[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: Ligabuesaurus leanzai
Brad McFeeters wrote:
Bonaparte, J.F., González Riga, B.J. & S. Apesteguía, 2006. Ligabuesaurus
leanzai gen. et sp. nov. (Dinosauria, Sauropoda), a new titanosaur from the
Lohan Cura Formation (Aptian, Lower Cretaceous) of Neuquén, Patagonia,
Argentina. Cretaceous Research, in press.
AFAIK, this is the THIRD dinosaur to be named after Dr Giancarlo Ligabue,
together with two other South American taxa, _Ligabueino andesi_ (theropod)
and _Agustina ligabuei_ (sauropod). Trivia question: Is there anybody who's
had more dinosaurs named after him/her? (I know Ned Colbert has three.)
The humerus/femur ratio of _Ligabuesaurus_ is 0.9 (1.49m/1.66m), which is a
little bigger than _Chubutisaurus_ (0.86). It's not clear if such long
forelimbs evolved independently of true brachiosaurids, or is plesiomorphic
for titanosauriforms. If the latter is true, this could undermine the
monophyly of Brachiosauridae (my opinion, not the authors') - especially
since there are similarities in the cervicals between _Ligabuesaurus_,
_Brachiosaurus_ ("Giraffatitan"), and _Sauroposeidon_.
_Ligabuesaurus_'s closest relative appears to be _Phuwiangosaurus_. Given
that _Ligabuesaurus_ is recovered as above _Brachiosaurus_ but below
_Andesaurus_, it would be a titanosaur under Wilson and Sereno's (1998)
stem-based definition ("titanosauriforms closer to _Saltasaurus_ than to
_Brachiosaurus_ and _Euhelopus_"), which was essentially followed by Sereno
(2005). However, under Salgado et al's (1997) node-based definition ("all
descendents of the most recent common ancestor of _Andesaurus_ and
Titanosauridae"), _Ligabuesaurus_ would not be a titanosaur. Though given
that Titanosauridae is not accepted as a valid taxon, that definition is
probably passe.
No body armor is preserved.
Cheers
Tim