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

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 96-01-15 12:48:02 EST, swf@ElSegundoCA.ATTGIS.COM (Stan
Friesen) writes:

>Not if the defining characters of Herrerasauria do not include any
>uniquely derived characters found only in the known herrerasaurs.
>
>[Actually, I am not convinced that the known hererasaurs *do* form
>a monophyletic group - especially if one includes Eoraptor].

The _Eoraptor_ description was too brief to be of much use in classifying the
critter. A more detailed description will be published by some of the same
authors in the near future.

Novas (1992? 1993? I don't want to run off and look it up while connected)
listed several characters shared by _Staurikosaurus_ and _Herrerasaurus_ that
he considered derived relative to other dinosaurs. These are mainly pelvic
(the portion of the skeleton that is best preserved in both taxa), so perhaps
they do form a monophyletic subgroup. But everything's still up in the air.