Re: Dinosaur Taxonomy (was Re: Re: dinosaur flatware)

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 96-01-11 02:23:35 EST, pharrinj@PLU.edu writes:

>And, just out of curiosity, what's wrong with my Sarcodinosauria 
>(Herrerasaurs + Theropods)?  It only took one good look at 
>_Herrerasaurus_'s hand to convince me that it is most probably a member 
>of the sister taxon to the Theropoda.  I do not consider it to BE a 
>theropod, because I like Greg Paul's criterion that metatarsal I in true 
>theropods does not reach the ankle.

That's where I draw the line between theropods and earlier avians. There is
indeed a clade that includes herrerasaurians and higher theropods, but I
wouldn't bother naming it. I simply retain Herrerasauria as a paraphyletic
taxon ancestral to Theropoda, which says the same thing.

>BTW, I still consider _Eoraptor_ to be an outgroup to all other 
>eudinosaurs, even after reading the description.  The skull in 
>particular (somewhere between _Coelophysis_ and _Plateosaurus_, with both 
>leaf-teeth and blade-teeth) seems appropriate to an animal near the common 
>ancestor of sarcos and phytos.

_Eoraptor_ has too few functional manual digits to be ancestral to the
sauropods and other phytodinosaurs, according to what's been written up so
far. It's already on its way toward Theropoda.