[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Dinosauricon Phylogeny: complete
--- Nick Gardner <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> I'm not sure about placing _Fukuisaurus_'s placement. I'd like to see it
> added to another analysis, but I suppose it's fine for now.
I could add a "?".
> Why is _Jinzhousaurus_ in two places, i.e. Iguanodontia/Euiguanodontia
> incertae sedis & Hadrosauroidea incertae sedis?
Caught that; fixed it.
> It seems like to me that
> the two plesiomorphic characters (i.e. weakly bifurcated ventral predentary
> process and small number of dentary teeth) are outweighed by the derived
> characters it shares with hadrosauroids such as the anteriorly extended
> frontal (anterior margin of frontal nearly in line with anterior margin of
> orbit), frontal excluded from orbit dorsal border, and the absence of an
> antorbital fenestra, as well as characters that are shared with other
> hadrosauroids, such as _Probactrosaurus_ (squamosals contact medially,
> well-developed primary ridge on the lateral surface of the maxillary tooth
> crown). Has anyone submitted _J._ to a phylogenetic analysis?
I'll leave it as _Hadrosauroidea_? incertae sedis until I hear better.
> Why do you include _Bainoceratops_ in the Leptoceratopsidae, but place it as
> more basal than _Montanoceratops_? The paper points to some strong
> affinities with _Udanoceratops_ and _Leptoceratops_.
It's _Leptoceratopsidae_ incertae sedis. I could move it up to a trichotomy,
though -- I haven't actually read the paper yet.
> Wouldn't Averostra be the same as the Avepoda node since you have
> _Dilophosaurus_ as a basal avepod, or are you assuming that it developed the
> promaxillary fenestra convergently?
Uh ... damn good question!
> What happened to Alxasauridae?
It's a junior heterodefinitional synonym of _Alxasaurus_ for now, using my
provisional system for genera.
> Isn't the group with both _Epidendrosaurus_ and _Scansoriopteryx_, the
Undefined. I'm trying to use only defined clades (with some exceptions in
_Neornithes_, unless I can find a paper that defines more exclusive clades than
_Galloanserae_ and _Neoaves_).
> Isn't the group with _Confuciusornis_ and _Changchengornis_ the
> Confuciusornithidae or the Confuciusornithiformes or something like that?
Also undefined, TMK.
> What is _Jinzhouornis_?
Why, a basal avian!
=====> T. Michael Keesey <email@example.com>
=====> The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
=====> BloodySteak <http://bloodysteak.com>
=====> Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).