Possible Megaraptoran from the Lameta Formation?

[DinoNerdBoi owo]

Hello there! I recently emailed Mickey Mortimer regarding this interesting tooth from the Lameta Formation that didn't look abelisauroid. She recommended that I ask for feedback here.  I have a document which explains what I mean. Also I have included the original paper too. What are your thoughts? Please let me know.

Thank you

vvv Document and Paper vvv

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1vdPCT57gNZ-BBi0SQmRRgM3fHbUMXGyS?usp=sharing

[Sean McKelvey]

I'm just an enthusiast, so take my opinion with a grain of salt, but the similarities are indeed apparent. It's the depression on the lingual side that sticks out to me. Assuming that is a genuine feature of the tooth, and not just damage to the fossil itself, it warrants further investigation. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dinosaur Mailing Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to DinosaurMailingG...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/DinosaurMailingGroup/5c869c57-9389-4b97-8176-a00fbe45484bn%40googlegroups.com.

[Ilya Sadykov]

Interesting point. To my knowledge, a theropod tooth has been found in the Kallamedu Formation that bears a close resemblance to those of troodontid.

пятница, 13 марта 2026 г. в 09:48:11 UTC+5, Sean McKelvey:

[DinoNerdBoi owo]

There is actually another tooth described in the paper that Mortimer and Ford consider to be troodontid.

Seems the Lameta Formation hates preserving non-abelisauroid body fossils

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/DinosaurMailingGroup/38966b07-ae37-4957-bed0-ab9b47806b87n%40googlegroups.com.

[Mickey Mortimer]

Regarding non-abelisauroid Lameta theropods, I might as well paste what I wrote you here-  Much of the Lameta material may not be abelisauroid. The only review is Novas et al. (2004), and many elements are said to be lost since 1933 or identified only as Theropoda indet. (Appendix). More importantly, the authors will often only say an element is congruent with an abelisauroid identification as opposed to proposing it has characters of Abelisauroidea or its subclades. And this is especially relevant as Megaraptora/idae and Unenlagiidae/inae were not recognized groups in 2003, with only the fragmentary holotypes of Megaraptor and Unenlagia described (ignoring tiny Rahonavis and unrecognized things like Rapator). So maybe that bone congruent with Abelisauridae would also be congruent with Megaraptoridae, or that bone congruent with Noasauridae might also be congruent with Unenlagiinae, but Novas et al. lacked the comparable material. 

Mickey Mortimer

[DinoNerdBoi owo]

To your point of non-abelisaurids not being described, I was invited to visit the repository in India that houses the Dravidosaurus specimens.

I remember seeing about a dozen cardboard boxes labeled with their localities.

I looked through some of them since they were all undescribed but soon realised that most of them are either abelisauroids or just lack any identifiable features.

However there was a box full of random ?dinosaurian centra and a couple of them didn't look abelisaurid, although I have no pictures of those bones (They lacked pleurocoels, and were above 10 cms in diameter).

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/DinosaurMailingGroup/bce64e17-5c11-41e6-93f0-2d2475a68022n%40googlegroups.com.

[Ilya Sadykov]

Generally, this is a constant phenomenon for almost any formation or group. Some of the "longest-lasting" fossils are the remains of large animals or the most durable parts of the skeleton; and, of course, the preservation conditions and the environment are the decisive factors.

пятница, 13 марта 2026 г. в 15:13:25 UTC+5, DinoNerdBoi owo:

[Ilya Sadykov]

Although I find it strange and curious that there are still no relatively significant finds of ornithischian dinosaurs, except for some very questionable evidence from the Lameta. Mostly, there are only saurischians (i.e., titanosaurs, abelisaurs, and other unidentified taxa).

воскресенье, 15 марта 2026 г. в 07:27:06 UTC+5, Ilya Sadykov:

[DinoNerdBoi owo]

Here's a rough graph of most of the specimens pertaining to dinosaur body fossils I could find from the Lameta Formation

Abelisaurids seem to have become really abundant by the end Cretaceous across their distribution, I wonder why? 

(Carnivorous dinosaurs of the Late Cretaceous Bauru Group in Central Brazil: Records, diversity, taxonomic composition and paleobiogeography)

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/DinosaurMailingGroup/b67ba793-856a-4478-b90f-8263df8ea1adn%40googlegroups.com.

[DinoNerdBoi owo]

I've a rough graph of most of the specimens pertaining to dinosaur body fossils I could find from the Lameta Formation

Abelisaurids seem to have become really abundant by the end Cretaceous across their distribution, I wonder why? 

The above graph is from "Carnivorous dinosaurs of the Late Cretaceous Bauru Group in Central Brazil: Records, diversity, taxonomic composition and paleobiogeography"

On Sun, Mar 15, 2026 at 8:05 AM Ilya Sadykov <ilasad...@gmail.com> wrote:

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/DinosaurMailingGroup/b67ba793-856a-4478-b90f-8263df8ea1adn%40googlegroups.com.