RE: Gaia theropod follow-up: a "new" phylogeny

["Timothy Williams" <twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com>]

Tom Holtz wrote:

> Contrast the above to the situation in Eutheria or in Neognathae, and 
> you'll
> see that we general theropod systematicists are in agreement over the basic
> structure; it is the nitty gritty details that have to be sorted out, and
> this means looking at the fine-level structure of anatomy and phylogeny.

I wonder if some of the disparity in the published phylogenies of Eutheria 
and Neognathae is due to molecular sequence-based cladograms.  For the 
Eutheria, phylogenies based on anatomical characters (principally bones, 
teeth) of fossil and extant eutherians more often than not differ radically 
from phylogenies based on molecular data from extant eutherians only (and if 
somebody does have molecular data on fossil eutherians, I'd love to hear 
from you!)



_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.