Content deleted Content added
m literally, what the hell even is the point of "now"? stop. |
→Misassigned species: Very odd wording going on here regarding Crichtonpelta, I've tried to fix it up the best I can. |
||
Line 20:
==Misassigned species==
A second species, ''Crichtonsaurus benxiensis'', was named by [[Lü Junchang]], Ji Qiang, Gao Yubo and Li Zhixin in 2007. The specific name refers to the [[Benxi Geological Museum]]. The holotype, '''BXGMV0012''', was discovered in the same early [[Late Cretaceous]]-age ([[Cenomanian]]-[[Turonian]]) [[Sunjiawan Formation]] of [[Beipiao]], [[Liaoning]], as the type species. It consists of a complete skull. Additionally, specimen BXGMV0012-1 has been referred, a partial skeleton lacking the skull, found at the same location.<ref name=Luetal07>{{cite journal |doi=10.1111/j.1755-6724.2007.tb01010.x |author=Lü Junchang |author2=Ji Qiang |author3=Gao Yubo |author4= Li Zhixin |year=2007 |title=A new species of the ankylosaurid dinosaur ''Crichtonsaurus'' (Ankylosauridae:Ankylosauria) from the Cretaceous of Liaoning Province, China |journal=Acta Geologica Sinica (English edition) |volume=81 |issue=6 |pages=883–897 }}</ref><ref>http://dml.cmnh.org/2002Nov/msg00398.html</ref> Also, according to Arbour, a skeleton displayed at the [[Sihetun Fossil Museum]] under the name of ''C. bohlini'', probably belongs to ''C. benxiensis''.<ref name="Arbour2014"/> Paul suggested ''C. benxiensis'' were a [[junior synonym]] of ''C. bohlini''.<ref name="Paul2010"/> However, apart from indicating ''C. bohlini'' as a dubious species to which no other species can be justifiably seen as identical, Arbour established diagnostic differences between the shoulder blades of BXGMV0012-1 and LPM 101, so two ankylosaurid taxa seem to be present in the formation. Based upon her conclusion that ''C. bohlini'' was a ''nomen dubium'', Arbour suggested a new generic name for the second species: ''[[Crichtonpelta]]'',<ref name="Arbour2014"/> for the time being an invalid ''nomen ex dissertatione''. However, in 2015, the name was validly published and it was officially separated from the dubious type species ''C. bohlini
==See also==
|