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

Re: coelurosaur phylogeny & classification



> Dear All,
>        I've concluded that the basal relationships of coelurosaurs is so
> uncertain (and bound to remain so for a long time)

sure

> that the best
> cladisto-eclectic approach would be to return to the recognition of a more
> traditional, broad "paraphyletic" Family Coeluridae (rendered
> semi-holophyletic with markers).

URGH!!! This is quite a wastebasket, IMHO. Why not list the members under
"incertae sedis" (as in the Dinosauricon)?

> [...] (Note that _1_ is the only symbol which interrupts a
> cladistic sequence and marks the beginning of another major clade):

I think I've understood it, but that's difficult to read, you know...

> ORDER SAURISCHIFORMES
>           .....basal families omitted here

Here the main disadvantage of having few ranks, compared to many ranks (let
alone no named ranks). If you stick to calling Saurischia an order (why not
follow Bakker & Galton and call it a subclass of Class Dinosauria?), you
have to lump all sauropods, prosauropods and theropods together... :-( .

>            9  {{Ornithomimidae to AVES}}
>                   (= Maniraptoriformes Holtz?)

See, you need a name, you want a name, but you can't give a name in your
system... B-) :->

>     6  Plesion _Rahonavis_

What do you mean with "Plesion"? A genus that doesn't need to be put into a
family? IMHO you should apply this much more often...