[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]


Was walking along the journal stacks at JHU minding my own business when out
of the corner of my eye caught sight of what seemed to be a cover photo of,
could it be, why yes, Sinosauropteryx. Two nice glossies showing both the
rarely seen Beijing type slab (which seems to have most of the bones) on the
front cover, and the Nanjing counterslab we've all come to know and love on
the back. Inside there is a consensus letter about the specimens by the
American group that examined the specimens. 

Brush, A. et al. 1997 Bird or Dinosaur. Episodes 20:47.

Having now had a good look at the main slab for the first time, it serves to
increase my feeling that the conclusions derived form this specimen by Jones
et al at SVP were very weak at best. The dark splotch that may or may not
represent the gut contents as opposed to the thoracic cavity does not even
have the dorsally convex dorso-anterior arch they observed in crocs (and
which may be present in at least some birds anyway). Maybe it was there in
life, but that just shows how badly the stuff is preserved. There *should*
have been septum, since they are present in crocs and birds. But how they can
tell whether there is a septum dividing the two cavities in the badly crushed
fossil is beyond me. Of course I'm only looking at pretty pictures - but so
were they!