[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: cursorial flapping



In a message dated 95-12-02 12:42:57 EST, Robert.J.Meyerson@uwrf.edu (Rob
Meyerson) writes:

>>The only detail left to be filled in is to find a nice, complete specimen
>>somewhere in the Middle Triassic or so.
>
>A few questions:
>
>Wouldn't this be _Protoavis_(P)?  Assuming it is a valid taxon, then where=
> would Archy fit, considering that it appears more "primitive" than P?  Is
P=
> an early experiment that failed (weren't pterosarus radiating at this=
> time), or is Archy the dino attempt at flight?  Finally, if P is=
> legitimate, then aren't there concerns about it being a true dinosaur, and=
> actually being a seperate descendant from the thecodonts?

The operative word here is "complete." Unfortunately, the P specimen is
incomplete and its present interpretation as a more advanced avian than
_Archaeopteryx_ is controversial (at least, for everyone except Sankar!). The
skull is smashed, and everyone has complained about Sankar's reconstruction
of it, so I disregard the skull. As far as I'm concerned, the known
postcrania fit right in at the right time for it to be a dino-bird of the
kind BCF asserts existed.