[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: FEATHERY LITTLE TYRANNOSAURS
Darren 'the joker' Naish wrote:
> Pete 'puke' says... (err, that's a private joke)..
> > Because, as we understand dinosaur systematics at this moment in time
> > TYRANNOSAURS ARE CLOSER TO BIRDS THAN ARE COMPSOGNATHIDS.
> Not if you're George Olshevsky;). George reckons compsognathids to be basal
> members of his Tyrannosauria, yes? George - if this is so it would show that
> feathers go back (and let's assume here that the _Sinosauropteryx_ structures
> are certainly feathers) to the common ancestor of Aves s.s. and Tyrannosauria.
Either way, the point still is that compsognathids aren't closer to birds than
Tyrannosaurs, so Tyrannosaurs still fall within the feather-bearing clade. I
would even argue that Arctomets could be closer to birds than
Archaeopterygids are because they seem to share a derived V1 olfactory nerve
anotomy with birds that Archaeopterigids might not have (I'll know one way or
the other when and if Witmer publishes something about it in the new
"Do, or do not; there is no try."