Re: smallest ANCIENT non-bird dinosaur - was what I was asking

["T. Michael Keesey" <keesey@gmail.com>]

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 6:21 PM, Jamie Stearns <stearns5@cox.net> wrote:
>
> I wonder if Aves ought to be defined as Passer>Velociraptor from now on.
> Granted, this could place certain dromaeosaur taxa within _Aves_, but I'd
> say there's somewhat more stability with this definition then arbitrarily
> anchoring the clade on Archaeopteryx, whose position has become somewhat
> problematic as of late.  Velociraptor's derived position within the
> dromaeosaurs would make it a decent external specifier, plus this grouping
> would include things like enantiornitheans and not be restricted to
> crown-group Aves.
>
>  And if Archaeopteryx would fall outside Aves, I don't really think that
> would be much of a loss.

This is similar to (although simpler than) what David Marjanovic has
proposed in the past, and I think his definition is much better than
the node-based definition using _Archaeopteryx_. (That said, I still
prefer the crown group definition, but this branch-based definition
could definitely get a name, perhaps "Ornithes".)

Much more here: http://www.phylonames.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=19&start=0

-- 
T. Michael Keesey
Director of Technology
Exopolis, Inc.
2894 Rowena Avenue Ste. B
Los Angeles, California 90039
http://exopolis.com/
--
http://3lbmonkeybrain.blogspot.com/
http://dragabok.blogspot.com/