> It hasn't. I think they just meant that the Kem Kem has > abelisaurids AND *Sigilmassasaurus* AND the two other big > tetanurans. You could be right. Here is the exact wording: > Upper Cretaceous Moroccan red beds in North Africa have yielded a > large abelisaurid, _Sigilmassasaurus brevicollis_, together with the > tetanurans _Carcharodontosaurus saharicus_ and _Spinosaurus > aegyptiacus_ (Weishampel et al., 2004).
This says flat-out that *S.* is "a large abelisaurid".The only way to make this ambiguous would have been to lengthen the list: "have yielded a large abelisaurid, *S. b.*, and something else, together with the..." -- and even this would make me lean towards the interpretation that they consider *S.* an abelisaurid.