[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: New dinobird "Sinovenator"
In a message dated Fri, 15 Feb 2002 3:12:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, "Ken
Kinman" <email@example.com> writes:
> The description of Sinovenator prompts to delurk momentarily on
> coelurosaurian systematics. The authors decision to assign Sinovenator as
> a "Troodont" is apparently being accepted with little challenge. I somewhat
Why so? The metatarsus certainly contains characters found nowhere outside the
Troodontidae, and the braincase and skull roof (from what I've seen) look very
troodontish as well.
Note that nothing I have said *proves* anything. There are many people far
more qualified to comment on this specimen than I, and even they cannot *prove*
anything. All I meant to do is indicate that a troodontid assignment for this
specimen is perfectly reasonable, even on a cursory, subjective level.
> It seems to me to be too specialized to be a truly primitive
> troodont, and it's inclusion therein is probably premature.
Again, how so?
> Note that this is a simple addition of Plesion Sinovenator to my
> previous classificiation (along with the proposed elevation of troodonts
> from plesion status to full Ordinal status).
..whatever the hell that means...
> If more primitive
> troodontiforms are found, I would expect them to be propubic to mesopubic
> (not opisthopubic like Sinovenator).
Why, when most or all of the nearest outgroups to Troodontidae have basal
members (especially the small ones) that are meso- to opisthopubic?