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

Re: The position of tyrannosaurs (was Re: Armour Symposium Recollections)



In a message dated 5/14/01 3:26:54 PM EST, tholtz@geol.umd.edu writes:

<< Please note that Olshevsky's "tyrannosauroid implosion" represents
 Dinogeorge's accepting taxonomic decisions many of the rest of us agreed
 upon since the late 1990s, via Thom Carr's work and others. >>

Well, most of you people still think Albertosaurus is three genera rather 
than just one with three species (not a terribly big deal, but part of the 
implosion nonetheless). And for some reason many of you still want to include 
Tarbosaurus within Tyrannosaurus, even though there is a lot more 
morphodistance between Tarbo and Tyranno than there is among the three 
Alberto "genera." And why was Aublysodontidae/Shanshanosauridae still showing 
as a separate group in the year 2001 at the Tom Holtz tyrannosaurid website 
(part of Tree of Life)?

The more interesting paradigm shift for me presently is removing the 
pterosaurs from Archosauria and reclassifying them as derived 
prolacertiforms. Makes Ornithodira a very inclusive subclade of 
Prolacertiformes. I think Dave Peters has nailed this one.