Product Code Database
Example Keywords: sony -underclothes $44-151
barcode-scavenger
   » » Wiki: Kangnasaurus
Tag Wiki 'Kangnasaurus'.
Tag

Kangnasaurus
 (

Kangnasaurus (meaning "Farm Kangnas lizard") is a of found in rocks of . It is known from a tooth and possibly some remains dating between the middle- to Kalahari Deposits Formation. "Table 19.1," in Weishampel, et al. (2004). Page 417.


Discovery and naming
Kangnasaurus was named in 1915 by Sidney H. Haughton. The is Kangnasaurus coetzeei. The generic name refers to the Kangnas farm; the specific name to the farmer, Coetzee. Kangnasaurus is based on SAM 2732, a tooth found at a depth of 34 metres in a well at Farm Kangnas, in the valley of northern , . The age of these rocks, conglomerates in an ancient crater lake, was once suggested to date to the Early Cretaceous (probably early-) due to the original phylogenetic position of the taxa as a dryosaurid.
(2026). 9780253348173, Indiana University Press.
But a Late Cretaceous age between the Campanian and Maastrichtian is more likely due to sedimentological analyses. Haughton thought SAM 2732 was a tooth from the , but Michael Cooper reidentified it as a tooth in 1985. This had implications for its classification: Haughton thought the tooth was that of an , while Cooper identified it as from an animal more like , a more basal ornithopod.

Haughton described several other fossils as possibly belonging to Kangnasaurus. These include five partial , a partial thigh bone and , a partial , a partial shin and foot, , and unidentified bones. Some of the bones apparently came from other deposits, and Haughton was not certain that they all belonged to his new genus. Cooper was also not certain, but described the other specimens as if they did belong to Kangnasaurus. Like other basal iguanodontians, it would have been a .


Classification
Kangnasaurus was originally regarded as dubious,
(1990). 9780520067271, University of California Press.
(2026). 9780520242098, University of California Press.
although a 2007 review of dryosaurids by Ruiz-Omeñaca and colleagues retained it as potentially valid, differing from other dryosaurids by details of the thigh bone.

The differences in interpretation between Haughton and Cooper regarding the placement of the tooth had implications for the taxon's classification: Haughton thought the tooth was indicative that of an when interpreted as a maxillary position, while Cooper classified it as coming from an animal more like based on his assignment of the tooth to the dentary. However, more recent studies have separately uncovered a position nested within the elasmarian group.

Page 1 of 1
1
Page 1 of 1
1

Account

Social:
Pages:  ..   .. 
Items:  .. 

Navigation

General: Atom Feed Atom Feed  .. 
Help:  ..   .. 
Category:  ..   .. 
Media:  ..   .. 
Posts:  ..   ..   .. 

Statistics

Page:  .. 
Summary:  .. 
1 Tags
10/10 Page Rank
5 Page Refs
1s Time