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

AUGUSTINIA & TITANOSAURIA



Mickey Mortimer wrote...

> if Agustinia is a titanosaur, the evidence argues for
> its placement within the Titanosauridae, and we can hardly have a
> family within a family.

Yes, but many workers use the higher-level Titanosauria nowadays. 
Presently the only named 'family' within this clade is Saltasauridae but 
there's no reason why there couldn't be others - the argument that taxa 
are redundant if they contain the same taxa as other, more inclusive 
clades (which has resulted in the idea that genera are redundant if they 
are monospecific: e.g. Lee and Caldwell on _Pachyophis_) is not 
universal (e.g. Livezey's papers on anseriform phylogeny: these involve 
computer-assisted parsimony analysis but the phylogeny generated 
follows a convention to produce a Linnean taxonomy. There are 
guidelines for this convention, cited in Livezey's papers). 

"Screw you guys - I'm goin' home" - - Cartman, 2000

DARREN NAISH 
PALAEOBIOLOGY RESEARCH GROUP
School of Earth, Environmental & Physical Sciences
UNIVERSITY OF PORTSMOUTH
Burnaby Building
Burnaby Road                           email: darren.naish@port.ac.uk
Portsmouth UK                          tel: 01703 446718
P01 3QL