0
Dromaeosaurids in the Kem Kem beds?
Viewed 296 times

Isolated theropod teeth from the Kem Kem beds have been referred to Dromaeosauridae by Amiot et al. (2004) and Richter et al. (2012), yet the authors seem to have omitted to discuss this clade in the section on the theropod fauna from the Kem Kem assemblage compound (KKCA). Do the authors also believe that these isolated teeth may in fact belong to the ceratosaur Deltadromaeus, as I recently suggested in my paper on spinosaurid quadrates (Hendrickx et al., 2016)? Likewise, is there a reason why the authors believe that abelisaurids are not part of the main theropod assemblage of the Kem Kem beds (cfr. Figure 2), while their dental, cranial and postcranial material have been reported from that assemblage by several authors, including themselves? Many thanks in advance for your reply!

Kind regards,

Christophe Hendrickx

References Amiot, R., Buffetaut, E., Tong, H., Boudad, L. and Kabiri, L. 2004. Isolated theropod teeth from the Cenomanian of Morocco and their palaeobiogeographical significance. Revue de Paléobiologie 9: 143–149.

Hendrickx, C., Mateus, O. and Buffetaut, E. 2016. Morphofunctional analysis of the quadrate of Spinosauridae (Dinosauria: Theropoda) and the presence of Spinosaurus and a second spinosaurine taxon in the Cenomanian of North Africa. PLOS ONE 11 (1): e0144695.

Richter, U., Mudroch, A. and Buckley, L. G. 2013. Isolated theropod teeth from the Kem Kem Beds (Early Cenomanian) near Taouz, Morocco. Paläontologische Zeitschrift 87 (2): 291–309.

waiting for moderation
2 Answers
0
Accepted answer

Thank you for the questions. The main aim of the revision in our paper was not to review the whole theropod record from the KKCA, but to provide a commentary on the large-bodied clades that may eventually be the same taxon as (or close relative of) the described femur. In fact, we re-directed the reader to McFeeters (2013), who reviewed the small-bodied record from the KKCA, and added a comment to the problematic Kemkemia because it may pertain to a Sigilmassasaurus-like taxon.

I agree that the "dromaeosaurid" teeth from the KKCA may belong to abelisauroids, as discussed by Hendrickx et al. (2016).

Figure 2 simply reports the named species from these assemblages. Currently, no abelisaurid species has been named from the KKCA. The "Spinosaurinae indet." in both Echkar Fm. and the KKCA is what other authors call "Spinosaurus": the use of "Spinosaurinae indet." is provided in the text. We are aware that abelisaurids were reported in the KKCA: note that the number of abelisaurid taxa represented by the isolated material from that assemblage is unclear (see discussion by D'Orazi Porchetti et al. 2011).

Reference: D’Orazi Porchetti S, Nicosia U, Biava A, Maganuco S. 2011. New abelisaurid material from the Upper Cretaceous (Cenomanian) of Morocco. Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia 117(3):463–472. McFeeters B. 2013. Bone “Taxon” B: reevaluation of a supposed small theropod dinosaur from the mid-Cretaceous of Morocco. Kirtlandia 58:38–41.

waiting for moderation