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

Re: Avipoda (was RE: Dilophosaurus)

Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. <tholtz@umd.edu> wrote:

> Novas' incarnation of Tetanurae here is overly restricted, and is in fact 
> Avethropoda aka Neotetanurae. But Avipoda could be used
> for a node-based clade incorporating Megalosauroidea, Carnosauria, and 
> Coelurosauria. At present that name isn't particularly
> helpful, as we don't have any clear tetanurines (i.e., taxa closer to Passer 
> than to Ceratosaurus) that are not also 'avipods' in
> this sense. But in the future, discovery of basal tetanurines rootward of 
> 'Avipoda' could make the term acutally serve a purpose.

Avipoda could also be useful if Ceratosauria (closer to _Ceratosaurus_
than to _Passer_) is found to be paraphyletic, with Abelisauroidea
closer to the crown than _Ceratosaurus_.  Abelisauroids would then be
non-avipod tetanurans.