Re: The Holy of Holies... Dinosauria II

["Jonathan R. Wagner" <jonathan.r.wagner@mail.utexas.edu>]

HP Carpenter wrote:
> don't forget the abnormally long diastema.

I'm not entirely convinced that the "diastema" (I really don't think this 
term should be used, since it normally refers to a gap in a toothrow...) is 
really that much bigger relative to skull length than in annectens. I'm not 
sure there is enough data to say for certain, but the 4 data points I have 
suggest that the edentulous oral margin of copei is the appropriate length 
relative to skull length for an annectens.


HP Holtz wrote:

> The third possibility is a two genus solution a la Wright and Lull, with
> Edmontosaurus regalis and Anatosaurus annectens and Anatosaurus copei
> (assuming the phylogeny is indeed regalis + (annectens + copei)).

Or, for those of us who hate genera, nested clades: Edmontosaurus including 
regalis and Anatosaurus, Anatosaurus including annectens and copei. 
Personally, I think this is a little much, but that's because I hate genera.

Wagner