Re: ARCTOMETATARSALY

["Jaime Headden" <jaemei@hotmail.com>]

I wrote:

<<3) The enantiornithine foot, with mt's II-IV fused along full length
   without pinching or adduction of mtIII.>>

Peter Buchholz wrote:

<How is this an arctometatarsus? Maybe Tom can clarify this, but doesn't 
an arctometatarsus require MT III to be pinched?>

I included it because it shows (like the elmisaur foot) that it isn't 
arctomet; part of the ongoing debate.

Incidentally, study shows the foot closer to dromaeosaurids and 
oviraptorosaurs equally, not exclusive of either, before anyone points 
this out to me.

<<4) Apparently, the alvarezsaurid foot may be a variation on types 1    
or 3, or its own type, with mtIII adducted _and_ fused proximally     
and distally, mtIII appearing only in posterior and distal aspects,
   totally occluded from proximal and dorsal except at the plantar
   end.>>

<MT III is not just adducted, but it is reduced proximally, like a true 
arctomet pes.  I believe it is so reduced in _Parvicursor_ that it does 
not even reach the tarsus proximally.>

I'm a real dunce. I haven't seen the *Parvicursor* (or *Bagaraatan*) 
material, and I think this vital to my study; could you supply me with 
data, or the ref/s?

Now, if it shows arctomet possibilities, wouldn't this neccesarily 
obviate the other forms of metatarsal fusion as relative? (Not 
absolutely obviatory, of course.)

Jaime A. Headden

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com