[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Ankylosauria and Scelidosaurus
> Given that Scelidosaurus is now falling out lately in cladistic
> analyses with ankylosaurs, is Ankylosauria defined in such a way that
> precludes Scelidosaurus from inclusion or would it be a part of
> Ankylosauria as well? I'm not aware of what definitions have been
> applied to Ankylosauria thus far.
See the Taxon Search page at
Sereno 2005 defined Ankylosauria as (_Ankylosaurus magniventris_ not
_Stegosaurus stenops_), which is identical to the earlier definitions
of Carpenter (1997) and Sereno (1998) as (_Ankylosaurus_ not
Taxon Search is almost excellent, despite a tendency to cite Sereno's
own most recent definition as the definitive one for most clades :-)
It has this important advantage over the PhyloCode's registeration
database: that it exists.
/o ) \/ Mike Taylor <firstname.lastname@example.org> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\ "For three days after death, hair and fingernails continue to
grow; but phone calls taper off" -- Johnny Carson.