Despite their extinction millions of years ago, Triceratops continue to incite controversy. In the latest chapter, researchers present further evidence that three genera thought at one time or another to be distinct — Triceratops, Torosaurus, and Nedoceratops — actually represent different individuals that all belong to the Triceratops genus.
The work, led by John Scannella of Montana State University and published in the Dec. 14 issue of the online journal PLoS ONE, focuses on one particular specimen — a single skull — that has been the subject of considerable debate.
Some consider it a Triceratops, while others argue that it is a different genus. The new analysis provides evidence that this specimen is in fact a Triceratops, and that much of the confusion has arisen due to significant skeletal changes that are thought to occur during Triceratops development, as well as natural variation within the genus.
These factors result in specimens with some features that are considerably different, but are nonetheless all Triceratops, the authors conclude.
Citation: Scannella JB, Horner JR (2011) ‘Nedoceratops’: An Example of a Transitional Morphology. PLoS ONE 6(12): e28705.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0028705
Financial Disclosure: This research was funded in part by grants from the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Fund of the AMNH and the Doris O. and Samuel P. Welles Research Fund of the UCMP to JBS. No additional external funding was received for this study. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing Interest Statement: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
PLEASE LINK TO THE SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE IN ONLINE VERSIONS OF YOUR REPORT (URL goes live after the embargo ends):
http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0028705
Disclaimer: This press release refers to upcoming articles in PLoS ONE. The releases have been provided by the article authors and/or journal staff. Any opinions expressed in these are the personal views of the contributors, and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of PLoS. PLoS expressly disclaims any and all warranties and liability in connection with the information found in the release and article and your use of such information.
About PLoS ONE
PLoS ONE is the first journal of primary research from all areas of science to employ a combination of peer review and post-publication rating and commenting, to maximize the impact of every report it publishes. PLoS ONE is published by the Public Library of Science (PLoS), the open-access publisher whose goal is to make the world’s scientific and medical literature a public resource.
All works published in PLoS ONE are Open Access. Everything is immediately available — to read, download, redistribute, include in databases and otherwise use — without cost to anyone, anywhere, subject only to the condition that the original authors and source are properly attributed. For more information about PLoS ONE relevant to journalists, bloggers and press officers, including details of our press release process and our embargo policy, see the everyONE blog at http://everyone.plos.org/media.
