Re: RAJASAURUS

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

Tim Williams <twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com> wrote:

<BTW, isn't the type material of _Lametasaurus indicus_ a composite of 
different taxa?>

  It's based on a partial braincase; referred plate-like material, such as
the ilia, were considered to be horizontal, which led to the ID as an
ankylosaur by Matley. However, I think this has since been identified as
an abelisaur ilium, instead; the frontoparietal of the type remains unseen
by myself, despite attempts to view it even in the original paper. Thus,
my attempts to theorize that *Indosaurus*/*Indosuchus* and *Lametasaurus*
were synonymous based on consistent material have yet to bear any testable
proof. Now, if others have illustrations/photos of the material, I'd love
to see them. That most of the large theropod vertebrae belong to
abelisaurs is likely, as do much of the smaller material, it makes one
consider that, when more complete material _is_ recovered, there will be a
taxonomic implosion as synonyms are granted to most of von Huene and
Matley's taxa.

  One can only hope.

  Cheers,

=====
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.

"Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com