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

Re: Which is Cosesaurus (palatal teeth)



Ken Kinman wrote:

<What about palatal teeth in prolacertiforms? I assume
early prolacertiforms had palatal teeth, so where in
the proposed prolacertiform-to-pterosaur lineage were
the palatal teeth lost?>

  Palatal (all the palatal bones have been known to
bear teeth) teeth are lost in a lot of taxa
(independantly) within the Tetrapoda; I assume I could
say most osteichthyians, instead. It is not
inconceivable to suggest a basal archosaur like
*Euparkeria* with small, very sparse platal teeth,
could be one of two lineages that reduce the need for
such teeth.

Larry Febo wrote:

<<So,...Cosesaurus has independently evolved
mesotarsal ankles, and antorbital fenestra that may
not really be antorbital fenestra? .... a
"pseudoarchosaur"???">>

  An archosauromorph. The antorbital fenestra is, I
believe, an archosauromorph synapomorphy, or has been
proposed by such. Sorry, no ref. Witmer (1994) I
believe covers the subject -- will check with my copy.

=====
Jaime "James" A. Headden

"Come the path that leads us to our fortune."

Qilong---is temporarily out of service.
Check back soon.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
http://photos.yahoo.com