[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
At 07:35 AM 6/22/00 -0700, Ken Kinman wrote:
I pretty much agree with all your statements on the paraphyly of
Thecodontia. But I am indeed a taxonomist of Mayrian stripe, and taking
Peter Ashlock's systematics course at the University of Kansas back in
the 1970's had an immense impact on how I practice systematics.
Gads, I wonder if we have met. I took Dr. Ashlock's course in about 1977
or 1978 (I graduated from KU in 1979).
Your last statement below makes the assumption that one is recognizing
the traditional Thecodontia (sensu stricto).
However, in an effort to make Thecodontiformes ("Thecodontia" sensu
lato) as useful as possible, I include prolacertiforms and rhynchosaurs
(and still haven't decided about choristoderes).
I am not sure such a large and variegated group is really that useful.
If I had a good set of character data superimposed upon a cladogram, I
could try to estimate optimal breakpoints for paraphyletic taxa.
May the peace of God be with you. email@example.com