[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
>From: Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. <email@example.com>
>To: firstname.lastname@example.org <email@example.com>
>Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org <email@example.com>
>Date: Wednesday, February 24, 1999 8:58 AM
>Subject: Re: Rahonavis....Both!
>The large sickle claw is certainly dromaeosaurid-like, but as most analyses
>show dromaeosaurids and/or troodontids are bird outgroups, this feature is
>probably basal to the bird-dromaeosaurid (& troodontid) group, and later
>lost in more advanced birds (_Archaeopteryx_ and some other basal birds do
>retain a hyperextensible digit II without keeping the sickle claw).
Well, yeah, but...I`ve been hearing lately (sorry no specific refs) that
Dromaeosaurs seem in many ways MORE advanced that Archeopteryx, and for that
matter,...so is Rahonavis. So, it dosen`t seem to fit in as a decent
intermediate either. More likely further advanced because it actually had
more time to evolve into the Cretaceous, and give rise to Dromaeosaurs.