This HTML5 document contains 58 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Subject Item

n2:

rdfs:label

Wuerhosaurus Wuerhosaurus

rdfs:comment

Wuerhosaurus homheni is the type species, described by Dong Zhiming in 1973 from the Tugulu Group in Xinjiang, western China. The generic name is derived from the city of Wuerho. The remains consisted of the holotype IVPP V.4006, a skull-less fragmentary skeleton, and the paratype IVPP V4007, three vertebrae from the tail of a second individual. A smaller species from the Ejinhoro Formation in the Ordos Basin in Inner Mongolia, W. ordosensis, was formalized by the same researcher in 1993. It is based on specimen IVPP V6877, a fragmentary skeleton lacking the skull. It was found in 1988. Susannah Maidment and colleagues proposed in 2008 that Wuerhosaurus should be considered a junior synonym of Stegosaurus, with type species W. homheni as Stegosaurus homheni and second species W. ordosensis Wuerhosaurus homheni is the type species, described by Dong Zhiming in 1973 from the Tugulu Group in Xinjiang, western China. The generic name is derived from the city of Wuerho.[2] The remains consisted of the holotype IVPP V.4006, a skull-less fragmentary skeleton, and the paratype IVPP V4007,[3] three vertebrae from the tail of a second individual.[4] Despite popularly being shown with short, rounded plates, the original fossils were actually broken, creating this illusion, and their actually shape is currently unknown. "Wuerhosaurus" was a stegosaur from the early cretaceous period

owl:sameAs

dbr:Wuerhosaurus

n48:

7.0

dcterms:subject

n4: n5: n6: n11: n13: n17: n18: n19: n20: n22: n25: n26: n31: n32: n34: n38: n39: n40: n41: n42: n43: n44: n45: n46: n47: n51: n55:

n7:wikiPageUsesTemplate

n8: n56:

n14:wikiPageUsesTemplate

n15: n21: n28:

n29:wikiPageUsesTemplate

n30: n49: n54:

n53:

Jurassic Park III: Park Builder Jurassic World: The Game

n9:

n10: n33:

n57:

4

n50:

"Wuerho's reptile"

n52:

Jurassic Park Institute Artwork

n23:wikiPageUsesTemplate

n24: n35:

n27:

Herbivore

n58:

China

n16:abstract

"Wuerhosaurus" was a stegosaur from the early cretaceous period Despite popularly being shown with short, rounded plates, the original fossils were actually broken, creating this illusion, and their actually shape is currently unknown. Wuerhosaurus homheni is the type species, described by Dong Zhiming in 1973 from the Tugulu Group in Xinjiang, western China. The generic name is derived from the city of Wuerho.[2] The remains consisted of the holotype IVPP V.4006, a skull-less fragmentary skeleton, and the paratype IVPP V4007,[3] three vertebrae from the tail of a second individual.[4] A smaller species from the Ejinhoro Formation in the Ordos Basin in Inner Mongolia, W. ordosensis, was formalized by the same researcher in 1993. It is based on specimen IVPP V6877, a fragmentary skeleton lacking the skull. It was found in 1988.[5] Susannah Maidment and colleagues proposed in 2008 that Wuerhosaurus should be considered a junior synonym of Stegosaurus, with type species W. homheni as Stegosaurus homheni and second species W. ordosensis regarded as dubious.[6] This opinion has been contested, however. Wuerhosaurus homheni is the type species, described by Dong Zhiming in 1973 from the Tugulu Group in Xinjiang, western China. The generic name is derived from the city of Wuerho. The remains consisted of the holotype IVPP V.4006, a skull-less fragmentary skeleton, and the paratype IVPP V4007, three vertebrae from the tail of a second individual. A smaller species from the Ejinhoro Formation in the Ordos Basin in Inner Mongolia, W. ordosensis, was formalized by the same researcher in 1993. It is based on specimen IVPP V6877, a fragmentary skeleton lacking the skull. It was found in 1988. Susannah Maidment and colleagues proposed in 2008 that Wuerhosaurus should be considered a junior synonym of Stegosaurus, with type species W. homheni as Stegosaurus homheni and second species W. ordosensis regarded as dubious. This opinion has been contested, however.