Re: Postorbital processes (& weighting??)

["Mickey_Mortimer11" <Mickey_Mortimer11@email.msn.com>]

Ken Kinman wrote-

>      Nope.  Feduccia, Martin, and colleagues recognize a holophyletic
> Sauriurae (which goes all the way back to Archaeopteryx).
>      According to their phylogeny, Aves would be a heterodefinitional
> synonym of Ornithothoraces (the latter would then be more inclusive than
> Pygostylia, not less).  So whether Ornithothoraces includes
> confuciusornithids (or not) depends entirely on whose phylogeny you are
> looking at.

No, Mike was correct.  Even in Feduccia et al's (completely implausible,
based solely on misinterpretations and plesiomorphies, I'm aghast that some
papers still use it) phylogeny, Ornithothoraces is never more inclusive than
Pygostylia.  Confuciusornithids are sauriurines in Feduccia's phylogeny,
making Aves, Ornithothoraces and Pygostylia all heterodefinitional synonyms.
Ornithothoraces excludes confuciusornithids in all plausible phylogenies, as
all evidence indicates Iberomesornis is closer to neornithines than
Confuciusornis is.

Mickey Mortimer