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

Re: Greg Paul is right (again); or "Archie's not a birdy"



_Scansoriopteryx_, though, seems to have had relatively long wings
feathers (considering it is known only from fledgling specimens) that
form a herringbone pattern characteristic of remiges. The small arms
and lack of remiges in _Epidexipteryx_ look like a secondary loss.

Matt Martyniuk

On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:29 AM,  <GSP1954@aol.com> wrote:
> There was no way that small armed Epidexipteryx flew. But its actual
> phylogenetic placement is tenuous and it may have descended from Jurassic 
> fliers.
> I doubt we will ever be able to sort a lot of this out. In any case my basic
> notion was that Archaeopteryx was less derived than some "dinosaurs," and
> that some of the latter were secondarily flightless, which seems to be
> holding up pretty well.
>
> GSPaul
>
>
> In a message dated 7/28/11 9:34:25 AM, jaseb@amnh.org writes:
>
> << The new paper on Xiaotingia places scansoriopterygids as the most basal
> avialans, and Xu has opined that Epidexipteryx was flightless, raising the
> possibility (though by no means requiring) that the last common ancestor of
> Archaeopteryx and crown group birds was flightless.
>
> That doesn't fit your theory, correct? >>
>
> </HTML>
>