[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Just a quick note. Pieter Depuydt wrote..
> Second, first archosaurs were agile terrestrial small carnivores such
> as the euparkeriids, which descended from tiny "eusuchians" (yes a
> ragbag name I know) as Robert Carroll's Heleosuchus and Heleosaurus, which
> could already atteign some degree of bipedalism (such as the extant Basilisc
Laurin recently (1991) had a go at reinstating Eosuchia as a formal cladistic
taxon that consists of all the descendants of the most recent common ancestor
of the Younginiformes and the Sauria. Gauthier, Benton and Evans previously
regarded younginiforms to be close to lepidosaurs (together the two would form
the Lepidosauromorpha: sister-group to Archosauromorpha within Neodiapsida) but
Laurin's analysis (of a new Texan younginiform relative whose name I have
forgotten) shows that younginiforms lack the characters used to diagnose Sauria
and out-group to it. Massare and Callaway's (1991) hypothesis - that
ichthyosaurs are derived younginiforms (I think they are right) - comes in here
as ichthyosaurs too would be non-saurian neodiapsids.
All well and good, but bringing a name like Eosuchia back in a newly defined
context is, as we have witnessed from Gautherian experience, very confusing.
Similarly, Olivier Rieppel recently re-defined a Rhynchocephalia to include
Sphenodontida/Sphenodontia and a related genus (dammit I've forgotten that name
too..). No thanks. I've had it to here with rhychocephalians. If people see it
used again, they will continue associating rhynchosaurs (which are
archosauromorphs) with tuataras (which are lepidosaurs). Maybe I should cut down
on the coffee.
"Oh my god"
"Which god would that be Daryl? The one who created you, or the one who created
me? You see, in your world, The Lord giveth and The Lord taketh away, but in my
world, the one who created me doesn't have any balls. You're frightfully
inadequate for a deity Daryl."