Re: Caudipteryx not a bird and more from APP

[Tim Williams <twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com>]

T. Michael Keesey wrote:

> IIRC, the analysis in the first paper didn't include any previously
> known oviraptorosaurs, or any previously known non-eumaniraptors, for
> that matter, just dromaeosaurids, avialans, _Caudipteryx_, and
> _Protarchaeopteryx_. CMIIW.

You're right; the analysis also included alvarezsaurids, but these were 
considered to be avialans.  The analysis also did not recover _Caudipteryx_ 
coming out closest to _Protarchaeopteryx_, even though there's good evidence 
that both are oviraptorosaurs.  (Of course, the _Incisivosaurus_ skull 
helped us enormously in figuring out what _Protarchaeopteryx_ might be.)