[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Dinosaur Genera List update #192
George Olshevsky wrote-
> Archaeovolans Czerkas & Xu, 2002
> Possible junior subjective synonym of Yanornis (Czerkas & Xu, 2002)
So Czerkas and Xu have the same idea I do, eh?
Odd to propose a new taxon when you think it is potentially synonymous with
another. What characters do they list as distinguishing the two taxa?
I'd like to add that I dislike the generic name, as it is exceedingly
undescriptive (an ancient flying bird? how unique!) and would have liked
Archaeoraptor to be kept for something. I can see how they might have
wanted to avoid the controversy of that name though, which isn't very
applicable to this basal euornithine/ornithuromorph in any case.
> Cryptovolans pauli Czerkas, Zhang, J. Li & Y. Li, 2002â
> LPM 0200/0201: Slab and counterslab of a crushed virtually complete
> skeleton with feather impressions, missing parts of a pes and a manus
> Hypodigm APK:100/99: LPM 0159 headless postcranial skeleton in slab,
> missing cervicals and caudals, with feather impressions; and scattered
> in holotype specimen of Omnivoropteryx sinousaorum; in addition to
So neither specimen of Cryptovolans is BPM 1 3-13 or two other undescribed
Liaoning deinonychosaurs? So many sickle claws.....
> Described as a primitive bird in its own order Omnivoropterygiformes,
> this genus seems closely related to Caudipteryx and is here tentatively
> classified as a volant oviraptorosaurian
It seems we now have a volant deinonychosaur and a volant oviraptorosaur.
Looks like neoflightlessness wins. Congratulations Greg!
Of course, I'd like to verify the identity of both taxa and include them in
> Scansoriopteryx heilmanni Czerkas & Yuan, 2002â
> Early Cretaceous > Jehol Grp. > Yixian Fm.
> Asia > China > Liaoning Prov. > Lingyuan City > Dawangzhanzi
So Scansoriopteryx is from the Yixian Formation, which overlies the Dauhugou
that Epidendrosaurus is from? Might be hard for them to be synonyms then,
though both might be included in the Scansoriopterygidae. Again, I'll need
the paper for further comment.