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

Re: Ceratonykus oculatus

Jaime Headden wrote:

(Thanks for the potted translation, BTW.  Much appreciated.)

Anyone know why it was named "Ceratonykus"?

>   The authors also clearly separate the North
> American/Asian lineage from the South American lineage
> (Alvarezsauridae proper), which would explain their use of
> the terminology. As such, even if Alvarezsauridae is
> confined to *Alvarezsaurus* and does not encompass all
> alvarezsaurs, *Parvicursoridae* Karhu and Rautian 1996 has
> priority over the coordinated-rank taxon *Mononychidae*
> Chiappe et a. 1998.

According to the ICZN, yes, Parvicursoridae has priority over 
Mononychidae/Mononykidae.  But under PhyloCode, whichever clade is defined 
first (Parvicursoridae or Mononykidae) would get the gig.  Neither has been 
defined, AFAIK, although Mononykinae has a phylogenetic definition.

>  The tibiotarsal length is 89 mm long, which is comparable
> to the tibiotarsus of *Parvicursor remotus* (PIN 4487/25) of
> 75.6mm, and *Mononykus olecranus* (GIN 107/6) of 175.2mm,
> and 185mm of an undescribed alvarezsaur from Alberta
> (Longrich and Currie, in press).

I guess that would be _Albertonykus_.