[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: Protoavis is part pterosauromorph, no details about Novacaesareaia, etc.
Michael Mortimer wrote:
The Protoavis entry is posted, and I'm nearly certain parts belong to an
undescribed taxon of basal pterosauromorph.
Now, isn't Pterosauromorpha defined as "Archosauria closer to _Pterodactylus
antiquus_ than to _Vultur gryphus_"? This means that the validity of
Pterosauromorpha is predicated on pterosaurs being archosaurs. If
pterosaurs are not archosaurs but closer to prolacertiforms (non-archosaur
archosauromorphs), then Pterosauromorpha is extinguished. Thus, a "basal
pterosauromorph" must be some kind of primitive archosaur. The only
potential basal pterosauromorph I know of is _Scleromochlus_, and this is
contentious. I'm really looking forward to seeing what Atanassov has in
I had to examine Huene's figures of the Coelophysis "type" material now
that Eucoelophysis is a silesaurid,
I wonder if ALL the _Eucoelophysis_ material is silesaurid...?
Ever heard of the Mesozoic theropod Novacaesareaia?
Apart form it being a bird, I know nothing about this guy. The name
references its discovery in New Jersey. ("Caesarea" is apparently the
ancient Roman name for the British island of Jersey: hence, "Nova Caesarea"
= New Jersey.) Given that this bird comes from New Jersey, the precise age
(Maastrichtian vs Danian) might not be settled. Hence, it may not be
Any help in adding dinosaurs that were thought to be theropods at one point
(like lots of basal sauropodomorphs) is appreciated.
I know _Anchisaurus_ was initially regarded as a theropod. I've got the
ref, in which Marsh refers to other basal sauropodomorph genera as
Great work Mickey!