[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Ceratonykus braincase described
Brad McFeeters <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> So I can see why Alifanov and Saveliev would not want a "typical
>> theropod" like _Haplocheirus_ to be ancestral to Late Cretaceous
>> alvarezsaurs like _Ceratonykus_ and _Shuvuuia_: it destroys their
>> arboreal hypothesis.
> No, it is just as easy to imagine that alvarezsaurs passed through their
> hypothetical sloth-like arboreal phase in the Early Cretaceous, in forms more
> derived than *Haplocheirus*.
Alifanov and Saveliev (2011) regard _Haplocheirus_ as a theropod, but
regard alvarezsaurs as non-theropodan dinosaurs. So for what it's
worth, they would disagree with you. Frankly, I find any arboreal
phase in the evolution of alvarezsaurs difficult to imagine -
especially anything resembling a modern tree sloth. Derived
therizinosaurs have been regarded as ground sloth analogs - but that's
a whole different matter.
It's also worth mentioning that although there is no doubt that
alvarezsaurs were theropods, their placement inside Maniraptora is a
little precarious. Choiniere et al. (2010) noted that an
Alvarezsauria-Ornithomimosauria clade required only one additional
step compared to having Alvarezsauria nested inside Maniraptora (the
most parsimonious topology).