The Thing I Like About “Toroceratops”

Let me first apologize for using “Toroceratops.” There is no such taxon, but the name is being used to describe the debate that is now raging through the dinosaur paleontological circuit, and it’s too catchy not to use. Now, on with the show.

I Cannot Compel to Reason: Triceratops, We Done It Again

Earlier this year, Andy Farke took the opportunity of  a remodel to assess the skull of that classic of classic dinosaurs, Nedoceratops hatcheri. Formally named by Richard Swan Lull (completing a monograph that first OC Marsh had begun but uncompleted by hid death, and then resumed by John Bell Hatcher until his death), he presumed it may have been a pathological specimen, probably Triceratops (one of its species, many of which abounded at the time), owning to large irregular rather than concise fenestrae in the parietals and one of the squamosals; but he relented on the idea of its apparently unique features and coined the name Diceratops hatcheri. The name would be later found to be ironic.

The Saga of Raptorex

…Continues.

When Flat-Head Met Dome-y

One of the most interesting aspects of ornithischian phylogeny has been (alongside whether heterodontosaurs are ornithopods or whatever) is the nature of many pachycephalosaur taxa. Recently, Schott et al. (2003) have done some great detective work in nailing down what they expect to be a firm argument for expected ontogeny in pachycephalosaurs.

Nanotyrannus Nomore!?

Nanotyrannus is everyone’s favorite tyrannosaur, as long as it’s right behind the big guy, Tyrannosaurus, itself. It’s been lovingly depicted and aggressively championed by such notable figures as Robert Bakker, and supported less enthusiastically but no less masterfully by Philip Currie. Nanotyrannus was the name given to Gorgosaurus lancensis (Gilmore, 1946) by Bakker, Williams and Currie in 1988 for an elongated, narrow-snouted skull (CMNH 7541). 40 years later, the peculiar morphology of the skull, with its broad boxy posterior end and the thin snout, slender and narrow blade-like teeth, and greater numbers of them, implied that it might be very distinguishable from Gorgosaurus, and in fact from Tyrannosaurus to which it was compared favorably, resulting in the “tiny tyrant,” Nanotyrannus being given to replace Gorgosaurus, thus Nanotyrannus lancensis.

Horns, Frills, Knobs and Domes – Morphological Ontogeny

Recently I’ve been embroiled in a discussion with various professional paleontologists, interested scientists, and lay paleophiles on the topic of the synonymy proposed by Scannella and Horner [1] for the Hell Creek chasmosaurine ceratopsians Triceratops and Torosaurus. I feel it necessary to place my thoughts here, as they are long and doing so in blog entries or on forums, etc., is getting tedious. I should have done this long ago, but attempts have failed because of the scattered nature of the individual parses I’d like to say about it. So, what I will do it summarize their hypotheses, then attempt a synthesis with my thoughts on the range of topics they argue about. It should be further notes that Horner and Goodwin [2] also recently proposed a similar synonymy of the Hell Creek pachycephalosaurids Pachycephalosaurus, Stygimoloch and Dracorex. I handled this latter paper in part in various places, most notably here and here, although I hope to endeavor better here

Scare Quotes and Recent Ceratopsians

Scare quotes are a figurative use of quotation marks to imply the object(s) being enclosed (be it a theory, phrase, or word) are not proscribed by the quoting author(s) [n1]. In this case, they are used around taxonomic names that the authors (Longrich, 2010 [1] & Scannella and Horner, 2010 [2]) regard as unusable. There’s a further trend, in that some authors place these quotes to imply the taxa used are nomina dubia, or otherwise unavailable taxonomically, i.e., nomina nuda or some other type of informality. In which case, the usage is confusing.