[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
FOLLOWUP: BIRDS
I need to correct some things that I have said...
<<_Caudipteryx_ retains a postorbital-jugal bar contact, as well as a
quadratojugal-squamosal contact, lacks any indication of prokinesis
which probably was present in (_Archaeopteryx_), non-reversed hallux
and unfused metatarsals.>>
I should say that there is no evidence of prokinesis in _Caudipteryx_,
not _Archaeopteryx_.
<<There is no indication of something like this. One can argue that
protofliers had stronger muscles, it makes little difference. Anyway,
it does not seem that they did have stronger flight muscles since the
pectoral girdle elements are smaller as well as the humeral crests.>>
This was just assuming that _Caudipteryx_ and _Protarchaeopteryx_ were
the protofliers. Really, phylogenetically speaking, there is no
evidence that these creatures were secondarily flightless.
Morphologically, the evidence is equivocal on the issue of whether they
were secondarily flightless. One can argue that they are secondarily
flightless based on the feathers or that they are a gliding stage in
bird evolution.
Matt Troutman
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com