RE: Taxonomic Status

["Michael de Sosa" <ofsosa@uclink4.berkeley.edu>]

Upchurch (March 1999 JVP) found that the holotype braincase of A.
wichmannianus and the referred mandible were from different animals, right?
I think one was a nemegtosaur and one was a diplodocid (rebacchisaur?), but
I can't remember which was which.

Mike D.

> Ivan Kwan (t_rexkwan@hotmail.com) wrote:
>
> <Just what is Antarctosaurus? Is it a titanosaur, or is it (as i
> read  somewhere else) a
> diplodocimorph?>
>
>   It's both. Or rather, the holotype of the type species, *A.
> wichmannianus* von Huene, 1927, from
> the Allen Fm. near Roca (same region and strata as
> *Quilmesaurus*), appears to be a
> diplodocimorph, and possibly allied with *Nigersaurus*. The skull
> is especially similar to several
> diplodocimorphs, but is not as "rotated" so that the braincase
> faces ventrally at the rear. The
> mandible is especially diagnostic. A second species, *A.
> septentrionalis* von Huene, 1932, was
> removed as a titanosaurid called *Jainosaurus,* named for Sohan
> Jain, and was an Indian
> titanosaur, and similar to both *Argyrosaurus* and
> *Titanosaurus.* A third species, *A. giganteus*
> von Huene, 1929, is also a titanosaur, from the Neuquin Fm..
> Obviously, *A. giganteus* is not
> *Antarctosaurus.* Other titanosaur material referred to
> *Antarctosaurus* looks like nemegtosaur
> material (see Curry-Rogers & Forster, 2001).