Re: Three New Neoceratopsians (Bagaceratopsidae Described)

["David Marjanovic" <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>]

> <Is there any real ceratopsian egg shell known?>
>
>   Despite arguments from Tim Donovon [sic], which I beleive are originally
placed due to referral of some species of *Protoceratopsidovum*
> to theropods because they look like troodont eggs from NA, some eggs with
smooth surface texture and the elongated, more rounded
> oval shape has been recovered with *Protoceratops* embryos and hatchlings
associated. This data is covered in Carpenter's recent
> book, "Dinosaur Eggs and Babies," and the data was covered here:
>
>   http://www.cmnh.org/dinoarch/2003Jan/msg00728.html

Looks like you misunderstood that post, which is an unanswered _question_
about whether *Protoceratopsidovum* is from *Protoceratops* or not. Judging
from the microstructure, it's from a theropod.

> If anything, the name could have been -rostralus

No.

> or -rostralis.

Yes (if masculine or feminine; -e would be neutral... as _os rostrale_ is).

> -rostris is used to refer passively to the bone by referring to the nose.

It could be an ablative plural... "with big noses"? Hm.