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
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
I'd like to put up an Eoceratops page, but the name redirects to this one. However, this article has no mention of Eoceratops. Shouldn't there be something on this page if there's a redirect? How do I cancel a redirect to set up a new page?
CFLeon 22:02, 15 May 2006 (UTC)reply
Eoceratops is a synonym of Chasmosaurus, so I'd recommend adding a section here discussing this and other synonymous genera.
Dinoguy2 23:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)reply
Umm, a page discussing Lambe's concept of Eoceratopsinae and his classification later revised by Lehman maybe worthwhile. I stuck in a mini-reference so the genus at least appears on this page anyway.
Cas Liber 21:17, 25 May 2006 (UTC)reply
Stance
Here's a new development, by Stefan Thompson and Robert Holmes in Palaeontographica Electronica:
[1] It's nominally about C. irvinensis, but it has implications for all horned dinosaurs. They favor a half-sprawl, something not entirely unlike Bakker's "semi-erect" crocodiles. Kind of a crouch, really.
J. Spencer 19:19, 4 April 2007 (UTC)reply
I have a personal record of another species, C. kaiseni. Can anyone else verify this?
Ninjatacoshell 19:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)reply
According to
this site,C. kaiseni named by Brown (1933) is a skull (AMNH 5401) and is now considered a synonym of C. belli.
ArthurWeasley 20:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)reply
According to
http://paleodb.org/cgi-bin/bridge.pl?action=checkTaxonInfo&taxon_no=63914, Chasmosaurus canadensis (Lambe, 1902) is a junior synonym of C. belli (Lambe, 1902). There are currently three species of Chasmosaurus: C. belli (Lambe, 1902), C. russelli C.M. Sternberg, 1940, and C. irvinensis Holmes, Forster, Ryan & Shepard, 2001.
72.194.116.63 17:43, 29 April 2007 (UTC) Vahe Demirjian 10.43 29 April 2007reply
Horns
At the Museum Of Nature in Ottawa, Canada there are several model Chasmosauruses irvinensis shown without horns over their eyes, and plaque which reads "Unlike its larger cousin Triceratops, Chasmosaurus had only a single horn on its snout". This article describes only three-horned ones. Are there sub-species?
Unregistered User, Kie, 22.15 30 April, 2007 (UTC)
It's a line that needs to be adjusted, and we haven't gotten to it yet. Chasmosaurus has quite a bit of variety in horn length, incidentally.
J. Spencer 00:19, 1 May 2007 (UTC)reply
Hi
IJReid, you just added a taxobox photo which is arguably aesthetically nicer than the previous one, but it is problematic in that the angle and crop does not show the diagnostic features of the frill and ornamentation (vaguely related to this section). Preferably, we should probably use a photo hat shows the shape of the frill and its parietal ornamentation, and ceratiopsid postcrania do not appear to have diagnostic features anyway.
FunkMonk (
talk) 10:29, 23 June 2019 (UTC)reply
Fair enough, feel free to replace it. IJReid{{
T -
C -
D -
R}} 22:08, 23 June 2019 (UTC)reply
Looking again, it isn't like we have a lot of other good ones. These
[2][3][4] of the same mount do show the frill better, but not sure otherwise. This one maybe too:
[5]FunkMonk (
talk) 01:24, 24 June 2019 (UTC)reply
Amazing how someone writing in 2007 could miss an appearance in a movie that didn't come out until 2009! ;)
MMartyniuk (
talk) 02:17, 29 June 2010 (UTC)reply
Sexual dimorphism
The recognition that Chasmosaurus kaiseni is not congeneric with Chasmosaurus casts serious doubts on the hypothesis of sexual dimorphism for Chasmosaurus. Lehman (1990) considered C. kaiseni to be a junior synonym of Eoceratops canadensis (as C. canadensis). The provisionally referral of C. kaiseni to Mojoceratops could explain the differences from C. belli, because the holotype of C. kaiseni (AMNH 5401) was reconstructed in plaster (Longrich, 2010). Perhaps Chasmosaurus is not sexually dimorphic after all.
Lehman, T. M. 1990. The ceratopsian subfamily Chasmosaurinae: sexual dimorphism and systematics,. 211–230. In P. J. Currie and K. Carpenter (eds.). Dinosaur Systematics: Approaches and Perspectives Cambridge University Press Cambridge.
Nicholas R. Longrich (2010). "Mojoceratops perifania, A New Chasmosaurine Ceratopsid from the Late Campanian of Western Canada". Journal of Paleontology 84 (4): 681–694.
68.4.61.237 (
talk) 23:34, 22 September 2010 (UTC)Vahe Demirjianreply
Or someone's oversplitting things. :P
Abyssal (
talk) 00:06, 23 September 2010 (UTC)reply
See the analysis today by Mortimer on the DML (not on the archive yet, but should be soon). There's no reason to consider Mojoceratops distinct from Eoceratops to begin with, except Longrich's assertion that only the parietal can be diagnostic in ceratopsids (Eoceratops lacks a parietal and would be a nomen dubium in this case), which he contradicts in his own paper by listing non-parietal features in his codings and diagnosis.
MMartyniuk (
talk) 23:44, 23 September 2010 (UTC)reply