Re: Feduccia's delusion

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 12/1/01 0:40:27 AM EST, tmk@dinosauricon.com writes:

<< Problem here is that the node of the node-stem triplet *is* a crown group.
 (And would we really want "Archosaurolepidosauria" anyway?) >>

Wait a minute--how can a node all by itself be a crown group? My 
understanding of a node-stem triplet is that it is a clade comprising a node 
and its two descendant stem groups. Also, isn't a crown group bounded by 
extant taxa (so that, for example, Archaeopteryx would not be included in the 
crown group Aves)?

I wouldn't use a combo name if there were a better, long-standing name 
already available, of course. The combo name here would be 
Archolepidosauria--no need to multiply the saurias. Would be nice to use 
Diapsida, but there are other diapsids besides archosaurs and lepidosaurs.