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

RE: Feduccia in _PNAS_

> Although I would go along with the idea that there was a major 
> Enantiornithes-Ornithurae dichotomy, the rest of the last sentence is 
> rubbish.  Clarke and Norell used _Apsaravis_ to argue against the 
> "transitional shorebird" hypothesis for the origin of Neornithes, and
> little impact on the issue of an Enantiornithes-Ornithurae split
(though the 
> authors did suggest that the monophyly of Enantiorithes might be
> than previously thought). 

AT the risk of a little pedantry, Clarke and Norell suggested that some
of the characters usually regarded as 'enantiornithine' might be more
widespread among basal birds. So, while they probably didn't doubt the
monophyly of the main Enantiornithes clade, they did object to less
well-known species being assigned to Enantiornithes by a few 'signature'
characters without an explicit phylogenetic analysis.


        Christopher Taylor

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.13/221 - Release Date: