"Eobrontosaurus" is not Camarasaurus

[DinoBoyGraphics@aol.com]

I don't know if this has been discussed on the list yet, but the new version of 
the Dinosauria tentatively reassigns Eobrontosaurus yahnahpin (orginally 
described as Apatosaurus yahnahpin and affectionately called "Bertha") as a 
species of Camarasaurus.  Not having seen the specimen in many years, I went to 
Glen Rock and examined it (despite rumors to the otherwise, the specimen is 
still in fact there).

So...the verterae un unquestionably apatosaurine.  The Dinosauria II cites the 
original "publication's" description of long cervical ribs as a non-diplodocine 
character, which of course it would be.  Except there are absolutely no 
complete cervical ribs preserved.  The bone that was described as a cervical 
rib is (I swear I'm not making this up!) actually a fragmentary (and still 
incompletely prepped)illium.  It is the pubic peduncle and ventral margin of 
the anterior blade.  The rest was apparently not preserved, but in the 
incomplete state of prep the authors apparently thought it was an unfused 
cervical rib (or else they thought the peduncle was part of a cervical 
vertebrae...?).

So, the quick version is that some of the bones are mis-diagnosed in the 
original description, which lead to the reassingment of the species to 
Camarasaurus.  Obviously the specimen needs a more complete description when it 
is fully preped out, but it is assuredly apatosaurine in nature.

Just thought some of you would like to know.

-- 
Scott Hartman
Zoology & Physiology
University of Wyoming
Laramie, WY 82070

(307) 742-3799