Re: Dinosaur Genera List corrections #141

["Timothy Williams" <twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com>]

George wrote:

> The point here is that Ponerosteus is most likely based on a dinosaur 
> fossil,
> whereas those others (including Aachenosaurus) are now known not to be:

My impression is that the "type" material of _Iguanodon_ (now _Ponerosteus_) 
_exogyrarum_ is of such poor quality that it cannot be determined if it's a 
dinosaur or not.  As a _nomen dubium_, I would question whether _I. 
exogyrarum_ deserved to be given its own genus.  I suppose if nothing else, 
it gets it out of the genus _Iguanodon_.  When I receive my copy of MM#3, 
I'll be interested in reading your opinion on its identity.

> By the way, where did you hear about Macrodontophion being a
> mollusc lately?

I believe it was in Glut's _Dinosaur Encyclopedia_.  I have heard it before 
though.


Tim
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com