Re: Now online: Critique of Benton's (2000) "critique" of the PhyloCode

[David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>]

> Yixianornis does have an 'ornithurine'-style pygostyle (SVP 2002?), so 
> your
> Ornithurae2 should be put a node further down the tree.

Oh.

> Ornithuromorpha is defined to include Patagopteryx AND Vorona, so should 
> be a node further down.

That's one of the two definitions. The PhyloCode is not yet in effect, so... 
but you're right, I should make two numbers.

>  Hmm.  If Vorona ends up being a basal enantiornithine
> (as suggested by some of Clarke's trees when Liaoningornis is included),
> this could be problematic.

Interesting. I always get *L.* as an enanti when I don't reweight, but *V.* 
stays a euornithine no matter what. But then I figure she has _seen_ 
*L.*...!

> Thanks for using the phylogeny on my website, but it's not based on the
> results of my analysis (well, the latter certainly influences it, but 
> there
> are a lot of things in my tree which PAUP hasn't found from my matrix yet-
> monophyletic Enantiornithes and Yanornithidae, etc.).

I figured linking to your site was better than chasing after each of the 
updates you've sent to the DML...

:-)