Re: Oviraptorid pelvic structure question

[Marco Auditore <maaudito@tin.it>]

At 09.40 03/02/2003 -0800, you wrote:
>   Well, it's not hard to maker different pubic orientations between our
> skeletons, as the pubes are disarticulated in both specimens of *Khaan
> mckennai* as described by Clark, Norell, and Barsbold. These show the
> pubic separated from the ilium, and I chose to rearticulate them in a
> manner similar to other articulated oviraptorid pubes, as in
> *Conchoraptor* and GI 100/42.

I've seen the skeleton of GI 100/42 in an exposition of the Gobi desert 
dinosaurs, and the pelvic elements weren't articulated. The pubis was 
curved like that of my skeletal reconstruction. I has the suspect that the 
pelvic elements of the oviraptorids (and maybe caenagnathids) were 
articulated in a manner like that of my reconstructions from some time, and 
this idea was strenghtened by the fossil of the holotype of Heyuannia 
huangi pelvic elements, and above all, by the ARTICULATED pelvic elements 
of PC 100/2112, the "Ingenia"sp. by Lu, Dong, Azuma, Barsbold and Tomida, 
2002 (that probably is another Citipati sp.): the proximal pubis and 
ischium (distally are not preserved) are absolutely opisthopubic. Only 
that, if we add the distal part of these two bones (taken from other 
oviraptorids), we have the pseudo opisthopubic orientation that I made for 
the disarticulated pelvic girdle of Citipati sp. and Khaan mckennai in the 
manner that You have seen in the Dinosauricon.
Is possible that the pseudo opisthopubic orientation of the oviraptorids 
(and maybe caenagnathids) was a common character of all enigmosaurs, 
extremizated in segnosaurs. Naturally this is only conjectural, only an idea.

I hope that my words are understandable, I don't speak English very well.

Bye,
Marco