[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Dinosauricon Phylogeny: complete
--- David Marjanovic <email@example.com> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "T. Michael Keesey" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > > # *Dromaeosauridae* _sensu stricto_
> > > # *Velociraptor*
> > > # *Dromaeosaurinae*
> > > #?
> > > # *Deinonychus*
> > > # *Saurornitholestes*
> > > #
> > This is an interesting grouping.
I was referring to the bit that followed.
> Elzanowski keeps *A. siemensii* separate. Page 132...
> "_Diagnosis_ -- Smaller than *A. lithographica*, close in size to
> *Archaeopteryx bavarica*. Preacetabular ilium without the iliofemoralis
> internus fossa and ventral process. Pedal claws without flexor tubercles.
> Tooth crowns consistently rounded in cross section. The humerus/ulna ratio
> above 110 % and the femur/tibia ratio around 70 % or more."
Hmm, sounds like I should have this:
Aves sensu Chiappe
|--Ornithurae sensu lato
| `--lithographica (=recurva)
And then figure out where the non-type specimens go....
(No generic name has ever been proposed for _bavarica_, right? Is it possible
that it allies with one of the other three species to the exclusion of the
> > someone needs to do an expansive, published analysis of all
> > non-ornithuran pygostylians.
> :-) Obviously. But we need such an expansive coelurosaur analysis first, so
> that we get the outgroup situation right.
I think that seems to be firming up....
> > > Is *O[rnithurae]* _sensu medio_ defined?
> > _sensu medio_ is Gauthier & de Queiroz 2001 -- I was under the impression
> > it was roughly equivalent to _Avebrevicauda_.
> That's what one should think. But instead, they take the neornithean aspect
> of the pygostyle (short and bent upwards).
Ugh. Better re-read that.
> > > *Palintropus* could be a pangalliform,
> Yay! I've fallen into the basic trap of phylogenetic nomenclature -- it
> could be a _non-galliform_ pangalliform. :-]
I would like to re-emphasize that "pangalliform" is not a published term, but
an error committed by myself.
(And I do have it as a non-galliform "pangalliform".)
> > > What is *Omorhamphus*? I only know *Diatryma*...
> > I'm curious, myself:
> Peculiar, peculiar...
I'll get rid of it -- don't really need it anyway.
> > Primarily Livezey & Zusi 2001. Instead of trying to forge a compromise
> > all the different stuff out there, I decided to go with the most recent
> > broad study.
> OK, but it's 1/10 of a study, they're still collecting characters...
I'm aware, but it seemed to be the best choice for now.
=====> 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).