Re: synapsids are reptiles

["T. Michael Keesey" <mightyodinn@yahoo.com>]

--- David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at> wrote:

>                                 |_Sauropsida = Reptilia = Eureptilia_|

Not quite...

> "Unnamed" is called "Amniotiformes" in 
> http://dinosauricon.com/taxa/tetrapoda.html (good idea)
> and Stegocephali by Laurin & Reisz (I hate them for that). Sauropsida is 
> stem-based, Reptilia
> and Eureptilia have (AFAIK different) node-based definitions, so they are the 
> same only in
> currently known contents.

Yes, _Reptilia_ is node-based and _Sauropsida_ is stem-based, so they are 
different clades, even
if we do not currently know of any non-reptilian sauropsids. But _Eureptilia_ 
is actually a
synonym of _Romeriida_ (_Sauria_ <-- _Testudines_), and meant as the sister 
group to
_Parareptilia_, a.k.a. _Anapsida_ (_Testudines_ <-- _Sauria_).

Anthracosauria (ugh ... also "Amniotiformes")
|--Diadectomorpha
`--Amniota
   |--Synapsida (incl. Mammalia)
   `--Sauropsida
      `--Reptilia
         |--Anapsida (=Parareptilia; incl. Testudines)
         `--Romeriida (=Eureptilia; incl. Diapsida, which incl. Sauria)

>   3) "The situation in amniote phylogeny is so solid".
> 
>   I cannot agree with this statement, unless the "solidity" is restricted  to 
> the fact that
> synapsids diverged before sauropsids.

How can they diverge before sauropsids when they are the sister group to 
_Sauropsida_? By
definition, both diverged from each other at the same time.

=====
=====> T. Michael Keesey <keesey@bigfoot.com>
=====> The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
=====> BloodySteak <http://bloodysteak.com>
=====> Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>
=====

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/