SEGNOSAURS AGAIN

[Jeffrey Martz <martz@holly.ColoState.EDU>]

     At the risk of annoying people who would be happy to see the
discussion stay dead, I am bringing up segnosaurs again.  Clark et. all's 
paper is pretty clear, but interpreting the data in Russel & DOng is a
little more difficult.  
     I need a little clarification on the case for prosauropod affinites
for segnosaurs; I need clarification both on possible synapomorphies
between prosauropods and segnosaurs, and sympleisiomorphies that are
absent in theropods, or a least the coelurosaurs.  Here is what I have so
far, some of it dug out of past arguments from the archives:

1) elongate nares (possible syn?)
2) no accessory antorbital feenstrae (possible pleis?)
3) no fanglike dentary tooth (definite pleisiomorphy, and probably not
   that imporatnt in the overall debate of segnosaur affinities)
4) prominant antorbital rim (is this a pleisiomorphy that is just
   unusually well developed in _Plateosaurus_?
5) Cheeks
5) The foot; digit I is connected to the tarsal joint, the metatrsals
   overlap priximally like they do in prosauropods (these are all
   pleisiomorphies, right?)
I can only see one possible prosauropod-segnosaur plesiomorphy given by
Russel & Dong that excludes their "Oviraptosauria" ("Coelurosauria?"),
thier character 40:

6) Metacarpel II longer then metacarpal I.
 
     And shared by prosauropods, therizinosaurs, and oviraptids and/or
a bullatosaur:

7) Ulnar facet of humerus expanded, merges with epicondyle (36-1).  
8) Medial alae from pmx meet in front of vomers (3-1)
9) Small denticles, constricted roots (20-1).  Are segnosaur teeth really
particularly more like bullatosaurs then prosauropods?

    I obviously haven't listed everything, several these I posted over
others becuase they seemed important to me for no particular reason.
Could I get some help resolving this mess?  More to follow...

LN Jeff