Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
The Speeding Carno

Dinosaur Growth Ontogeny

Recommended Posts

The Speeding Carno

I'm sure most of you know about Jack Horner's study on dinosaur growth ontogeny in the Hell Creek formation. It centered around the idea that some dinosaurs were really just juveniles of other dinosaurs. To my knowledge, most of his hypothesis about which dinosaur is a juvenile or adult are generally accepted (except Nanotyrannus and Tyrannosaurus Rex). This study has primarily been in the Hell Creek Formation. I was wondering if there are any dinosaurs or animals out of the Hell Creek Formation that you think are really juvenile forms of other animals.

 

For those who want to know more this is a link to his Ted Talk:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kQa11RMCeSI

 

Edit: Saurophaganax and Allosaurus are hypothesized to be the same.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon

I'm not sure it's been generally accepted (except Nano/Rex)

 

I think his pachycephalosaurid argument has been more accepted with new discoveries and publication by Goodwin and Evers in 2016 but I'm not sure most paleontologists support this hypothesis.

 

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02724634.2016.1078343

 

However his Ceratopsian argument as been rebuked by Ceratopsian paleontologists and most feel that Torosaurus is a valid taxon.  Longrich's paper is widely accepted.

 

Torosaurus Is Not Triceratops: Ontogeny in Chasmosaurine Ceratopsids as a Case Study in Dinosaur Taxonomy

Nicholas R. Longrich and Daniel J. Field

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3290593/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Speeding Carno

 

7 hours ago, Troodon said:

I'm not sure it's been generally accepted (except Nano/Rex)

 

I think his pachycephalosaurid argument has been more accepted with new discoveries and publication by Goodwin and Evers in 2016 but I'm not sure most paleontologists support this hypothesis.

 

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02724634.2016.1078343

 

However his Ceratopsian argument as been rebuked by Ceratopsian paleontologists and most feel that Torosaurus is a valid taxon.  Longrich's paper is widely accepted.

 

Torosaurus Is Not Triceratops: Ontogeny in Chasmosaurine Ceratopsids as a Case Study in Dinosaur Taxonomy

Nicholas R. Longrich and Daniel J. Field

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3290593/

 

Oh, thanks for that information. I didn't realize this was still a hotly debated topic. I certainly was not aware that his ceratopsian work was rebuked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×