▁syn onym ▁of ▁M . ▁per if ania . ▁Long rich ▁also ▁regarded ▁the ▁hol ot ype ▁of ▁E oc er at ops ▁as ▁probably ▁being ▁an ▁exempl ar ▁of ▁M oj oc er at ops . ▁He ▁considered ▁it ▁too ▁poor ly ▁preserved ▁for ▁a ▁reliable ▁determ ination , ▁especially ▁as ▁it ▁belonged ▁to ▁a ▁ju ven ile ▁individual , ▁and ▁regarded ▁it ▁too ▁as ▁a ▁nom en ▁dub ium , ▁rather ▁than ▁as ▁the ▁senior ▁syn onym ▁of ▁M . ▁per if ania . ▁A ▁ 2 0 1 6 ▁over view ▁of ▁Ch asm osa urus ▁found ▁C . ▁k ais eni ▁and ▁E oc er at ops ▁to ▁be ▁refer able ▁to ▁Ch asm osa urus ▁sp . ▁due ▁to ▁the ▁lack ▁of ▁the ▁par iet al ▁preserved ▁in ▁the ▁hol ot ypes ▁of ▁both . ▁ ▁Following ▁the ▁original ▁assignment ▁of ▁the ▁hol ot ype ▁and ▁other ▁sk ull s ▁to ▁M oj oc er at ops , ▁several ▁teams ▁of ▁research ers ▁published ▁work ▁question ing ▁the ▁valid ity ▁of ▁this ▁new ▁genus . ▁In ▁ 2 0 1 1 , ▁Ma id ment ▁& ▁Bar rett ▁failed ▁to ▁confirm ▁the ▁presence ▁of ▁any ▁supposed ly ▁unique ▁features , ▁and ▁argued ▁that ▁M oj oc er at ops ▁per if ania ▁was ▁a ▁syn onym ▁of ▁Ch asm osa urus ▁russ elli . ▁Campbell ▁and ▁colle agues , ▁in ▁their ▁ 2 0 1 6 ▁analysis ▁of ▁Ch asm osa urus ▁spec im ens , ▁agreed ▁with