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

Ankylosauridae classification

I do not formally recognize intermediate ranks like subfamily---I simply code them as a clade within the family. And I think I am probably already skating on thin ice by including Scelidosaurus in this family (rather than as a separate plesion as I did before), so I am not ready to put Scutellosaurus in there as well (but I will think about it).
Here is my first stab at how I might code ankylosaurids (other genera would be added as I studied the family more carefully):
1 Scelidosaurus
2 Liaoningosaurus
3 Minmi
4A Pawpawsaurus
? Nodosaurus
B Sauropelta
C Panoplosaurus
D Edmontonia
E Animantarx
5 Shamosaurus
6A Mymoorapelta
? Hylaeosaurus
B Gastonia
C Polacanthus
7 Tsagantegia
8 Ankylosaurus
9A Pinacosaurus
B Euoplocephalus
10 Saichania
11 Tarchia
From: Dinogeorge@aol.com
Reply-To: Dinogeorge@aol.com
To: kinman@hotmail.com
CC: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Re: Revised Ornithischian Classification
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001 01:42:18 EDT

In a message dated 8/18/01 11:03:56 PM EST, kinman@hotmail.com writes:

<< George,
      My Ankylosauridae (sensu lato) includes Scelidosaurinae, Minmi,
 Nodosaurinae, and Polacanthinae.  Likewise Stegosauridae includes
 Huayangosaurinae. >>

Well, I guess that answers my question. Perhaps you should put the
subfamilies into your chart (Ankylosaurinae, too), just to make sure everyone
knows what's going on.

You might want to include a Scutellosaurinae in Ankylosauridae sensu lato,
too. The scutes of Scutellosaurus are tiny but otherwise strikingly similar
to those of ankylosaurids sensu stricto, and it's merely a very basal
ankylosaurid that doesn't warrant a family of its own.

_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp