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

Re: WYLEYIA A DROMAEOSAUR?



At 12:38 26-09-2000 +0100, you wrote:
>The Jaimester also wrote..
>
>>  Loosing sight of the supposed troodontid and
>> dromaeosaurid European material (*Wyleyia,*
>
>Has anybody ever actually suggest a dromaeosaurid or troodontid 
>identity for _Wyleyia_? Published interpretations of which I'm aware 
>are primitive avian (Harrison and Walker), non-avian small theropod 
>(Norman, Feduccia etc.), enantiornithine (Walker) and palaeognath 
>(Kurochkin). My previous (unpublished) coverage of it was minimal 
>and it's worth returning to. It probably is avian but I'm not totally 
>convinced.
>
>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                               
>
>

Dear Darren,


Why bother, Wyleyia valdensis Harrison & Walker, 1973. is described from a
worn humerus, not identifilable, there are as many opinions as there are
there are scientists, I have it listed as "Aves, Sauriurae, Eneatiornithes,
Alexornithiformes, enantiornithdae", for what it's worth. It had better been
left were it was, in the early cretaceous rocks of England. I don't know why
Collin Harrison and Cyril Walker had the urge to describe this humerus, as
it is undiagnostic. My opinion is simple, it should be removed from any list
(except, of course, Amniota Incertae Sedis).

Fred Ruhe