Re: Pro(to)avis

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

> Er... why?  The taxa around the base of Avialae seem to be okay runners 
> and
> okay climbers (Archaeopteryx, Rahonavis, Microraptor, Jinfengopteryx, 
> Mei).

Okay runners, yes. Okay climbers... hmm... for bird standards, yes...

> > Elongated maxillae
>
> I don't know about this.  Jinfengopteryx and Mei have shorter maxillae 
> than
> Archaeopteryx and Confuciusornis.

Wow! I've completely missed this so far.

> > At any rate, this taxon probably lived sometime in the late Triassic or
> > earliest Jurassic.
>
> [...]  I say Middle Jurassic, where we have taxa slightly less derived
> than Archaeopteryx (Epidendrosaurus), and basal paravians (Pedopenna).

I do not advocate the use of salamanders in biostratigraphy.

However, the Yixian Fm (radiometrically dated to what is now thought to be 
the Barremian-Aptian boundary) has *Liaoxitriton zhangjiani*, and the 
Daohugou Fm has the other species, *Liaoxitriton daohugouensis*. 
Furthermore, the Daohugou Fm _overlies_ the allegedly Tithonian but probably 
quite a bit younger Tuchengzi Fm (where *Chaoyangsaurus* is from). I have 
the pdf of a paper by Wang Yuan on this... but stupidly I didn't forward it 
to myself. It's on the computer in the lab. So, Monday.

It's a real pity that we don't have any terrestrial Middle Jurassic 
Konservatlagerstätte... *Batrachognathus* and *Sordes* are at least from a 
Late Jurassic one, though...

Oh, and, before I forget, I should answer the question that the subject line 
is. *Proavis* is hypothetical. *Protoavis* is only a hypothetical 
interpretation of real fossil material.