Talk:Allosaurus

Allosaurus jimmadseni was named in 2006

This is according to an article named "D. J. Chure, R. Litwin, S. T. Hasiotis, E. Evanoff, and K. Carpenter. 2006. The fauna and flora of the Morrison Formation: 2006. In J. R. Foster, S. G. Lucas (eds.), Paleontology and Geology of the Upper Jurassic Morrison Formation. New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin". I got access to it a few days ago.--Bubblesorg (talk) 16:05, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

The name has been mentioned plenty of times in the literature, but it was not formally named until 2020, which doesn't just include mentioning it. FunkMonk (talk) 17:03, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

The study here was the first mention of the name.--Bubblesorg (talk) 17:28, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

I don't think you understand what FunkMonk means. A. jimmadseni was not, for formal scientific purposes, named in 2006. Yes, the name appeared in a journal article, but that does not automatically make it valid. A name is only valid if it is accompanied by a description of distinguishing characteristics. Therefore the title of your section is incorrect and no dates need to be changed. Lythronaxargestes (talk | contribs) 17:44, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

So it was Nomen nudum until the time period between mid 2010-early 2020?--Bubblesorg (talk) 20:01, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Until 2020, when it was validly published with a proper diagnosis. Lythronaxargestes (talk | contribs) 21:22, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

I see--Bubblesorg (talk) 17:58, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Our images found in real life

This Dutch museum appears to feature a pre-2015 version of Steveoc's Allosaurus reconstruction. Lythronaxargestes (talk | contribs) 21:25, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, seems a lot of museums are using Wikipedia images, not too bad we help them save money, haha... FunkMonk (talk) 15:22, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Adjust temporal range for Allosaurus

On this page, the temporal range for the genus Allosaurus is currently set to 155–145 Ma.

Allosaurus jimmadseni was officially described in 2020 by Chure & Loewen (https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.7803) and in their open access paper, the authors referred the new species to the following age:

"Age — Allosaurus jimmadseni was found in the Salt Wash Member of the Morrison Formation and its lateral equivalents. The Tidwell Member near the base of the Morrison (below the Salt Wash Member) produced a date of 154.82 ± 0.58 Ma (RAIN-1325-4+4 of Kowallis et al. (1998)) and a date of 150.18 ± 0.51 Ma (LCM-1 of Kowallis et al. (1998)) was recovered at the base of the overlying Brushy Basin Member. These two dates constrain the Salt Wash Member between them. These single-crystal, laser-fusion 40Ar/39Ar ages on sanidine crystals were recalibrated (Irmis, Nesbitt & Sues, 2013) to 157.32 ± 0.61 Ma (RAIN-1325-4+4 of Kowallis et al. (1998)) and a date of 152.77 ± 0.3 Ma following the Monte Carlo method of Renne et al. (2010). This places it in the Kimmeridgian Age of the Late Jurassic Epoch (Walker et al., 2012)."

So if Allosaurus jimmadseni is aged 157.32 Ma to 152.77 Ma, then the start of the temporal range for the genus Allosaurus on Wikipedia should be adjusted to 157.32 (or 157) Ma.

So, 157–145 Ma.

Thanks for considering. AlexanderDecommere (talk) 08:40, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

The current range is consistent with the authors describing A. jimmadseni as Kimmeridgian-aged. The Kimmeridgian begins at 154.8 Ma. The 157.32 Ma estimate, note, is a loose upper bound for the age of A. jimmadseni because it does not come from the Salt Wash Member, it comes from underlying strata. Lythronaxargestes (talk | contribs) 15:46, 8 November 2023 (UTC)