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

Re: Removing segnosaurs from Theropoda



In a message dated 95-09-01 22:37:58 EDT, head@lust.isem.smu.edu (Jason Head)
writes:

>At 9:11 PM 9/1/95, Dinogeorge@aol.com wrote:
>>In a message dated 95-09-01 20:01:03 EDT, jshields@iol.ie (James Shields)
>>writes:
>>
>>>Well, if you want to be a STRICT cladist, the term "Non Avian Dinosaur" is
>>>paraphyletic. Therefore it is impossible for [strict] cladists to talk
>about
>>>dinosaurs without also talking about birds.
>>>
>>>Am I missing something?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>As you have shown, while monophyletic taxa are desirable, paraphyletic taxa
>>are often more useful. It's a point I've been harping on for weeks now.
>
>        As long as you can define them in terms of a real, natural group- a
>point I'VE been harping about for weeks.
>
>
Right: We can always define a paraphyletic taxon as the difference between an
inclusive clade and one or more included clades. All the clades are "natural
groups," thereby satisfying your requirement.