[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
since Mike understood "non-avian", then I would argue the word is just fine :-)
On the other hand, since ostrich, emu, kiwi are non-volant, it isn't
necessarily clearer to refer to "non-volant" adult dinosaurs
Kenneth Carpenter, Ph.D.
Curator of Lower Vertebrate Paleontology &
Dept. of Earth Sciences
Denver Museum of Natural History
2001 Colorado Blvd.
Denver, CO 80205
>>> "T. Michael Keesey" <email@example.com> 30/Dec/03 >>>
--- Adam S Smith <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Is there any reason (biological/ecological or other)
> > why we should not expect there to have been tiny
> a little addition: NON-AVIAN. oops!
> > dinosaurs, in which the adult size is far smaller
> > than the Compsognathus?
In my continuing efforts against overuse of the term "non-avian" (which is
generally only useful when discussing traditional notions of taxonomy), I would
like to suggest the question, "Are there any tiny NONVOLANT adult dinosaurs?"
_Microraptor_ is indeed pretty small, but it's debatable as to whether it's
volant or not. _Micropachycephalosaurus_ might come closest to fitting the
bill. If you wanted to extend to question to nonvokant dinosauromorphs, then
_Lagosuchus_ and _Marasuchus_ are pretty small, too. (And possibly the same
=====> T. Michael Keesey <http://dino.lm.com/contact>
=====> The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
=====> Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now