• Thomas Holtz: Tyrannosaurus = Tyrannosaurus rex

    From Peter Nyikos@21:1/5 to All on Mon Oct 16 14:13:08 2023
    Thomas Holtz is a dinosaur specialist, renowned for both his research and expository writing on a popular level. Back in the good old days of sci.bio.paleontology, the 1990's, he was a regular participant here.

    Last year, he co-authored a paper in Evolutionary Biology with the formidable title,

    Insufficient Evidence for Multiple Species of Tyrannosaurus
    in the Latest Cretaceous of North America: A Comment on “The Tyrant Lizard King, Queen and Emperor: Multiple Lines of Morphologicaland Stratigraphic Evidence Support Subtle Evolution and Probable Speciation Within the North American Genus
    Tyrannosaurus”
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-022-09573-1
    I got access through Academia, with a url that repeats almost the whole title.

    The paper is as technical as any I've seen. Perhaps John Harshman can
    make immediate sense out of the abstract, whose message is that the authors
    did not make a good enough case for T.rex having two sister species.

    Abstract
    The Late Cretaceous dinosaur Tyrannosaurus rex was recently split into three species based on the premise that variation
    in the T. rex hypodigm is exceptional, indicating cryptic species and “robust” and “gracile” morphs. The morphs are based
    on proportional ratios throughout the skeleton. The species are claimed to be stratigraphically separate, with an early robust
    species followed by robust and gracile descendants. There are problems with the hypothesis: the taxon diagnoses are based
    on two features that overlap between the species; several skulls cannot be identified based on the diagnoses; proportional
    comparisons between Tyrannosaurus and other theropods are based on incomparable samples; the tooth data are problematic;
    the stratigraphic framework divides the Hell Creek Formation into thirds, without the stratigraphic position of each
    specimen, or independent age control showing the subdivisions are coeval over the entire geographic area; previous work
    found variation in T. rex, but it cannot be parsed into discrete categories. We tested for “gracile” and “robust” morphs by
    analyzing the femoral and tooth ratios that were published in the multiple species study using agglomerative hierarchical
    clustering. The results found that each set of ratios are explained by one cluster, showing that dimorphism is not supported.
    We tested for exceptional variation of the femoral ratio of Tyrannosaurus; we calculated the mean intraspecific robusticity
    for 112 species of living birds and 4 nonavian theropods. The results showed that the absolute variation in Tyrannosaurus
    is unexceptional and it does not indicate cryptic diversity. We conclude that “T. regina” and “T. imperator” are subjective junior synonyms of T. rex.

    I've downloaded the paper and will discuss it if there is enough interest.


    Peter Nyikos
    Professor, Dept. of Mathematics -- standard disclaimer--
    University of South Carolina
    https://people.math.sc.edu/nyikos

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From erik simpson@21:1/5 to Peter Nyikos on Mon Oct 16 19:56:13 2023
    On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 2:13:09 PM UTC-7, Peter Nyikos wrote:
    Thomas Holtz is a dinosaur specialist, renowned for both his research and expository writing on a popular level. Back in the good old days of sci.bio.paleontology, the 1990's, he was a regular participant here.

    Last year, he co-authored a paper in Evolutionary Biology with the formidable title,

    Insufficient Evidence for Multiple Species of Tyrannosaurus
    in the Latest Cretaceous of North America: A Comment on “The Tyrant Lizard King, Queen and Emperor: Multiple Lines of Morphologicaland Stratigraphic Evidence Support Subtle Evolution and Probable Speciation Within the North American Genus
    Tyrannosaurus”
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-022-09573-1
    I got access through Academia, with a url that repeats almost the whole title.

    The paper is as technical as any I've seen. Perhaps John Harshman can
    make immediate sense out of the abstract, whose message is that the authors did not make a good enough case for T.rex having two sister species.

    Abstract
    The Late Cretaceous dinosaur Tyrannosaurus rex was recently split into three species based on the premise that variation
    in the T. rex hypodigm is exceptional, indicating cryptic species and “robust” and “gracile” morphs. The morphs are based
    on proportional ratios throughout the skeleton. The species are claimed to be stratigraphically separate, with an early robust
    species followed by robust and gracile descendants. There are problems with the hypothesis: the taxon diagnoses are based
    on two features that overlap between the species; several skulls cannot be identified based on the diagnoses; proportional
    comparisons between Tyrannosaurus and other theropods are based on incomparable samples; the tooth data are problematic;
    the stratigraphic framework divides the Hell Creek Formation into thirds, without the stratigraphic position of each
    specimen, or independent age control showing the subdivisions are coeval over the entire geographic area; previous work
    found variation in T. rex, but it cannot be parsed into discrete categories. We tested for “gracile” and “robust” morphs by
    analyzing the femoral and tooth ratios that were published in the multiple species study using agglomerative hierarchical
    clustering. The results found that each set of ratios are explained by one cluster, showing that dimorphism is not supported.
    We tested for exceptional variation of the femoral ratio of Tyrannosaurus; we calculated the mean intraspecific robusticity
    for 112 species of living birds and 4 nonavian theropods. The results showed that the absolute variation in Tyrannosaurus
    is unexceptional and it does not indicate cryptic diversity. We conclude that “T. regina” and “T. imperator” are subjective junior synonyms of T. rex.

    I've downloaded the paper and will discuss it if there is enough interest.


    Peter Nyikos
    Professor, Dept. of Mathematics -- standard disclaimer--
    University of South Carolina
    https://people.math.sc.edu/nyikos
    I recall Brusatte remarking on how the tooth, snout and jaw structure changes remarkably as the
    young T-rex matures. The changes reported in this paper shows "the absolute variation in Tyrannosaurus
    is unexceptional".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peter Nyikos@21:1/5 to erik simpson on Wed Oct 18 18:49:54 2023
    On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 10:56:15 PM UTC-4, erik simpson wrote:
    On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 2:13:09 PM UTC-7, Peter Nyikos wrote:

    Thomas Holtz is a dinosaur specialist, renowned for both his research and expository writing on a popular level. Back in the good old days of sci.bio.paleontology, the 1990's, he was a regular participant here.

    Last year, he co-authored a paper in Evolutionary Biology with the formidable title,

    Insufficient Evidence for Multiple Species of Tyrannosaurus
    in the Latest Cretaceous of North America: A Comment on “The Tyrant Lizard King, Queen and Emperor: Multiple Lines of Morphologicaland Stratigraphic Evidence Support Subtle Evolution and Probable Speciation Within the North American Genus
    Tyrannosaurus”
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-022-09573-1
    I got access through Academia, with a url that repeats almost the whole title.

    The paper is as technical as any I've seen. Perhaps John Harshman can
    make immediate sense out of the abstract, whose message is that the authors
    did not make a good enough case for T.rex having two sister species.

    Abstract
    The Late Cretaceous dinosaur Tyrannosaurus rex was recently split into three species based on the premise that variation
    in the T. rex hypodigm is exceptional, indicating cryptic species and “robust” and “gracile” morphs. The morphs are based
    on proportional ratios throughout the skeleton. The species are claimed to be stratigraphically separate, with an early robust
    species followed by robust and gracile descendants. There are problems with the hypothesis: the taxon diagnoses are based
    on two features that overlap between the species; several skulls cannot be identified based on the diagnoses; proportional
    comparisons between Tyrannosaurus and other theropods are based on incomparable samples; the tooth data are problematic;
    the stratigraphic framework divides the Hell Creek Formation into thirds, without the stratigraphic position of each
    specimen, or independent age control showing the subdivisions are coeval over the entire geographic area; previous work
    found variation in T. rex, but it cannot be parsed into discrete categories. We tested for “gracile” and “robust” morphs by
    analyzing the femoral and tooth ratios that were published in the multiple species study using agglomerative hierarchical
    clustering. The results found that each set of ratios are explained by one cluster, showing that dimorphism is not supported.
    We tested for exceptional variation of the femoral ratio of Tyrannosaurus; we calculated the mean intraspecific robusticity
    for 112 species of living birds and 4 nonavian theropods. The results showed that the absolute variation in Tyrannosaurus
    is unexceptional and it does not indicate cryptic diversity. We conclude that “T. regina” and “T. imperator” are subjective junior synonyms of T. rex.

    I've downloaded the paper and will discuss it if there is enough interest.


    Peter Nyikos
    Professor, Dept. of Mathematics -- standard disclaimer--
    University of South Carolina
    https://people.math.sc.edu/nyikos

    I recall Brusatte remarking on how the tooth, snout and jaw structure changes remarkably as the
    young T-rex matures. The changes reported in this paper shows "the absolute variation in Tyrannosaurus
    is unexceptional".

    Did you notice that Brusatte is one of the co-authors of the paper?
    We are also told: "Thomas D. Carr and James G. Napoli are co-lead authors."

    Here is the whole list:
    Thomas D. Carr1 · James G. Napoli2 · Stephen L. Brusatte3 · Thomas R. Holtz Jr.4,5 · David W. E. Hone6 ·
    Thomas E. Williamson7 · Lindsay E. Zanno8,9

    The numbers refer to information about affiliation, and email addresses
    that are on the last page of the article.

    It looks as though this paper can take us to the next level of
    scholarly criticism. I have read similarly high-level reviews in mathematics, but this is the first I've seen on such a high plane in paleontology.


    Peter Nyikos

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JTEM@21:1/5 to Peter Nyikos on Wed Oct 25 10:07:46 2023
    Peter Nyikos wrote:

    erik simpson wrote:
    On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 2:13:09 PM UTC-7, Peter Nyikos wrote:

    Thomas Holtz is a dinosaur specialist, renowned for both his research and
    expository writing on a popular level. Back in the good old days of sci.bio.paleontology, the 1990's, he was a regular participant here.

    Last year, he co-authored a paper in Evolutionary Biology with the formidable title,

    Insufficient Evidence for Multiple Species of Tyrannosaurus
    in the Latest Cretaceous of North America: A Comment on “The Tyrant Lizard King, Queen and Emperor: Multiple Lines of Morphologicaland Stratigraphic Evidence Support Subtle Evolution and Probable Speciation Within the North American Genus
    Tyrannosaurus”
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-022-09573-1
    I got access through Academia, with a url that repeats almost the whole title.

    The paper is as technical as any I've seen. Perhaps John Harshman can make immediate sense out of the abstract, whose message is that the authors
    did not make a good enough case for T.rex having two sister species.

    Abstract
    The Late Cretaceous dinosaur Tyrannosaurus rex was recently split into three species based on the premise that variation
    in the T. rex hypodigm is exceptional, indicating cryptic species and “robust” and “gracile” morphs. The morphs are based
    on proportional ratios throughout the skeleton. The species are claimed to be stratigraphically separate, with an early robust
    species followed by robust and gracile descendants. There are problems with the hypothesis: the taxon diagnoses are based
    on two features that overlap between the species; several skulls cannot be identified based on the diagnoses; proportional
    comparisons between Tyrannosaurus and other theropods are based on incomparable samples; the tooth data are problematic;
    the stratigraphic framework divides the Hell Creek Formation into thirds, without the stratigraphic position of each
    specimen, or independent age control showing the subdivisions are coeval over the entire geographic area; previous work
    found variation in T. rex, but it cannot be parsed into discrete categories. We tested for “gracile” and “robust” morphs by
    analyzing the femoral and tooth ratios that were published in the multiple species study using agglomerative hierarchical
    clustering. The results found that each set of ratios are explained by one cluster, showing that dimorphism is not supported.
    We tested for exceptional variation of the femoral ratio of Tyrannosaurus; we calculated the mean intraspecific robusticity
    for 112 species of living birds and 4 nonavian theropods. The results showed that the absolute variation in Tyrannosaurus
    is unexceptional and it does not indicate cryptic diversity. We conclude that “T. regina” and “T. imperator” are subjective junior synonyms of T. rex.

    I've downloaded the paper and will discuss it if there is enough interest.


    Peter Nyikos
    Professor, Dept. of Mathematics -- standard disclaimer--
    University of South Carolina
    https://people.math.sc.edu/nyikos

    I recall Brusatte remarking on how the tooth, snout and jaw structure changes remarkably as the
    young T-rex matures. The changes reported in this paper shows "the absolute variation in Tyrannosaurus
    is unexceptional".
    Did you notice that Brusatte is one of the co-authors of the paper?
    We are also told: "Thomas D. Carr and James G. Napoli are co-lead authors."

    Here is the whole list:
    Thomas D. Carr1 · James G. Napoli2 · Stephen L. Brusatte3 · Thomas R. Holtz Jr.4,5 · David W. E. Hone6 ·
    Thomas E. Williamson7 · Lindsay E. Zanno8,9

    The numbers refer to information about affiliation, and email addresses
    that are on the last page of the article.

    It looks as though this paper can take us to the next level of
    scholarly criticism. I have read similarly high-level reviews in mathematics,
    but this is the first I've seen on such a high plane in paleontology.


    Peter Nyikos

    The erik simpson troll is just a sock puppet -- maybe one of yours? -- regurgitating
    titles & names it heard, pretending to understand things it never read.

    Asperger's isn't a crime, but neither is it an intellectual accomplishment...

    Ignore the erik simpson load. Better yet; flush!




    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/731796353021247489

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)