Re: Magnosaurus & matrilineal dinosaurs

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

David Marjanovic (david.marjanovic@gmx.at) wrote, in reply to Pickering:

<In many species, especially predatory ones AFAIK, the females are considerably 
larger.>

  I would like to see evidence for this assumption. It is my understanding that 
as of the main
line of evidence supporting this (Larson, 1995, 1997) a recent list-member's in 
press publication
(Brochu, in press) would seem to suggest that there is no way to securely mark 
a "male" or
"female" label to that skeleton, or in fact apply it to others. What appears to 
indicate male and
female morphs in ceolophysids (robust and gracile) does not compare to actual 
size disparities
(Raath, 1980; Colbert, 1989) and ceratopsid variation is based almost soley on 
horn and facial
morphology (Sampson, 1995, 1997; Tanke has something in prep on this, as well) 
and not size. In
fact, there is no real data for size variation as an indication of gender 
except for
tyrannosaurines, and this is based on 1) sample size and 2) inference from 
crocodylians which, as
Brochu (onlist and in press) has said, is not entirely correct.

=====
Jaime A. Headden

  Little steps are often the hardest to take.  We are too used to making leaps 
in the face of adversity, that a simple skip is so hard to do.  We should all 
learn to walk soft, walk small, see the world around us rather than zoom by it.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com