A Thought About *Jurapteryx*

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

David Marjanovic (david.marjanovic@gmx.at) wrote:

<HP John V. Jackson was so kind as to send me:

  M. E. Howgate: The teeth of Archaeopteryx and a
reinterpretation of the Eichstätt specimen, Zoological Journal
of the Linnean Society 82: 159 -- 175 (1984) 

  I must say the case for separating the Eichstätt specimen as
A. recurva is quite convincing. 

-- AFAIK a rebuttal of this is published -- where? 
-- The teeth of the 7th specimen, called A. bavarica, look the
same. Any chance A. bavarica is a junior synonym of A. recurva?>

  Some features here would be nice, David ;)

  Anyway ...

  There are two major features that distinguish the Eichstätt
specimen from several other specimens, aside from being one of
the smallest. Howgate uses both limb proportions, and the form
of the teeth, being more strictly and strongly recurved, hence
the original designation of the species, *Archaeopteryx
recurva.*

  One might wonder, but one sees similar conditions in a
particular theropod dinosaur, *Gorgosaurus libratus*, which
features juveniles having extraordinarily large, long, and more
labiolingually flattened teeth than the adults, more gracile
limb structure, and longer and more cursorially-built legs and
body proportions. Apparently, one could apply a different
ecology to juveniles than to adults, but I'm sure no one has
ever suggested that juvenile *Gorgosaurus* are suddenly a new,
distinct species from adult *Gorgosaurus*.

  Just an extant example for fun,

=====
Jaime A. Headden

  Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhr-gen-ti-na
  Where the Wind Comes Sweeping Down the Pampas!!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/