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

[dinosaur] Traditional Saurischia weakly supported over proposed Ornithoscelida




Ben Creisler
bcreisler@gmail.com


A new paper:


Max C. Langer, MartÃn D. Ezcurra, Oliver W. M. Rauhut, Michael J. Benton, Fabien Knoll, Blair W. McPhee, Fernando E. Novas, Diego Pol & Stephen L. Brusatte (2017)
Untangling the dinosaur family tree.
Nature 551, E1âE3 (02 November 2017)Â
doi:10.1038/nature24011
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v551/n7678/full/nature24011.html

The article itself is behind a pay wall but the supplementary material is free:

https://images.nature.com/full/nature-assets/nature/journal/v551/n7678/extref/nature24011-s1.pdf

From the supp:

"...[O]ur dataset does not provide statistically significant support for Saurischia over Ornithoscelida, even though Saurischia is a more parsimonious explanation of our data.Â

....


Finally, the analysis of our modified matrix (without the addition of new taxa, such that only the taxon sample of Baron et al. [2017] is analyzed) resulted in >500,000 MPTs of 1,708 steps (CI: 0.3085, RI: 0.6792), the strict consensus of which (Fig. S2a) also shows a traditional monophyletic Saurischia. In this case, three additional steps are necessary to recover Ornithoscelida..."

***



News:

Time to rewrite the dinosaur textbooks? Not quite yet

https://phys.org/news/2017-11-rewrite-dinosaur-textbooks.html


Virus-free. www.avg.com