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

RE: Eoconfuciusornis, Paraprotopteryx, Pengornis, Aberratiodontus and other basal birds



--- Michael Mortimer <mickey_mortimer111@msn.com>
schrieb:

> 
> There have been several Mesozoic birds described
> recently, so I figured I'd add them to my prior bird
> matrix (http://dml.cmnh.org/2007Mar/msg00079.html)
> and see what's changed in a year.  Since that time,
> I've added numerous non-pygostylian outgroups to
> make the basal relations better tested than before,
> when it consisted of Dromaeosauridae, Archaeopteryx,
> Shenzhouraptor (= Jeholornis) and Sapeornis.  Now
> there's also Omnivoropteryx, Yuan's unpublished
> omnivoropterygid from his thesis, Dalianraptor,
> Yandangornis, Jixiangornis, Epidendrosaurus (=
> Scansoriopteryx), Hulsanpes, Deinonychus,
> Velociraptor, Bambiraptor, Sinornithosaurus,
> Microraptor (= Cryptovolans), Unenlagia, Rahonavis,
> Buitreraptor, Mahakala, Troodon, Sinornithoides,
> Sinusonasus, Byronosaurus, IGM 100/44, the largely
> undescribed basal Zos Canyon troodontid, Mei,
> Sinovenator, Jinfengopteryx, Pedopenna and with
> Protarchaeopterygidae (Incisivosaurus and
> Protarchaeopteryx) as the ultimate outgroup.  New
> ingroup taxa include
>  Eoconfuciusornis, Pengornis, Paraprotopteryx,
> Martinavis, Potamornis, Asiahesperornis and
> Enaliornis.  Additionally, Protopteryx, Longipteryx,
> Archaeopteryx, Sapeornis and Shenzhouraptor have
> been updated with new codings.

Cool! Many thanks! (You gonna update it to TTDB?)

And because one more can't harm, grab your copy of the
_Eoconfuciusornis_ description here:
http://palaeo.gly.bris.ac.uk/Benton/reprints/2008Zhang.pdf
Many thanks to all who sent me the link! 

> |--Protarchaeopterygidae
> `--Paraves
>    |*-Hulsanpes 
>    |--Troodontidae

Anything new on the Khulsan foot since
http://www.biology.ualberta.ca/faculty//philip_currie/uploads/pdfs/2000/2000Mongolian_Theropod.pdf
?

Due to it being so plesiomorphic and the hypodigm so
small, it is resisting quantitative analysis at
present.
http://www.dinodata.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6628&Itemid=67
takes a qualitative look and puts a rather convincing
limit on how much of an avian it could have been if it
were avian. But there should be a bit more juvie
non-avian paravian material around than in 2000.

>          |  |--Unenlagiinae
>          |  |  |--Mahakala
>          |  |  `--+--Rahonavis
>          |  |     `--Unenlagia

That is the position in which _Rahonavis_ makes most
sense IMHO, if you consider its age and place.

>          |     `--+--Velociraptor
>          |        `--+--Deinonychus
>          |           `--Wyleyia

How well-supported? (Apparently it is possible to
recognize a broken humerus as velociraptorine with
enough certainty to leave no place for a
question-mark. Intriguing indeed. How are the
characters that put it here distributed among Aves -
in other words: if its placement here is a result of
LBA+conserved plesiomorphies, is there anywhere in
Aves where it would most sensibly go?) 

Regards,


Eike


      __________________________________________________________
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail.
Mehr Möglichkeiten, in Kontakt zu bleiben. http://de.overview.mail.yahoo.com