[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Now online: Critique of Benton's (2000) "critique" of the PhyloCode
Yixianornis does have an 'ornithurine'-style pygostyle (SVP 2002?), so
Ornithurae2 should be put a node further down the tree.
Ornithuromorpha is defined to include Patagopteryx AND Vorona, so should
be a node further down.
That's one of the two definitions. The PhyloCode is not yet in effect, so...
but you're right, I should make two numbers.
Hmm. If Vorona ends up being a basal enantiornithine
(as suggested by some of Clarke's trees when Liaoningornis is included),
this could be problematic.
Interesting. I always get *L.* as an enanti when I don't reweight, but *V.*
stays a euornithine no matter what. But then I figure she has _seen_
Thanks for using the phylogeny on my website, but it's not based on the
results of my analysis (well, the latter certainly influences it, but
are a lot of things in my tree which PAUP hasn't found from my matrix yet-
monophyletic Enantiornithes and Yanornithidae, etc.).
I figured linking to your site was better than chasing after each of the
updates you've sent to the DML...