Re: A couple of questions

[npharris@umich.edu]

Quoting Dino Rampage <dino_rampage@hotmail.com>:

> Yes, I'm finally back with a bunch of more questions to ask...
> 
> 1) What's the difference between Citipati osmolskae & Oviraptor 
> philoceratops? Seriously, to me they both look identical. 

That's because all the pictures you've seen of "_Oviraptor philoceratops_" are 
really specimens of _Citipati osmolskae_.  I'm not sure whether any real _O. 
philoceratops_ are known besides the type specimen.  A restoration of the 
holotype of _O._ by HP Marco Auditore can be seen here:

http://dinosauricon.com/images/oviraptor-ma.html


> And while we're at
> that, in what way does Khaan differ from Ingenia? 

Off the top of my head, _K._ lacks _I._'s odd finger proportions (I longest, 
then II, then III).


> Does anybody know what 
> Nomingia's head looked like?

No.


> And is Rinchenia mongoliensis still valid or is
> it now Oviraptor mongoliensis??

The species was originally described as _O. mongoliensis_.  It has been 
suggested that this species does not belong in _Oviraptor_, and the genus 
name "Rinchenia" has been proposed in print, but "Rinchenia" has never been 
scientifically described.


> 2) Just asking around here, how many of you think that Nanotyrannus is a 
> valid taxon??? I just don't know whether I should consider it a full species
> or just a juvenile Tyrannosaurus.

The "consensus" (ha, ha) appears to be that _N._ represents a juvenile, most 
likely _T. rex_.  The possibility remains that it could be a juvenile of some 
other tyrannosaur (perhaps another species of _Tyrannosaurus_), though.

--Nick Pharris