tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5519292617097628087.post3098140062721581362..comments2011-12-21T09:42:03.586-07:00Bill Parkerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05941940882532354219noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5519292617097628087.post-25487297632756498652011-12-21T09:42:03.586-07:002011-12-21T09:42:03.586-07:00Thanks for the shout-out! Very happy that this is finally published. We&#39;re probably not going to turn our attentions to <i>Rutiodon</i> any time soon, but stay tuned for more big synapsid revisions in the coming year. Nothing quite on the magnitude of <i>Dicynodon</i>, but after you&#39;ve gone through a genus with 168 species ranging from the Wordian to the Norian nothing else seems quite as bad (I can&#39;t even think of any other Paleozoic vertebrates with as expansive and problematic an alpha taxonomy...maybe <i>Bothriolepis</i>?) Incidentally, &quot;<i>Rutiodon</i>&quot; (sensu dumping ground for all Newark phytosaurs) is somewhat relevant to our monograph--we argue that Cope&#39;s <i>Dicynodon rosmarus</i> from the Lockatong of Pennsylvania was probably phytosaurian. Unfortunately it&#39;s all circumstantial evidence--Cope initially described this taxon in a few sentences, noting that illustrations and a more detailed description would follow. They never did, and the specimen has since been lost. As such we call it a nomen dubium, but speculating a bit on its identity, the original description sounds a lot more like the recurved teeth in a phytosaur terminal rosette than a dicynodont tusk, and all the other dental material from Cope&#39;s Wheatley mine collection is phytosaurian. It actually makes me wonder if there wasn&#39;t some skullduggery involved in the loss of the type--all the other specimens Cope described from that locality are safely housed at the AMNH and <i>D. rosmarus</i> was clearly lost before this collection ever arrived at the museum (there is no record of its accession with the other specimens). If it was a phytosaur tooth, being a smart guy I&#39;m sure Cope would have figured out its true identity after seeing any complete phytosaur skulls. But coming right on the heels of his <i>Elasmosaurus</i> debacle and given his strong desire not to be caught with his pants down on any more misidentifications, I would not be surprised if the <i>D. rosmarus</i> type simply &quot;disappeared&quot; before anyone else had a chance to see or illustrate it. Pure speculation on my part, mind you, but you have to wonder... <br /><br />-ChristianAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com