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

Re: Peering at review (Triassic dino-birds)

George Olshevsky (Dinogeorge@aol.com) wrote:

<And Protoavis is what...?>

  That's just the problem. Bryan Small has said onlist that he, as the
collector, was quite certain the specimens are monochthonous, comprising
only one animal. However, the morphology of much of the material is of
unique and ambiguous nature, including the pterosaur-like "scapula" (if it
is such), a pelvis of peculiar processes and scarf joins unlike any
archosauriform pelvis _I've_ seen, and a skull and neck that are decidedly
identical to material of *Megalancosaurus*, not just the type but several
referred animals as well. Chaterjee's bird theory is falling apart as the
material comes under scrutiny, and the features it is said do not appear
or are questionable. Having seen photos of the "manus" bones, they appear
to exhibit a taphonomy of extreme twisting. Identifications of elements
appears sound in some parts, but questionable in others; some have
commented, even professionally and in print that the manus is like a
crurotarsan pes, and that the vertebrae are of an animal quite removed
from any avian relationship. The quest continues, but I was afraid this
animal would be brought up to support BCF ... Chatterjee beleives that the
animal is a well-nested non-pygostylian bird, at least as recently as


Jaime A. Headden

  Little steps are often the hardest to take.  We are too used to making leaps 
in the face of adversity, that a simple skip is so hard to do.  We should all 
learn to walk soft, walk small, see the world around us rather than zoom by it.

Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site