Osteohistology does not refute Nanotyrannus

[Praefectus]

A response to Woodward et. al 2020's refutation of Nanotyrannus. Argues that specimens BMRP 2002.4.1 and BMRP 2006.4.4 fall outside the growth curve of Tyrannosaurus. 

 

https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/1/eaax6250/tab-e-letters

[piranha]

Science Advances eLetters are not citable publications; they are not given DOIs and are not indexed in search engines such as Medline.

[marumo]

The paper looks like an interesting read, will give the response a read, but I'll take it with a pinch of salt until there's a published response. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!