Re: Dinosaur Genera List corrections #153

[NJPharris@aol.com]

In a message dated 12/16/00 6:56:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
Dinogeorge@aol.com writes:

> Azuma, Y. & Currie, P. J. 2000. "A new carnosaur (Dinosauria: Theropoda) 
from 
> 
>  the Lower Cretaceous of Japan," Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 37(12): 
>  1735-1753.
>  
>  The paper describes the allosaurid carnosaur Fukuiraptor kitadaniensis, 

Carnosaur, but not allosaurid.  Most parsimonious tree places it outside of, 
but just basal to, Allosauroidea ({_Allosaurus_+_Sinraptor_}).


> based 
>  on a recently discovered partial but rather poorly preserved skeleton. It 
is 
>  said to be similar in size and appearance to Sinraptor. 

Apparently similar in appearance, but not in size.  The type of _F. 
kitadaniensis_ would have been about 4.2 m long (though it was apparently 
immature), compared to 7.2 m for _S. dongi_.


>  A tooth once nicknamed "Kitadanisaurus" in a few Japanese publications, 
> never 
>  formally described under that name and originally considered 
dromaeosaurid, 
>  is supposedly shown by this new material to be the allosaurid Fukuiraptor. 

Apparently so:

"In cross-section, the premaxillary tooth most closely resembles a 
premaxillary tooth of a dromaeosaurid..." (1738)

"The dental shelves of the maxilla and dentary are narrow, and the 
interdental plates have fused to each other and to the margin of the jaw.  
These are characteristics that have previously only been reported in 
dromaeosaurids.  On the basis of these and the unguals, the specimen was 
originally assigned to the Dromaeosauridae...In all other characters, 
_Fukuiraptor_ more closely resembles advanced carnosaurs." (1745)


However, note also the following:

"A variety of theropod teeth have been collected in the quarry...[s]maller 
teeth are similar in size and shape to those of dromaeosaurids, but do not 
have the peculiarities of denticulation found in either _Dromaeosaurus_ or 
known velociraptorines.  Nevertheless, teeth from the Katsuyama quarry are 
identified as dromaeosaurid on the basis of a characteristic twist in the 
anterior carina...and at least one dorsal vertebra (FPM 96082619) is 
suggestive of dromaeosaurid affinities." (1735)

So there were apparently dromaeosaurs around as well.  I do not know which 
specimen is "Kitadanisaurus".  The paper never mentions the name.


Two more tidbits of note:

1.)  The authors indicate that the "allosaur" astragalus from Australia is 
very similar to that of _Fukuiraptor_ and may come from a related species.

2.)  _Xuanhanosaurus_ is mentioned twice in the paper, and both times it is 
referred to as a carnosaur.  Carnosauria is used consistently in this paper 
for {_Allosaurus_>Neornithes}.  _X._ is also said to be more primitive than 
_Fukuiraptor_ (1741).

Nick P.