Taxonomy of Allosaurus
Taxonomy of a dinosaur genus
The dinosaur genus Allosaurus has a complex taxonomic history, including multiple proposed species of which only a few are considered valid today. The genus was first described in 1877 by Othniel Charles Marsh from a very fragmentary specimen found in Colorado. For several decades, Allosaurus was known under the name Antrodemus, until a 1976 publication re-established the name Allosaurus. In 2023, another, much more complete specimen found in the same quarry was selected as the neotype (the specimen on which the taxon is based, replacing the inadequate original specimen).
Four species are considered potentially valid. Besides the well-known type species A. fragilis, these are A. europaeus, A. jimmadseni, and A. anax. A. europaeus, based on a specimen from Portugal, is the only species found outside of North America. Its validity is contested, and some researchers found it to be a synonym of A. fragilis. A. jimmadseni was described in 2020 and is known from multiple complete specimens. A. anax was described in 2024 based on a few bones that were previously assigned to the genus Saurophaganax.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Taxonomy of Allosaurus” as taxonomy of a dinosaur genus. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the science & nature register because the source frames it as taxonomy of a dinosaur genus. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 12, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q135495461. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1877, 1976, 2023 and 2020.
Current terminology should not be projected backward without checking the classification used when the underlying evidence was created. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Taxonomy of Allosaurus”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Taxonomy of Allosaurus primary sources, Taxonomy of Allosaurus archive and Taxonomy research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Taxonomy of Allosaurus”?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Taxonomy of Allosaurus” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.