| [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Thread Index] | [Date Prev] | [Date Next] | [Date Index] |
The search for long-lost dinosaur names in the literature continues apace.
Jack McIntosh recently sent me a copy of a paper by the notorious
name-changer Leopold Joseph Fitzinger:
Fitzinger, L. J., 1840. "Über Palaeosaurus sternbergii, eine neue Gattung
vorweltlicher Reptilien und die Stellung dieser Thiere im Systeme überhaupt,"
Wiener Mus. Annalen II: 175-187 + plate XI.
In it Fitzinger described a partial fossil reptile skeleton, found by him in
1833 in the collection of the Prague National Museum, under the name
Palaeosaurus sternbergii: a new genus and new species. The names Palaeosaurus
Riley & Stutchbury, 1836 and Paleosaurus Riley & Stutchbury, 1840 were not
mentioned, perhaps because at the time of publication Fitzinger did not know
of their existence. Also not mentioned was Palaeosaurus Geoffroy
Saint-Hilaire, 1833, the generic name that preoccupies both Palaeosaurus
Riley & Stutchbury, 1836 and Fitzinger, 1840 (and is now a junior subjective
synonym of the crocodyliform genus Aeolodon). Ralph Molnar has mentioned
(pers. comm.) that Fitzinger's Palaeosaurus is probably a captorhinomorph,
but I cannot confirm this because these kinds of reptiles are outside my area
of interest and I have no detailed literature on them in my library. The
plate that accompanies the article shows it is definitely not a dinosaur. In
any case, its name is preoccupied for the same reason that Riley &
Stutchbury's Palaeosaurus is, and, unless it has been referred elsewhere to
some other genus or species, it will need to be renamed.
The species epithet honors Caspar von Sternberg for his support of
paleontological research: "Die Art nenne ich Sternbergii, zum Gedächtnisse
Seiner Excellenz des Herrn Grafen Caspar von Sternberg, jenes ehrwürdigen
Veterans deutscher Naturforscher, der sich durch seine eben so gründlichen,
als scharfsinnigen Forschungen im Gebiete der Paläologie ein unvergängliches
Verdienst um die Wissenschaft erworben hat, und dem ich die Gelegenheit
verdanke, einiges Licht über jenen merkwürdigen fossilen Saurer verbreiten zu
können."
Owing to the identity of the names Palaeosaurus Riley & Stutchbury, 1836 and
Palaeosaurus Fitzinger, 1840, I have carried the species Palaeosaurus
sternbergii Fitzinger, 1840 (under the date 1843, and incorrectly referred to
the non-dinosaurian archosaur genus Palaeosauriscus as Palaeosauriscus
sternbergii) in Mesozoic Meanderings, for longer than I can remember, as a
nomen nudum dinosaur species no longer considered dinosaurian. It certainly
is not a nomen nudum, having been properly described by Fitzinger in 1840. So
I have added Palaeosaurus Fitzinger, 1840 as name #941 to the Dinosaur Genera
List:
Palaeosaurus Fitzinger, 1840/Geoffroy Saint-Hilare, 1833* [captorhinomorph?]
The asterisk indicates its present non-dinosaurian status.
Palaeosauriscus, of course, is Kuhn, 1959's replacement name for the
preoccupied Palaeosaurus Riley & Stutchbury, 1836. As noted in Dinosaur
Genera List corrections #139, this name change was unnecessary (see Benton,
Juul, Storrs
& Galton, 2000), because the name Paleosaurus Riley & Stutchbury, 1840 is not
preoccupied and is available to replace Palaeosaurus Riley & Stutchbury,
1836. (Spelling is important here.) Paleosaurus is not the same genus as
Palaeosaurus Fitzinger, 1840.
Fitzinger, 1840 also carried earlier uses of the names Therosaurus and
Hylosaurus than I had listed in previous issues of Mesozoic Meanderings (both
were attributed to Fitzinger, 1843). I had long regarded Hylosaurus as a
misspelling of Hylaeosaurus Mantell, 1933, for which reason I decided years
ago to remove it from the Dinosaur Genera List, but the usage in Fitzinger,
1840 suggests that it was not a misspelling but another attempt at a
renaming. Therosaurus was introduced in Fitzinger, 1840 point-blank as a
renaming of Iguanodon. Intention is important here. So I have placed
Hylosaurus back on the Dinosaur Genera List as name #942:
Hylosaurus Fitzinger, 1840 [JOS -> Hylaeosaurus]
and I have changed the listing for Therosaurus to read:
Therosaurus Fitzinger, 1840 [JOS -> Iguanodon]
As for names #939 and 940, read on:
----------------------------------------------
This email (slightly edited) arrived from Jaime Headden April 2 (so it's not
an April Fool joke):
<<Just read Naish's Dinopress article on Eotyrannus, and came across a lovely
bit of unintended but potentially damaging taxonomic quibbles and the reason
why people need to be careful about the dissemination of nomina nuda.
In 1998, prior to the formal announcement and during the high-press frenzy of
the coverage of the discovery of this animal and preparation (between
1997-1999), various papers published so-called names applied to the specimen
in question, MIWG 1997.550, including the following:
Kelly, J., 1998. "Is this man our Indiana Jones?" The Daily Mail (newspaper),
dated 10-7-1998.
Published were both Gavinosaurus and Lengosaurus, in response to the
discoverer, Gavin Leng (honored with the specific epithet of E. lengi). What
nasty outcomings for short-sightedness. These are effectively nomina nuda and
subjective junior synonyms of Eotyrannus and completely, utterly useless to
science.
To the news media who could care less (not that the entirety do, just those
who don't): Please, people, show a little respect when playing with names in
publications.>>
Jaime's email, complete with citation, made it necessary to add the names
Gavinosaurus Kelly, 1998 [nomen nudum -> Eotyrannus]
Lengosaurus Kelly, 1998 [nomen nudum -> Eotyrannus]
as #939 and 940 to the Dinosaur Genera List. I used italics rather than, say,
quotation marks because that is how Jaime cited the names.
----------------------------------------------
New species department:
These are dinosaur species to be added to the forthcoming second printing of
Mesozoic Meanderings #3. First is a "phantom" species, that is, an apparent
nomen nudum that appeared in a faunal list in
Anonymous, 1979. Stratigraphy of China, Jurassic System, Summary, Chinese
Academy of Geological Sciences, May 1979.
I list it as anonymous because there's no indication of an author in the
incomplete set of pages I have. On p. 9 and p. 17 the paper notes from the
Lufeng Formation the species Sinosaurus shawanensis (Young) among a number of
well-known dinosaur names. That's all I have on this species. Perhaps it is
significant that Sinosaurus triassicus is not listed, which might mean that
Sinosaurus shawanensis is a synonym. Anybody who has more information about
this species, or a citation to an actual description by Young, please email
with details.
A recent email to the Dinosaur Mailing List from Markus Moser at the
Bayerische Staatssammlung fuer Palaeontologie und Geologie in Munich, Germany
reads (slightly edited):
<<Dear all,
A new species of the ankylosaurid genus Amtosaurus Kurzanov & Tumanova, 1978
has been described by Alexander O. Averianov on the basis of a single
braincase from the lower part(?) of the Bissekty Formation (Upper Turonian -
Coniacian) from Dzharakuduk, Uzbekistan. The braincase is compared to those
of 16 other ankylosaurian taxa. Implications for the biostratigraphical
dating of several Central Asian and Mongolian dinosaur-bearing strata are
discussed.
The reference is:
Averianov, A. O., 2002. "An ankylosaurid (Ornithischia: Ankylosauria)
braincase from the Upper Cretaceous Bissekty Formation of Uzbekistan,"
Bulletin de l'Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Sciences de
la Terre (Bulletin van het koninklijk Belgisch Instituut voor
Naturwetenschappen, Aardwetenschappen), 72 Bruxelles (Brussels): 97-110, 3
figs. [March 31, 2002].>>
The subject heading of the above email reveals the name of the new species,
Amtosaurus archibaldi. This revises the Amtosaurus listing in the Asiatic
dinosaurs section of Mesozoic Meanderings #3 to:
Amtosaurus Kurzanov & Tumanova, 1978
A. magnus Kurzanov & Tumanova, 1978†
A. archibaldi Averianov, 2002
Another recently described new dinosaur species in an old generic name is
Protoceratops hellenikorhinus, in this paper:
Lambert, O., Godefroit, P., Li H., Shang C.-Y. & Dong Z.-M., 2001. "A new
Species of Protoceratops (Dinosauria, Neoceratopsia) from the Late Cretaceous
of Inner Mongolia," Bulletin de l'Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de
Belgique, Sciences de la Terre (Bulletin van het koninklijk Belgisch
Instituut voor Naturwetenschappen, Aardwetenschappen), Supplement 71
Bruxelles (Brussels): 5-28, 4 plates, 13 figs. [December 15, 2001].
Yes, that's the same journal as for Amtosaurus archibaldi. After examining
the figures, I think there's as much morphological difference between P.
andrewsi and P. hellenikorhinus as between P. andrewsi and Bagaceratops
rozhdestvenskyi or even Udanoceratops tschizhovi. In short, this species,
with its twin nasal horns, flaringly wide but short frill, and very deep
muzzle, could well represent a distinct genus. Most interesting critter.
Partial index: