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

Re: Revised Ornithischian Classification

I can add some of the scrappier Australian genera if you like, assuming they form a clade. I like to get the better known genera classified before I tackle the scrappier ones.
The question is whether this Australian clade split off before or after Tenontosaurus. Mickey Mortimer's analysis places Mattaburrasaurus between Tenontosaurus and dryomorphs. But I'm open to suggestions. By the way, where in this family might Notohypsilophodon best fit (is it less derived than Tenontosaurus??).

     4  Rhabdodon
     ?  Yandusaurus
     5  Tenontosaurus
     6  Mattaburrasaurus
     B  Leaellynasaura
     C  Qantassaurus
     7  {{Dryosauridae to
         Hadrosauridae}} (= dryomorphs)

NOTE: I recognize a dryomorpha clade, but since Gasparinisaura is incertae sedis (it jumps around in cladograms a lot), I personally think an euiguanodontia clade is worthless baggage. Way too many clades based on Iguanodon as it is.
From: "David Marjanovic" <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
Reply-To: david.marjanovic@gmx.at
To: "The Dinosaur Mailing List" <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Subject: Re: Revised Ornithischian Classification
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001 11:08:58 +0200

> [...]
>            ?  Gasparinisaura
>            4  Rhabdodon
>            ?  Yandusaurus
>            5  Tenontosaurus
>            6  Muttaburrasaurus
>            7  {{Dryosauridae to
>                Hadrosauridae}} (dryomorphs)

Far from being a euiguanodontian, *Muttaburrasaurus* has turned out to be
closely related to the Australian "hypsilophodonts" -- which you seem to
have forgotten :-)

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