Re: Arambougiania Citation Redux

[Michael Mortimer <mickey_mortimer111@msn.com>]

T. Michael Keesey wrote-

> Also, I assume this genus was named because including _T. caducus_ in
> _Thecodontosaurus_ made _Thecodontosaurus_ paraphyletic? Is
> _Pantydraco_ closer to or further from _Sauropoda_ than
> _Thecodontosaurus_ is?

Surprisingly no.
Apparently the Thecodontosaurus antiquus neotype (a dentary with teeth) is 
indeterminate relative to Pantydraco caducus and Saturnalia.  Also, there 
are three humeral morphotypes in the Thecodontosaurus material, so no 
postcrania can be certainly assigned to the genus.  One (YMP 2195) will be 
described by Galton (in prep.) as a new taxon, another (robust) is 
apparently a member of the Prosauropoda+Sauropoda clade, and the third 
(gracile) may belong to Thecodontosaurus and is also known from a 
monospecific assemblage from another locaility to be described by Yates and 
Benton (in prep.).  Galton (in prep.) will describe the gracile and robust 
forms in more detail.

Fun fun fun

Mickey Mortimer