaurs or related things.  In that vein, I appreciate his correcting
(without pointing to) my 1:30 a.m. mis-spelling of  Cycadeoidea as
Cycadiodea!

    "Hats off to Holtz", Ray Stanford