|WikiProject Dinosaurs||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
|WikiProject Palaeontology||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
|WikiProject Australia / Biota||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
Reassessment of Agrosaurus
Agrosaurus macgillivrayi is actually a specimen of Thecodontosaurus antiquus those type locality was mis-labeled Cape York, Australia. The source on which this assertion is based is as follows:
Vickers-Rich, P., T.H.Rich, G.C.McNamara and A.Milner 1999 Agrosaurus: Australia's Oldest Dinosaur? Records of the Western Australian Museum Suppliment No.57: 191-200
Thanks, anonymous stranger! I have made the necessary changes.--Gazzster 11:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Thecodontosaurus and Agrosaurus
I suggest that you merge the Agrosaurus page with the Thecodontosaurus page, because the holotype of Agrosaurus macgillivrayi is a specimen of Thecodontosaurus antiquus.
I take the point, but....
I think the article ought to stay for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the name Agrosaurus enjoys a certain amount of fame, especially in Australian circles, in its own right. Someone looking up Agrosaurus would possibly be confused to be redirected to Thecodontosaurus. There is a precedent: Brontosaurus has its own article, and does not redirect to Apatosaurus. This is because the name Brontosaurus enjoys status in its own right. Secondly, the article refers to a particular fossil, albeit mislabelled. The name Agrosaurus thus refers to a particular find of significance, albeit minor, to palaeontology, particular in Australia. However, I am open to discussion. If you or any others would like to argue the point, please do so.--Gazzster 03:29, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Reorientation of the Article
I rewrote the article, because I believed I was giving undue bias to the opinion that Agrosaurus macgillivrayi is synonymous with Thecodontosaurus antiquus. After reading (quite by accident) a discussion of the subject by Long (see references) I decided that the problem was quite complex. So while that opinion is probable, it needed some analysis. I feel the article needed to reflect that. Cheers all!--Gazzster 11:00, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- With regard to the synonymy of Agrosaurus with Thecodontosaurus, the separation of Thecodontosaurus caducus into the genus Pantydraco and the recent description of Asylosaurus Galton, 2007 raise questions of whether or not Agrosaurus is a specimen of Asylosaurus, Pantydraco, or the unnamed Anchisaurus-grade "prosauropod" identified by Galton (2007), since Galton (2007) discriminates Asylosaurus, Pantydraco, and the Bristol anchisaurian from the gracile sauropodomorph remains identified as Thecodontosaurus antiquus in the characters of the forelimb. The lectotype of Agrosaurus is a left tibia and the paralectotypes (incl. proximal right femur, ungual phalanx) don't necessarily come from the same individual or species as the lectotype, so Agrosaurus may still stand as a nomen dubium in Sauropodomorpha indet. despite the fact that it came from Bristol and not Australia.
Galton, Peter (2007). "Notes on the remains of archosaurian reptiles, mostly basal sauropodomorph dinosaurs, from the 1834 fissure fill (Rhaetian, Upper Triassic) at Clifton in Bristol, southwest England". Revue de Paléobiologie 26 (2): 505–591. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:53, 21 January 2013 (UTC)Vahe Demirjian