You are here
I write in support of Upchurch et al.’s proposal to establish Cetiosaurus oxoniensis Phillips, 1871 as the type species of Cetiosaurus Owen, 1841 and to set aside all previous fixations of type species for this genus. Cetiosaurus was
the first sauropod dinosaur to be scientifically described (Owen, 1841)
and one of the earliest dinosaurs to be recognised: the taxon is
clearly of historical importance and stabilising its taxonomy would
represent an important contribution to dinosaur studies. The name has
I strongly support the proposal by Upchurch et al. (BZN 66(1): 51–55) for the conservation of usage by designating Cetiosaurus oxoniensis Phillips, 1871 as the type species of Cetiosaurus Owen, 1841. As extensively referenced in the proposal, the name Cetiosaurus has invariably been associated with the species C. oxoniensis,
and specifically the Bletchington Station material, for almost 125
years. In particular, it should be noted that the ‘Monograph of the
I am writing to strongly endorse the application to give precedence to Procynosuchus over Cyrbasiodon and Parathrinaxodon. As Kammerer and Abdala note, the name Procynosuchus is
widely used and a very important name to conserve because of its
significance in evolutionary studies and museum exhibits. The authors
have amply documented the preponderance of its usage and strong support
within the specialist community.
As the state paleontologist of Utah, I heartily support the proposal to make USNM4734 the neotype of Allosaurus. Allosaurus has been the Official State Fossil of Utahfor many years based primarily on the 54+ specimens of Allosaurus fragilis from ourCleveland/Lloyd Quarry (a national historic landmark) with many skeletons exhibitedacross the globe. No large theropod dinosaur is as well documented as Allosaurusand to risk losing this name would only serve to confuse and complicate our scienceamong the people of the world.
Here are several points of Case 3506 that need clarification:1. Hypsirophus discurus Cope, 1878 (mis-spelled as Hypsirophis discursis in BZN67: 54) is a stegosaur and not an allosaur (Maidment et al., 2008). The type specimen,AMNH 5731, actually consists of a dorsal vertebra, two caudal neural arches, andtwo caudal centra (Galton, 2010).2.
e are writing to support the petition (Case 3506) of Paul & Carpenter to conserve usage of Allosaurus fragilis Marsh, 1877 as the type species for genus Allosaurus by designating USNM 4734 as the neotype for Allosaurus fragilis Marsh, 1877. We support this conservation because of the taxon’s widely accepted usage by palaeontologists and its entrenched familiarity among the general public.