RE: sauropod

[Tim Williams <twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com>]

K and T Dykes wrote:

> While much of the pelvis, rib cage and neck of a 30+ metre gardener
> apparently caught the eye, I'm sure the authors would've preferred to find 
> a
> millimetre long dryolestoid mammal molar or some such, and I hope their
> disappointment over their new friend isn't all too great.  They estimate 
> its
> length at between 32-34 metres.

Try checking sauropod footprints for said mammal.  There might be a complete 
dryolestid skeleton there, squished perfectly in two dimensions.  ;-)

Back to the sauropod _Futalognkosaurus_ ... as well as scraping small 
mammals out between its toenails, this sauropod is notable for other reasons 
(including those mentioned above).  It comes up in a clade with 
_Mendozasaurus_ and _Malawisaurus_ (88% bootstrap support - not bad at all), 
and the authors erect (and define) the new suprageneric clade Lognkosauria 
for this trio.

Looking at the cladogram, this part of sauropod evolution seems to be in 
dire need of some new family-level taxa, instead of a continuing profusion 
of 'subfamilies' and 'tribes'.  Titanosauridae has effectively been 
scrapped, so why not have Opisthocoelicaudiidae and Aeolosauridae instead of 
Opisthocoelicaudiinae and Aeolosaurini?  The Titanosauria were a *very* 
diverse clade, and they deserve better, methinks.

Cheers

Tim

_________________________________________________________________
More photos; more messages; more whatever. Windows Live Hotmail - NOW with 
5GB storage. 
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_5G_0907