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

RE: Tetanurae

> From: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu [mailto:owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu]On Behalf Of
> Tim Williams
> Mike Keesey wrote:
> >I really don't see why this is a problem. If abelisaurs are tetanurans, 
> >then they're tetanurans.
> Yes, Mickey M. feels the same way.

As do I. (And thanks, Adam Yates, for posting about the JAES paper with the 
tetanurine abelisaurs).

>  True, as a stem- err... branch-based 
> clade, Tetanurae is an idea as much as a category.  The fact that you both 
> agree makes me re-think this.  But I think Sereno's "stability of content" 
> is important here.

There is only the most minor "stability of content" issue here (i.e., a group 
barely known at the time Tetanurae was coined).

                Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
        Senior Lecturer, Vertebrate Paleontology
Department of Geology           Director, Earth, Life & Time Program
University of Maryland          College Park Scholars
        Mailing Address:
                Building 237, Room 1117
                College Park, MD  20742  
Phone:  301-405-4084    Email:  tholtz@geol.umd.edu
Fax (Geol):  301-314-9661       Fax (CPS-ELT): 301-405-0796