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

RE: Combined answer Archaeopteryx running...


Jim Cunningham wrote:

> Since they lasted till the end of the Cretaceous, it may not have been
> the pygostylians what done um in.

I don't mean to imply that the radiation of the Pygostylia *caused* the
extinction of _Rahonavis_ and its kin.  Only that the vastly improved flight
capabilities of the Pygostylia allowed them to diversify, occupying niches
closed off to the more _Archaeopteryx_-like birds.  _Archaeopteryx_ and
_Rahonavis_ were certainly specialized IMHO; but their body plan limited the
ecological options available to them.

>I'd like to know of an earlier reference in which Archaeopteryx is >called
a [non-avian] dinosaur, the earlier the better 
>(e.g., 19th century??). 

Does Wagner's _Griphosaurus_ count?  Though I don't think he actually called
it a "dinosaur", just a reptile (or "saurian").



Timothy J. Williams 

USDA-ARS Researcher 
Agronomy Hall 
Iowa State University 
Ames IA 50014 

Phone: 515 294 9233 
Fax:   515 294 3163