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

Re: birds and avians again




Dinogeorge wrote:

(But I don't like
pinning a major group like Aves to a single genus such as Archaeopteryx: if
we find a slightly pre-archaeopterygid fossil flying bird, why arbitrarily
exclude it from Aves?)

But, to turn the question around, why arbitrarily *include* it in the Aves?

The point of phylogenies is to display the relationships between different taxa. The names are just labels to help you get around.


The vernacular, paraphyletic term "dinosaurs" would then denote the non-avian
ornithans.

"Ornithans"?


Tim

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