The short answer to that question is we have no idea. This is a reconstruction of 3/5ths of known New Zealand Dinosaur types. However the problem with this is that all these animals are known from one to two bones each. We know the general families for each but that's it.
So in this case I can say safely the two fossils I based this on are from an Ankylosaur. What sort we don't know. I've based this on the well known Minmi from Australia (though in the late Cretaceous New Zealand and Australia were only just seperated). If it turns out the Zealandia Ankylosaur is something like Minmi (for which there is a not to unrealistic possiblity) it would be a basal Ankylosaurid rather than Nodosaurid. Of course it could be a totally different variety of Ankylosaur and be a Nodosaur or something else...
Very interesting! Just a question: what is this sort of nodosaur?
ReplyDeleteHey Alessandro
DeleteThe short answer to that question is we have no idea. This is a reconstruction of 3/5ths of known New Zealand Dinosaur types. However the problem with this is that all these animals are known from one to two bones each. We know the general families for each but that's it.
So in this case I can say safely the two fossils I based this on are from an Ankylosaur. What sort we don't know. I've based this on the well known Minmi from Australia (though in the late Cretaceous New Zealand and Australia were only just seperated). If it turns out the Zealandia Ankylosaur is something like Minmi (for which there is a not to unrealistic possiblity) it would be a basal Ankylosaurid rather than Nodosaurid. Of course it could be a totally different variety of Ankylosaur and be a Nodosaur or something else...
Thank you for your exhaustive answer. See you soon!
ReplyDelete