RE: Ornithodiran phylogeny - a graphical approach

[Michael Mortimer <mickey_mortimer111@msn.com>]

Renato Santos wrote-

> Corrections and comments are not only very appreciated as sorely
> needed to perhaps make this the source phylogeny for the DML ;o)

Well, for non-neornithine theropods...

Eoraptor and herrerasaurians have also been placed outside Eusaurischia 
(Sauropodomorpha+Theropoda) by some studies (Padian and May, 1993; Bonaparte 
and Pumares, 1995; Holtz, 1995; Langer et al., 1999; Langer, 2004), though 
others agree with your phylogeny (Sereno and Novas, 1992; Novas, 1993; 
Sereno, 1993; Sereno and Novas, 1993; Sereno et al., 1993; Novas, 1996, 
1997; Benton, 1999; Sereno, 1999; Rauhut, 2000; Kischlat, 2002).

Chindesaurus is probably not a herrerasaurid, though it may be a 
herrerasaurian (Langer, 2004).

The placement of Segisaurus in Procompsognathidae has not been recovered in 
analyses besides Sereno 1999.  Instead, it's in a polytomy with 
coelophysines and Procompsognathus (Rauhut, 2003), in Coelophysinae (Tykoski 
and Rowe, 2004) or has a rather uncertain position within Theropoda (Senter 
and Hutchinson, 2001).

Nesbitt et al. (2004) found Eucoelophysis to be a relative of Silesaurus.

You're gonna at least have to put "Syntarsus" in quotes, as it's preoccupied 
and called Megapnosaurus (Irmis, 2004; Tykoski and Rowe, 2004) or 
synonymized with Coelophysis (Downs, 2000; Bristowe and Raath, 2004) now.

Camposaurus is a junior synonym of Coelophysis (Downs, 2000; Newbitt et al., 
2004).

Placing Podokesaurus anywhere specific within Coelophysidae isn't based on 
any published data I know.

Sarcosaurus is a coelophysoid (Carrano and Sampson, 2004).

Laevisuchus is a noasaurid (Novas et al., 2004; Tykoski and Rowe, 2004).

Ilokelesia is closer to abelisaurids than noasaurids (Tykoski and Rowe, 
2004; Sereno et al., 2004).

Tarascosaurus has been placed more generally as Abelisauroidea incertae 
sedis (Tykoski and Rowe, 2004), and this brings Betasuchus down to that 
level too.  Abelisauridae is defined as Abelisaurus + Carnotaurus, so 
placing any taxon not known from a skull in the clade is difficult.

Indosaurus does not have its supposed carnotaurine characters and is almost 
indistinguishable from Indosuchus (Novas et al., 2004).

Torvosauridae should be called Megalosauridae, and is sister to 
Spinosauridae, in a clade called Megalosauroidea or Spinosauroidea (Holtz et 
al., 2004; Sereno, 1999).

Edmarka has been synonymized with Torvosaurus (Holtz et al., 2004).

Irritator and Angaturama share no synapomorphies exclusive of Spinosaurus 
(as their holotypes don't overlap), so should be in a trichtomy if they 
aren't synonymized.

Cryolophosaurus is a basal tetanurine (Smith et al., 2005).

Acrocanthosaurus is a carcharodontosaurid (Rauhut, 2003; Holtz et al., 
2004).

Szechuanosaurus is an indeterminate theropod, while the skeleton previously 
referred to it actually a basal tetanurine "Szechuanosaurus" zigongensis 
(Rauhut, 2003; Holtz et al., 2004).

Deltadromeus is a noasaurid (Sereno et al., 2004).

Tyrannosauroids are basal to maniraptoriformes (Holtz et al., 2004; Rauhut, 
2003; TWG 2001-2005).

Tyrannosauridae is now applied to the Albertosaurus + Gorgosaurus + 
Tyrannosaurus node (Holtz, 2004).

Alectrosaurus could go where you placed it, or several other positions 
within Albertosaurinae or Tyrannosaurinae (Holtz, 2004).

Alioramus could go where you position it, or sister to Tarbosaurus + 
Tyrannosaurus (Holtz, 2004), or be a juvenile Tarbosaurus (Currie et al., 
2003).

The Daspletosaurus + Tarbosaurus + Tyrannosaurus clade is now called 
Tyrannosaurinae (Currie et al., 2003; Holtz, 2004).

Dromiceiomimus is a junior synonym of Ornithomimus (Makovicky et al., 2004).

Deinonychus and Saurornitholestes may be dromaeosaurines (Senter et al., 
2004; Holtz et al., 2004), or may not be (Currie and Varricchio, 2004; 
Makovicky et al., 2005).

Yungavolucris and Lectavis were in a trichotomy with avisaurids in Chiappe 
(1993) and Sanz et al. (1995).

Apsaravis is now placed basal to your Ornithurae (Clarke and Norell, 2002; 
Clarke, 2004).

For taxa you didn't include and polytomies you didn't resolve, I recommend 
http://students.washington.edu/eoraptor/Phylogeny%20of%20Taxa.html , though 
it's not updated with Buitreraptor and some others yet.

Mickey Mortimer