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

Re: The iguanodont paper

On Dec 8, 2007 4:29 PM, Andreas Johansson <andreasj@gmail.com> wrote:
> Surely a plesio-avialan would be a _winged_ avialan? Having an
> apomorphy based clade named for one character (wings) and defined by
> another (flight) would get very confusing indeed.

Actually, the apomorphy is "wings used for powered flight" -- so it's
both. The clade of winged dinosaurs is _Aviremigia_. (For example,
oviraptorosaurs are probably non-avialan aviremigians.)

> In any case, in your examples the gain in succinctness is minimal to
> negative: "limbed tetrapod" is four syllables against six in
> "plesio-tetrapod".

Very true, but they are less redundant. "Limbed tetrapod" states the
apomorphy twice.
In cases where the apomorphy is very complex or there are multiple
apomorphy specifiers, there would be a significant gain in
succinctness. (I'm struggling to think of a good example though --
there aren't many such definitions out there....)

T. Michael Keesey
Director of Technology
Exopolis, Inc.
2894 Rowena Avenue Ste. B
Los Angeles, California 90039