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

Re: "Phylogenetic Definitions and Nomenclature..."

On Fri, 26 Mar 1999, Jonathan R. Wagner wrote:

> T. Mike Keesey wrote:
> >Allosauridae == {Allosaurus > Sinraptor, Carcharodontosaurus,
> >Cryolophosaurus, Monolophosaurus}
>         Aaaaaah, multiple exclusive anchor taxa...
I take that "Aaaaaah" as a sigh of satisfaction?
> >Actually, his explicit definition is "all *allosauroids* closer to Ca. 
> >than to either A., M., Cr., or S." (emphasis mine). By either definition
> >of Allosauroidea, the "abelisaur hypothesis" renders Carcharodontosaurus a
> >non-allosauroid. So would this turn Carcharodontosauridae into a null
> >group? 
>         Yeah, this is an old objection of mine. Sereno seems to be following
> an old taxonomic tradition. I believe Padian et al. discuss this in their
> new paper. IMHO we can just ignore the "all allosauroids" crud.

That's good, since, now that I think about it, even if
_Carcharodontosaurus_ is just outside {_Allosaurus_ + _Sinraptor_}, it's
not an allosauroid ...

--T. Mike Keesey                                    <tkeese1@gl.umbc.edu>
WORLDS                                  <http://www.gl.umbc.edu/~tkeese1>
THE DINOSAURICON                               <http://dinosaur.umbc.edu>