[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: dinosaur synapomorphies? (especially postfrontals)
Ken Kinman (kinman@hotmail.com) wrote:
<Well I think Jaime hit the nail right on the head. The similarities between
dinosaurs and basal
Crurotarsi need to be very carefully reexamined. This especially true in view
of the collapse of
Ornithodira (sensu Sereno), which was purportedly sister group to Crurotarsi.
In fact, I think
Crurotarsi is even in more jeopardy than Dinosauria.>
As Chris said, Dinosauria is not in jeopardy unless you can find an alternate
placement that
corrupts the character assignments and polarities. Until a contravening
hypothesis can be
formulated (you have only attempted to destabilize characters based on "weight"
which is
subjective to the mind) Dinosauria is stable and valid. So goes Crurotarsi and
Archosauria. Dave
Peters finds a destabilizing position for Ornithodira and places Pterosaurs
with protorosaurs, and
this provides the alternate hypothesis condition. Plus his characters have
great consistency,
whereas the majority of Ornithodiran features are plesiomorphic, as in the
sigmoid neck (oddly,
basal pterosaurs lack a sigmoid neck whereas basal archosauriforms have a
slight one (like
*Euparkeria*, archosaurs like *Postosuchus*), suggesting this is not an strict
ornithodiran
feature), or convergent features like the mesotarsal ankle, approached in some
prolacertiforms and
archosauromorphs, and best used as a Dinosauromorph feature, or qualities of
the hips which are
inferred as bipedal adaptations, hence the appearance in Archosauromorpha
throughout multiple
lineages that are not otherwise allied.
Which is what I tried to suggest earlier and thus I do not understand why Ken
is implying I was
saying Crurotarsi needs to be looked at... Basal dinosaurs and dinosauromorphs
will have
similarities to basal crurotarsans/pseudosuchians based on phyletic distance
(they are both stems
of the same ancestor, there will be plesiomorphies that unite them, and these
are normally
synapomorphic of Archosauria.
<I'm beginning to think that any large clade based on morphology of ankles or
toes is likely to be
stuck clear up to its sternum or clavicles in a morass of homoplasy. What Dave
did to ornithodiran
synapomorphies is very likely to happen to Crurotarsi, and I'm obviously still
having doubts about
Dinosauria as well.>
May I ask why you doubt the monophyly of these features? I'd like to think
you are versed in the
gross anatomy of fossils with which to test convergence or homplasy among
bones, but cannot see
how you are versing weight of features when polarity is all you can test in
these taxa.
Until then,
=====
Jaime A. Headden
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhr-gen-ti-na
Where the Wind Comes Sweeping Down the Pampas!!!!
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger
http://im.yahoo.com