Dryptosaurus kenabekides, Hay, 1899

Hay, OP, 1899, On the nomenclature of certain American fossil vertebrates, The American Geologist 24, pp. 345-349 : 347-348

The disposition of this case above detailed, which disposition I believe to be uncontestable, on the assumption that two distinct genera are included in the lot of teeth described by Leidy, leaves those teeth represented by figures 21 -34 without specific name. It is possible that they are covered by some of the specific names which have been included under Prof. Cope`s genus Laelaps , but apparently they are not. Hence, I believe that I am justified in giving them a provisional specific title.

The name Laelaps , having been employed in 1835 for a genus of Arachnida. is not available iıı the sense given it by Prof. Cope. Hence, Prof. Marsh‡properly substituted for it, in 1877, the name Dryptosaurus .

To this genus then the teeth represented by figures 21 -34 of Dr. Leidy's plate IX seen to belong.

They may be called Dryptosaurus kenabekides .*

From the time of Leidy’s first description there have been some reasons for suspecting that all the teeth described by him belonged to the same genus, indeed to the same animal. All those teeth were found “ in one place and possessed the same structural differences." Again, Prof. Cope in describing his Laelaps incrassatus ; states that he found that the anterior denticulated carina of some of the anterior teeth was moved around the crown so that it was no longer opposite the hinder carina: and he says that a further transferrence would produce a tooth like those of Leidy's figures 35 -45 , those with the U- shaped section. Furthermore, Cape says that he found a large tooth in immediate association with the jaw of his L. incrassatus , but separated from it, which had the posteriorly truncated section described by Leidy as typical; and Cope believed that this tooth belonged to the maxillary bone, near the position of the superior canine of a mammal.

Nevertheless, in 1892 Prof. Cope: had the opportunity to study remains of L. incrassatus which furnished him nearly all parts of the skull; and he did not find, either in the maxilla or in the dentary, teeth of the kind represented in Leidy’s figures 35-45 . The teeth of the premaxilla were missing in his specimen and there remains the possibility that they are the ones which possess the U-shaped section. Meantime, it seems wiser to retain the genera as distinct, awaiting further discoveries.

Figures

figures 21 -34