[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: I will be ostracized because of this
It's hard to be critical of someone who endorses my site so strongly,
On Tue, 24 Feb 1998, Jack wrote:
> |--+--Herrerasauridae (or "herrerasaurids")
> | +--Phytodinosauria
> | |=="primitive segnosaurs" (?)
> | |--_Therizinosaurus_
> | |--Sauropodomorpha
> | |--Therizinosauridae (_Segnosaurus_, _Nanshiungosaurus_, etc.)
> | +--Ornithischia
This is a little confusing right off the bat. Why isn't _Therizinosaurus_
in Therizinosauridae, and what do you mean by "primitive segnosaurs"?
> It seems possible, then, that advanced herrerasaurids might have
> developed the strap-like scapula independently of theropods.
This seems like more of an argument for inclusion of herrerasaurids in
Theropoda to me.
> The therizinosaurid line would represent a state more
> derived than than those "segnosaurs" which gave rise to sauropodomorphs
> and primitive to the "segnosaurs" which were the direct ancestors of
"Basal phytodinosaurs" might be a better term than "segnosaurs".
> The basal "segnosaurs" might have been more derived than
> _Eoraptor_, but primitive to _Staurikosaurus_ based on comparisons of the
> pelvis and skull in these two forms as compared with the relatively
> derived _Segnosaurus_ and "prosauropods".
Now I'm really confused. This doesn't look like your cladogram at all, and
I still don't know what you mean by "segnosaurs".
> ALSO CHECK OUT T. MIKE KEESEY'S WEBSITE FOR THE CURRENTLY ACCEPTED
> CLADISTIC ANALYSIS OF ALL DINOSAURS:
Thanks! It's accepted by me, anyway... more or less.
--T. Mike Keesey
http://umbc.edu/~tkeese1 -- Dinosaur Web Pages