*Procompsognathus*

["Jaime A. Headden" <qilongia@yahoo.com>]

  I will have something to say on this taxon in the near future.
However, for the meantime, Chatterjee supports the skull as a dinosaur,
citing some very convincing features; they may still be convergent. The
type has a very squished manus that is largely rolled into a single
bundle ... one would have to separate the elements to find probable
articulations. I don't like referred elements like a manus and skull
SMNS 12352) that are difficult to compare with a type (SMNS 12591);
furtherore, the type lacks a skull, so all that is comparable is a
manus. As such, while Chatterjee may be correct is saying the second
specimen is dinosaurian, or even theropodan, no modern scientist would
refer it to a type without more extensive overlapping material. This
thing could just be Dinosauria? incertae sedis. *Procompsognathus*, on
the other hand, does really seem to be a theropod dinosaur, and a
"ceratosaur" to boot. It does seem to have definative podokesaurid
characteristics, and so a five-fingered manus is certainly not
expected. Dinosaurs, along with their immediate outgroups, are
diagnosed by the abscence of the fifth metacarpal and any phalanges
associated with it. On the off-chance that paedomorphosis produces a
dinosaur with a five fingered manus _aside_ from a questionable
specimen like SMNS 12352, then we'll talk digits, dudes.

=====
Jaime "James" A. Headden

  Dinosaurs are horrible, terrible creatures! Even the
  fluffy ones, the snuggle-up-at-night-with ones. You think
  they're fun and sweet, but watch out for that stray tail
  spike! Down, gaston, down, boy! No, not on top of Momma!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf!  It's FREE.
http://im.yahoo.com/