[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Dinogeorge et al. might be interested in these refs (if you hadn't seen
Abel, O. 1911. Die Vorfahren der Vogel und ihre Lebensweise. Verh.
Zool. Bot. Ges. Wien, 61: 144-191.
Abel, O. 1920. _Lehrbuch der Palaozoologie_. Jena: Gustav Fischer
I got these two out of Witmer's _Origins of the Higher Groups of
Tetrapods_ paper. I haven't read them yet (because they're in German
and I have no idea about the journal in the first one), but Witmer
summarized the basic outline of the papers:
"Othenio Abel (1911) agreed that birds and theropods possessed important
similiarities and was among those who argued for a common ancestry. For
Abel, however, this common ancestor was an arboreal animal. The avian
descendents of this ancestor simply remained in the trees, whereas the
theropods became secondarily teresstrial." Witmer 1991; 438.
So in response to somebody's claim that Olshevsky came up with the idea
of secondary flightless or arboreal theropods, let me say that it was
Abel who first developed the idea. Anyway, George deserves credit for
coming up with the "complete picture".
Also, before I go on, I must give a real positive endorsement of
_Origins of the Higher Groups of Tetrapods_. Some of the best articles
in there are Witmer's and L. Martin's (excellent article on the anatomy
of _Archaeopteryx_ where he argues convincingly that the squamosal was
absent in the creature). The whole book is good.
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com