Jump to content

Recommended Posts

WhodamanHD

A little off topic as it’s a not technically a Dromaeosaurid, but do you know if those Richardoestesia you see for sale are identified correctly? I know that genus itself is a little dubious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
-Andy-

It's just as sad when unsuspecting collectors purchase these teeth, and continue the cycle of misidentification.

 

To add on, whether or not you believe in Nanotyrannus is irrelevant here. The teeth you believe to be a Hell Creek raptor is far, far more likely to be a tyrannosaur than a raptor. A proper Acheroraptor has ridges on the side; please refer to this thread by Troodon: 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon
4 hours ago, WhodamanHD said:

A little off topic as it’s a not technically a Dromaeosaurid, but do you know if those Richardoestesia you see for sale are identified correctly? I know that genus itself is a little dubious.

There are two types of Richardoestesia found in the Hell Creek, R. gilmorei and R. isosceles but they are NOT formally described. R. isosceles is usually identified correctly by dealers simply because it looks like an isosceles triangle.  The other one is usually misidentified or most sellers do not know it even exists or how to ID them.  R. gilmorei is a very valid taxon but until it get described it's name may change.  R. isosceles is the questionable one and being studied simply because the jaw I provided the ROM contained those teeth and a Paronychodon tooth in the same jaw.   The initial research is not conclusive enough to warrant describing a new species but they are leaning toward it being a Pterosaur.  More specimens are needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhodamanHD
2 hours ago, Troodon said:

The initial research is not conclusive enough to warrant describing a new species but they are leaning toward it being a Pterosaur

Didn’t see that coming! That’s one scary pterosaur tooth. Thanks for the information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Haravex

Quick question I know there is no possibility of labeling them but correct me if i am wrong in saying there is at least one unidentified dromaeosauridae from the kem kem correct? and teeth as such should be either labeled theropod indet or dromaeosauridae sp yes?

 

Again feel free to correct me if I am misunderstanding this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon

 

23 minutes ago, Haravex said:

Quick question I know there is no possibility of labeling them but correct me if i am wrong in saying there is at least one unidentified dromaeosauridae from the kem kem correct? and teeth as such should be either labeled theropod indet or dromaeosauridae sp yes?

 

Again feel free to correct me if I am misunderstanding this.

We only have one research paper suggesting that Dromaeosaurid like teeth may exist but no further definitive proof exists.  In fact, a TFF member responded to a post who was working on isolated small Kem Kem teeth stated that none exist.   I have yet to see a members tooth that is a slam dunk candidate for one.  So the possibility is there that one exists but nothing certain at this time.   Labeling with either nomenclature you suggested is fine.

 

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


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×