[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: the chinese Mesozoic Aves tree
> Eocathayornis would appear to have [...]
More than I thought. :-)
> and no phalanx III-1.
I asked Feduccia if that's real... he doesn't know anymore, and seems not to
> > I'm pretty sure that *Cuspirostrisornis* is an avisaurid or
> > closely related, and that *Sinornis* is a close relative of that group.
> Because of which characters?
I've begun to translate my would-be paper about my analysis... then I didn't
continue for months... I'll look this up tomorrow.
> | `--Jixiangornis
> | `--Changchengornis
> | `--Omnivoropteryx
Familiar, but... ~:-| that's what my analysis looked like (with fewer taxa
of course) before I had "enough" characters! :-)
> Potential synapomorphies I can imagine for my prior
> arrangement are- elongate dorsal premaxillary process; C-shaped lacrimal;
> toothless dentary; proximal humeral foramen.
Aha. (All not in my analysis, of course.)
> Could these be due to poor illustrations, crushing and/or
> breakage? Absolutely. Which is why I've been pondering how misleading
> including Hou's taxa of crap could be for my analysis...
Perhaps you should code everything you don't trust "?".
> > > |--+--Liaoningornis longidigitus
> > > | `--Songlingornis linghensis
> > Similar to my analysis (62 characters). :-)
> Apparently due to their relatively robust radii.
Which weren't in my analysis. That proves it then! ;-)
> Yanornis and Ichthyornis both have more elongate wings. It was a
> state meant to test if the very elongate wings of tailed
> birds and omnivoropterygids would combine any of them together.
> also exhibits the condition.
IMHO this character could be a bit too volatile to include in an analysis...
but of course that's subjective. And once you have your expected 400, that
one won't do damage...