tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38902250.post264298925828283320..comments2023-10-25T04:04:15.348-07:00Comments on When Pigs Fly Returns: Predatory Mesozoic Marine ReptilesZachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08692080707969333711noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38902250.post-177445598207355982008-10-09T22:13:00.000-07:002008-10-09T22:13:00.000-07:00No, mosasaurs are actually more closely related to...No, mosasaurs are actually more closely related to snakes, while mosasauroids and snakes together form the sister group to varanoids.Christopher Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11075565866351612441noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38902250.post-65590269203238520402008-10-09T22:05:00.000-07:002008-10-09T22:05:00.000-07:00Also, are mosasaurs now considered varanids proper...Also, are mosasaurs now considered varanids proper?Neutrino Cannonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11975378867727506317noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38902250.post-22285515874663866582008-10-09T22:04:00.000-07:002008-10-09T22:04:00.000-07:00Zach, Dyrosaurs made it till at least the eocene. ...Zach, Dyrosaurs made it till at least the eocene. They aren't as adapted as, say, metriorynchids, but they are found in marine deposits.Neutrino Cannonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11975378867727506317noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38902250.post-56083331282526628282008-06-17T17:27:00.000-07:002008-06-17T17:27:00.000-07:00Damn! I was all about bleeding a Shonisaurus! I ha...Damn! I was all about bleeding a <I>Shonisaurus!</I> I have no reference that puts thalattosaurs directly into the sauropterygia, but virtually everything I've read tenuously places them near the basal end of that group, if not directly in it. In general form, I'm just gonna come out and say that thalattosaurs look a lot more like sauropterygians and ichthyopterygians, so it was a bit of assumption on my part. ;-)Zachhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08692080707969333711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38902250.post-57972665890115829582008-06-17T15:16:00.000-07:002008-06-17T15:16:00.000-07:00Nice work Zach, fun to finally see all the skulls ...Nice work Zach, fun to finally see all the skulls lined up together! <BR/><BR/>And it's exciting to finally see thalattosaurs getting some good press, since I'm still too lazy/tired/distracted/sick to get around to it, did I mention lazy?<BR/><BR/>If you have a reference that puts Thalattosauriformes into Sauropterygia proper I need it immediately! Otherwise, it's probably worth noting that while thalattosaurs were probably closer to sauropterygians than ichthyopterygians they technically don't belong in either of those groups but are, as it turns out, enigmatic hellasaurs of somewhat uncertain placement. <BR/><BR/>While I have no doubt that <I>Askeptosaurus</I> might opportunistically go after small marine reptiles, perhaps even those approaching its own size, I'm just a wee bit skeptical that its 1cm teeth would be adequate tools to bleed out a <I>Shonisaurus</I>. There were lots and lots of fish in Monte San Giorgio fauna, many were quite large and well defended, and I'd but a pretty heavy bet down that <I>Askeptosaurus</I> was predominately a fish eater. <BR/><BR/>At any rate, if I was diving in the Triassic ocean, <I>Cymbospondylus</I> and <I>Himalaya/Tibetosaurus</I> would be more of a concern for me, and <I>Placodus</I> if it managed to chomp down on a limb....<BR/><BR/>Quibbling aside, props again on the drawing and raising awareness on some neglected groups!Neilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10293693723899837239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38902250.post-68635589620080650472008-06-05T18:39:00.000-07:002008-06-05T18:39:00.000-07:00D. andiniensis is very much unlike its sister spec...<I>D. andiniensis is very much unlike its sister species, D. maximus, so much so that I wonder why it didn't receive a separate genus.</I><BR/><BR/>I believe <I>Dakosaurus andiniensis</I> was originally described from isolated teeth, and its unusual appearance didn't become known until the later discovery of skull material. (This might also go some way to explaining why it got the rather dull name of "<I>andiniensis</I>" rather than the much more appropriate "<I>stercusstercusmoratoriussum</I>".) Even after the discovery of cranial material, though, the two <I>Dakosaurus</I> species still form a clade, so dividing them up wouldn't actually be much more informative.Christopher Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11075565866351612441noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38902250.post-35138617077637922392008-06-05T13:27:00.000-07:002008-06-05T13:27:00.000-07:00Mass Extinctions are My Thang. It's funny. I enco...Mass Extinctions are My Thang. <BR/><BR/>It's funny. I encountered a guy online that was a total whacked out trip. He was a mammal, even placental mammal, supremacist (!!). he was almost a determinist with his beliefs on evolution, but not a deist either. He used to rant about how he considered 'certain' events mass extinctions (even though he obviously didn't understand the term) and the doom (doom!Doom!DOOM!) of the ichythosaurs was one he used to claim he was right about and no one else was.<BR/><BR/>wellllll...<BR/><BR/>It was a mass extinction. (minor one) The fish lizards did get it in their tails. Permanently. However, just because THEY died it doesn't mark the occasion as a ME. They just happened to be victims at the time. <BR/><BR/>The funnier part of it was that the fact that his claimed "enlightened knowledge" that a mass extinction happened then was accepted, old story by the ME studying crowd albeit for different reasons.<BR/><BR/>Wonderful skulls, dude.Will Bairdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07562404098136557872noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38902250.post-25378707097813703532008-06-05T12:05:00.000-07:002008-06-05T12:05:00.000-07:00Right. Thanks, Will. I'll have to change the post ...Right. Thanks, Will. I'll have to change the post around a bit before I submit it to Linnaeus' Legacy later today.Zachhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08692080707969333711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38902250.post-84435506157212827872008-06-05T12:00:00.000-07:002008-06-05T12:00:00.000-07:00You made me go crack open my Hallam and Wignall ag...You made me go crack open my Hallam and Wignall again.<BR/><BR/>Some notes:<BR/><BR/><I>With the extinction of most ichythosaurs and plesiosaurs at the close of the Jurassic, varanid lizards took advantage of this ecological vacuum and invaded the Cretaceous waters</I><BR/><BR/>Ichythosaurs died out some time in the Cenomanian (genus <I>Platypterygius</I> surviving, apparently w/ 6+ species). There seems to have been a minor mass extinction in the marine environment - 7% of marine families and 26% of genera croaked - near or at the Cenomanian-Turonian boundary.<BR/><BR/>http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/people/motani/ichthyo/strati.html<BR/>(or <A HREF="http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/people/motani/ichthyo/strati.html" REL="nofollow">here</A> if the URL is too long).<BR/><BR/>Plesiosaurs kept going to the KT Boomski. There are two schools of thought about the Plesies in the Cretaceous. One,a nd more traditional, is that they declined. Others are arguing that they didn't due to some more recent fossil finds arguing that it's just been a fluke of too few samples to give a statistically accurate picture. IDK which is really the case.<BR/><BR/>The mosasaurs didn't show up until the Turonian, after the CT extinction. <BR/><BR/>CT Boundary being rather different than the JK. ;)Will Bairdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07562404098136557872noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38902250.post-90731341060351693322008-06-05T10:50:00.000-07:002008-06-05T10:50:00.000-07:00With some adaptation, that Dakosaurus could probab...With some adaptation, that Dakosaurus could probably become an entry in the Archosauria show.<BR/><BR/>Which we prolly need to meet about (we, who be the principal artists).Dicing with Dragonshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03132972790091524968noreply@blogger.com