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

FOLLOWUP: BIRDS



I need to correct some things that I have said...

<<_Caudipteryx_ retains a postorbital-jugal bar contact, as well as a 
quadratojugal-squamosal  contact, lacks any indication of prokinesis 
which probably was present  in (_Archaeopteryx_), non-reversed hallux 
and unfused metatarsals.>>  

I should say that there is no evidence of prokinesis in _Caudipteryx_, 
not _Archaeopteryx_.  

<<There is no indication of something like this.  One can argue that  
protofliers had stronger muscles, it makes little difference.  Anyway, 
it does not seem that they did have stronger flight muscles since the 
pectoral girdle elements are smaller as well as the humeral crests.>>

This was just assuming that _Caudipteryx_ and _Protarchaeopteryx_ were 
the protofliers.  Really, phylogenetically speaking, there is no 
evidence that these creatures were secondarily flightless.  
Morphologically, the evidence is equivocal on the issue of whether they 
were secondarily flightless.  One can argue that they are secondarily 
flightless based on the feathers or that they are a gliding stage in 
bird evolution.  

Matt Troutman

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com