[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Confuciusornis feather length and flight mode
How does the Nudds and Dyke 2010 paper on rachis diameters "ultimately" derive
from the Senter paper on humeral mobility?
On Mar 22, 2011, at 9:10 AM, evelyn sobielski wrote:
> --- Jason Brougham <firstname.lastname@example.org> schrieb am Di, 22.3.2011:
>> Von: Jason Brougham <email@example.com>
>> Betreff: Re: Confuciusornis feather length and flight mode
>> An: firstname.lastname@example.org
>> CC: email@example.com
>> Datum: Dienstag, 22. März, 2011 01:59 Uhr
>> Well, I'll be the first to say it.
>> This paper does not seem to have
>> incorporated the data from Zheng et al. that Nudds et al.
>> acknowledged in
>> their response last year (Science, Vol 33), page 320-d, 15
>> October 2010.
>> DOI: 10.1126/science.1193474). At that time Nudds et al.
>> wrote that some
>> specimens (or possibly a distinct, volant, species) of
>> Confuciusornis may
>> have been capable of flapping flight.
>> Though the primary feather length of Confuciusornithids is
>> shown in this
>> new paper to group with volant ornithurines, the authors
>> disregard the
>> possibility of flapping flight again. This conclusion seems
>> to be based on
>> the conclusions of their earlier paper (and several other
> No, it's ultimately based on Senters analysis of dorsoventral humerus
> mobility http://app.pan.pl/archive/published/app51/app51-305.pdf which has,
> IIRC, not been refuted yet. Not that it has been reviewed except by Kurochkin
> (from a BANDit standpoint).
> As regards methodology, I'd believe the
> length-of-primary-to-secondary-rectrices-ratio might be more informative.
> But Varricchio seems to have shown that wing morphology may even be assessed
> (at least in some cases) from elbow joint morphology alone:
> (he did a cladistic analysis which resulted in a phylogeny that was clearly
> dominated by homoplasy, finding his fragmentary taxon to "clade" with the
> heavy-bodied round-winged taxa mentioned in the abstract - the "some
> columbiforms" refers more precisely to _Goura_ as opposed to _Columba_).
Senior Principal Preparator
American Museum of Natural History
(212) 496 3544