[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Pleurocoelus question
To Tom, Ray, Jaime, et al.:
I definitely agree that basing genera, species, etc. on teeth is "bad." It is
certainly something that I (probably...) wouldn't do. However, the fact
remains that several species and genera are based on teeth, and many have been
sunk (Trachodon, etc.).
Therefore, although Astrodon may indeed be a nomen dubium, there is no way to
know without 1) performing some sort of study and 2) publishing it somewhere.
To my knowledge, neither have been done.
I agree with Tom that the star-shaped pulp section likely may not be unique to
Astrodon. However, I'm not assuming this. I'm playing the role of Doubting
Thomas here, and will accept the fact that Astrodon is a nomen dubium when
somebody shows me a study.
And, as Ray said, I'm not advocating destroying any teeth! If a CT scan would
reveal anything, then I'm all for it. I sorely wish that somebody would take
up a study such as this. Not necessarily Pleurocoelus vs. Astrodon per se, but
something on the pulp and interior shapes of brachiosaurid or sauropod teeth.
Steve
---
***************************************************************
Steve Brusatte-DINO LAND PALEONTOLOGY
SITE: http://www.geocities.com/stegob
ONLINE CLUB: http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/thedinolanddinosaurdigsite
WEBRING: http://home.wanadoo.nl/dinodata.net/
INTERNATIONAL LANGUAGE SITE: http://www.geocities.com/stegob/international.html
****************************************************************
Get 250 color business cards for FREE!
http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/