Talk:Nomingia

hAGRYPHUS AND nOMINGIA

The picture on Nomingia is not Nomingia it's Hagryphus. Please remove the picture.

---

--408.965.879.065.765.216.519.296.848.415:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Elmo12456, Michael Skrepnick, the image's author, lists it in his site asNomingia[1].So I'd guess the image upload would have to have its tag corrected and the caption onHagryphuschanged to reflect this.

Dracontes13:24, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Skrepnick originally painted it ofNomingia,and later he allowed it to be re-used as an illustration ofHagryphus.Both are known from very incomplete remains, so it's basically just a generalized oviraptorid (even thoughHagryphusis a caenagnathid...)Dinoguy222:35, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I have added the remark that the tail-fan is probably wrong.Nomingiahad a rod-shaped pygostyle which is only found in taxa that havenoor at maximum 2 elongated tail feathers. Rod-shaped pygostyles, as opposed to the plough-shaped ones of modern birds and relatives, seem to have been associated with a generallackof tail feathering. Will add ref.Dysmorodrepanis13:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

There are two known oviraptorosaurians with feather impressions around the tail, and both show tail fans. This should be taken into account when figuring out the function ofNomingiapygostyles, especially since it is most likelynothomologous to the pygostyles of modern birds. Does your ref discuss oviraptorosaurs at all?Dinoguy214:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

"especially since it is most likelynothomologous to the pygostyles of modern birds "- that is precisely the point, the issue was not the" fan "but the" modern birds ". Hence I have changed" modern birds "toCaudipteryx.The tailfanning abilityof modern birds is due to therectricial bulbswhich at least as far as anyone can tell don't work with a rod-shaped pygostyle. Or ifNomingiahad found a means, the contact surfaces should be visible alongsides the pygostyle which is sort of the anchoring plate in modern birds' tail fanning. Or the tissue chould use its own bulk (or that of the other side's bulb) as an anchor, but that would mean thatNomingiahad a club-like sturucture at the tail tip, which would hardly be without consequences for the tail thickness and rigidity in general, and again, there seems nothing peculiar about it.

This would argue for the pygostyle having evolved thrice (and counting).

I also suppose there is something having become lost in translation. Modern birds don'thavea tail fan, theycan fantheir tails. There is for example no indication (IIRC) thatCaudipteryx'tail feathers were significantly moveable, so it seems in these dinos it was the other way around.Dysmorodrepanis(talk)22:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

That makes sense. However, the little that's been published on this genus asserts that it's a pygostyle and it had a tail fan. Not sure if the paper mentions anything about homology with modern birds (unlikely unless it was written by authors who agree with the hypothesis that ovis are closer to birds than dromaeosaurs). Further discussion would be OR.Dinoguy2(talk)02:48, 5 December 2007 (UTC)