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

Re: feathers, hair and Compsognathus



> It is ABSOLUTELY NOT useful to stick to the Linnean taxonomic rank of
> "Reptile."  It is Doubly paraphyletic.  It is an awful example of Linnean
> taxonomy.  Also, birds are defined cladistically as "All the descendants of
> the most recent common ancestor of both Archaeopteryx and Corvis", and since
> Sinosauropteryx does not fall within that clade, it is not a bird.

     Not being up on my basal reptile phylogeny, could someone explain
to me exactly why reptiles are now considered to be a paraphyletic
group?  I assume this means that thier earliest common ancestor was NOT
something that shared the traits that has caused scientists to group
"reptiles" together.  What was this common ancestor, and how was it
different?

LN Jeff