[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: thoughts on Dinocephalosaurus (long)

--- Jeff Hecht <jeff@jeffhecht.com> wrote:

> All too many news reports simply called Dinocephalosaurus a dinosaur 
> in the headline.
> The Science paper is a one-page "Brevia" which goes into little 
> detail. As best I could find out, protorosaurs are usually considered 
> a sister group of the basal archosaurs, but there is considerable 
> uncertainty about the phylogeny.

I think there's a consensus that they are basal archosauromorphs. The dissent
lies in:

- whether they form a natural group (synonymous with _Prolacertiformes_), or
are just a polyphyletic assemblage of non-archosauriform archosauromorphs

- whether or not pterosaurs are part of the same group (i.e., whether or not
they are pterosauromorphs)

- where, exactly, they go in non-archosauriform _Archosauromorpha_

=====> T. Michael Keesey <http://dino.lm.com/contact>
=====> The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
=====> Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!