Talk:Epanterias

Dinosaurs Low‑importance

	Dinosaurs portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dinosaurs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of dinosaurs and dinosaur-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DinosaursWikipedia:WikiProject DinosaursTemplate:WikiProject Dinosaursdinosaurs articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palaeontology Low‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Epanterias, a synonym of Allosaurus

Merge the Epanterias page with the Allosaurus page, because Chure (2000) found Epanterias to be merely an adult Allosaurus. When Chure's thesis is published, Epanterias will be put in synonymy with Allosaurus. Loewen (2004) also recognizes Epanterias as a grown-up Allosaurus.

Chure D. J., 2000. A new species of Allosaurus from the Morrison Formation of Dinosaur National Monument (Utah-Colorado) and a revision of the theropod family Allosauridae. Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1-964.

Loewen, M. A., 2004. VARIATION AND STRATIGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF ALLOSAURUS WITHIN THE LATE JURASSIC MORRISON FORMATION. 2004 Denver Annual Meeting: 226-4 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.194.116.63 (talk) 15:58, 24 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

"When Chure's thesis is published," There you have it ;) Dinoguy2 17:37, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the taxonomy of these big theropods is so utterly convoluted that one thesis won't be definitive. But, whether it goes in Allosaurus or not, it is definitely not just an adult Allosaurus fragilis/ferox/whatever, because it is way too rare and appears MUCH later than the main bulk of smaller Allo's. Whether it is an Allosaurus or not porbably will eventually just be a question of definitions, but it's certainly a species of its own. (Dino species and genera are, I think, too lumped anyway - how big are the bone differences between a genus Catharus Wood Thrush and a genus Turdus Song Thrush? Vultur 02:16, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[rant-warning] Realized that someone might want examples for my broad claim that big-theropod taxonomy is a tangled mess. In that case, Megalosaurus is a prime example - 180+ years after its discovery, we still don't know what specimens go in that genus!!! Also, it was a taxonomic dump for anything some lazy scientist couldn't bother to classify for so long that there are probably tons of new species that just haven't been described becuase they're labeled "Megalosaurus". It's not just big theropods either; look at the mess over Coelophysis/Podokesaurus/Syntarsus/Megapnosaurus/whatever name somebody decides on tomorrow. [end-rant] Vultur 02:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget the scientific rivalry between the ceratopsians Triceratops and Torosaurus, it's pretty messed-up as well. Although I myself think they are distinct genera. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.137.134 (talk) 21:54, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of the best described articles I have read on DInosaurs, with this I will be able to begin further research on how dinosaurs lived and also on their natural well being. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.205.97.25 (talk) 21:12, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]