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

Is *Eudibamus* a Reptile?

David Marjanovic wrote:

<Heh, heh. If we accept the phylogeny in the Science paper on
Eudibamus, then Mesosauridae belongs into Parareptilia/Anapsida, and
Reptilia has the same content as Sauropsida, so it can be
(yabbadabbadoo) ignored in favor of the latter, and the debate whether
we should call a bird and/or another dinosaur a reptile can be ended.
Like Huxley said in the 19th century, it is a sauropsid.>

  It may be both: Sauropsida is a stem-clade, defined as anything
closer to one form than another, whereas Reptilia is a crown-group
node-clade, defined as the most recent common ancestor of a living set
of organisms, including its fossil descendants. In this case,
Sauropsida includes Reptilia, but is still valid in either case. The
content may be the same, but a new fossil could change this, and
*Eudibamus*' only claim to fame will be its hips....

  Clade names are not just content related, which they were prior to
distinguishing the nature of their _diagnosis_ and their _definition_.

  Good Morning, Neverland!

Jaime A. Headden

  Where the Wind Comes Sweeping Down the Pampas!!!!

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.