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


> >I've obviously deleted the synapomorphy list. Point is, the Dave Peters that
> >wrote this _is not_ 'our' dpterosaur David Peters. Just thought I should
> >point that out.
> Sure it is. Dave even sent me a set of skeletal silhouettes that he drew for
> the article. Being from St. Louis, Dave is a member in good standing (as far
> as I know) of MAPS, the Mid-America Paleontology Society.         (G.O.)

Well now I'm really confused. He said to me (quote): 'Was not me writing about
birds - someone else'. I'll have to pester him about it some more - his
reconstructions are *fantastic* (you can buy his pterosaur ones, folks).

What's the latest on the tapejarids, BTW. How many genera, and is any postcrania
referred? It's been suggested to me that these animals were doing whatever the
oviraptorosaurs were doing.. well that really helps. I think this idea is based
on Smith's designation of _Oviraptor_ as a leaf-eater.


The situation seems complex, as the taxon was originally thought to be a ratite
one, but why isn't Caenagnathiformes used instead of Oviraptorosauria? I know
that rules of priority don't stand here, but is the name a viable alternative?
If not, why (presumably because, as diagnosed, it is far more inclusive than

"Reflect on your significance while resting in the shadow of a large carnivore"