[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Ornithopsida (was Re: Dinosauria---Rejected Name?)
Subject: Re: Ornithopsida (was Re: Dinosauria---Rejected Name?)
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2002 21:23:40 EST
In a message dated 2/23/02 6:40:25 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> > > WARNING: AMATEUR PALEONTOLOGIST REMINISCING...
> > >
> > > It's weird this would show up. When I was younger and thought the
> > > system could be salvaged, I used Ornithopsida as a subgroup below
> > > amniotes that contained archosaurs (including birds). I didn't
> > > others used it,
Wow, and I thought I had made it up. A while ago I suggested a system in
which the Amniota would be split up into Theropsida, Chelonopsida,
Herpetopsida, Suchopsida, and Ornithopsida. Each would be a stem-based
with a living amniote group as inclusive anchor. It seemed like a nice,
logical system to me, but it was not well-received on-list. :-)
You probably did. "Ornithopsida" isn't really a name that would be that
hard to come up with by two different people. It only means "bird faces".
Real easy to come up with considering that Sauropsida is "lizard faces" and
Theropsida is "beast faces".
Is this what you put in your groups?
Theropsida = Mammals, "Pelycosaurs", Therapsids
Chelonopsida = Turtles and more basal anapsids
Herpetopsida = Lepidosaurs
Suchopsida = Crocodiles and their extinct relatives
Ornithopsida = Dinosaurs (inc. Birds) and Pterosaurs
wouldn't be exactly the same though as mine as what I called "ornithopsids"
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com