Re: Diplodocoidea vs. Diplodocimorpha

[Mike Taylor <mike@indexdata.com>]

> Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 11:32:47 -0700
> From: "Mickey Mortimer" <Mickey_Mortimer111@msn.com>
> 
> > My questions: can anyone tell me the reference for
> > Diplodocimorpha?  And does anyone know who is responsible for the
> > narrower node-based definition of Diplodocoidea?
> 
> Diplodocomorpha Calvo and Salgado, 1995
> Reference- Calvo, J.O. and L. Salgado. 1995. Rebbachisaurus tessonei
> sp.  nov., a new Sauropoda from the Albian-Cenomanian of Argentina:
> new evidence on the origin of the Diplodocidae. Gaia 11: 13-33.

Thanks, Mickey, this is really helpful.  (BTW., I assume that
"DiplodocOmorpha" here and elsewhere in your message is a typo for
"DiplodocImorpha"?)

> Diplodocoidea was named by Upchurch (1995) for his nemegtosaurid +
> dicraeosaurid + diplodocid clade.  I don't know if he defined it, my
> copy is at home.

I'll check again, but I skimmed this paper last night, and didn't see
any clade definitions in it.

> Rebbachisaurids were not considered a distinct primitive clade yet,
> as Rayososaurus tessonei had yet to be described.  Once it was,
> Calvo and Salgado (1995) continued using Diplodocoidea for the more
> restricted clade, and created Diplodocomorpha for the more inclusive
> clade of (Rayososaurus tessonei + Diplodocus longus) (modified).

Aha!  Well, I think that's _equivalent_ (according to current
phylogenies) to the Dinosauricon definition of Diplodocimorpha =
{Diplodocus > Saltasaurus}, but it's a very different definiton.  So
that's Diplodocoidea sensu Calvo & Salgado, but I still need to track
down the author of the Dinosauricon's definition.

> I'm not sure if they defined both clades either (I don't have that
> paper), though the commentary in Glut (2000) suggests they at least
> defined Diplodocomorpha as (Rebbachisaurus + Diplodocidae).

Ah yes, Glut ...  The next best thing to primary literature!  Thanks
for pointing me back to that.  I followed the link from his
_Rayosaurus_ entry into the Systematics chapter, and found this on
page 87:

        Hunt et al. stated that similar cranial features
        shared by diplodocids and dicraeosaurids may suggest
        that these two groups together make up a monophyletic
        "superfamily" Diplodocoidea.

So I think that's the reference for that name:

        Hunt, A. P., M. G. Lockley, S. G. Lucas and
        C. A. Meyer.  1994.  The global sauropod fossil
        record.  Gaia 10:261-279.

(Man oh man, how _did_ people cope before the Internet and the Glut
encyclopaedias?  :-)

 _/|_    _______________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor  <mike@indexdata.com>  http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  "I did it preserve the Union and promote sales of my book"
         -- Charles J. Guiteau.

--
Listen to my wife's new CD of kids' music, _Child's Play_, at
        http://www.pipedreaming.org.uk/childsplay/