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

Re: Mongolian dinosaur inspires religion in grad student



In a message dated 96-10-01 15:56:38 EDT, nino@ccuam3.sdi.uam.es writes:

> Do you know that nearly all of the teeth character states are the same for
> Ornithomimosauria (not Ornithomimoidea; and you have to include here
> _Pelecanimimus_ for the teeth characters), Troodontidae and (I think)
> Alvarezsauridae? Have you included _Pelecanimimus_ in your analysis? 

Before we go any further into this, just what is Alvarezsauridae these days?
Yes, I know it contains _Alvarezsaurus_(!), but I've seen it bruited about
that _Mononykus_ and _Patagonykus_ are in this family, too. On comparing
_Mononykus_ with _Alvarezsaurus_ from published illustrations and
photographs, I see precious few similarities, and I don't see how these two
forms are confamilial; more data is needed, if you please. Inclusion of
_Mononykus_ in Alvarezsauridae would >have< to affect these cladograms in
some way.

Also, including _Compsognathus_ and therezinosauroids in the same low-level
clade is completely absurd. What could >possibly< be the basis for this? -->

>                    |  +-Alvarezsauridae
>                   +--+
>                      +-Therizinosauroidea+Compsognathus