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

Brochu's avian article in latest JVP



Dr Holtz has just reminded me of a question I had about Chris Brochu's
recent JVP article on the current theories of non-dinosaurian origins of
birds. 

In the article Dr Brochu refers to 4 published phylogenies of the
earliest avian and possible avian taxa.  Hoever the article >seems< to
be addressing Feduccia and Martin's claims to a crocodylian origin for
Aves, and yet none of the phylogenies discussed were that of Mssrs
Feduccia and Martin.

I know there's a great deal of cladistics I don't understand but this
seemed rather odd to me.  Is it that Feduccia and Martin have not
suggested a phylogeny, so that it can't be discussed?   How can you use
existing phylogenies to argue for or against a phylogeny that is
unreferred to?  WHY would you?

Had I gotten the gist of the article wrong?

-Betty  Cunningham

-- 
Flying Goat Graphics
http://www.flyinggoat.com
(Society of Vertebrate Paleontology member)
-------------------------------------------<,D,><