[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Haplocheirus does not confirm alvarezsaurs are maniraptoran
Michael Mortimer <mickey_mortimer111@msn.com> wrote:
> See my preliminary blog post at
> http://theropoddatabase.blogspot.com/2010/01/haplocheirus-jurassic-alvarezsaur-is.html
> for some early thoughts. More detailed analysis to
> follow.
Yes, the rationale behind this latest definition of Maniraptora is not
immediately clear ("_Ornitholestes_, _Archaeopteryx_, their most common recent
ancestor and all of its descendants.") The thing is, using the topology in
Choiniere et al. (2010), the content of Maniraptora is the same as it would've
been under Sereno's (2005) node-based definition ("Most inclusive clade
containing _Passer_ but not _Ornithomimus_). This is because Choiniere et al.
(2010) recovered Ornithomimosauria as sister taxon to their Maniraptora (the
clade bracketed by _Ornitholestes_ and birds). I'm left scratching my head at
this one.
The trouble is, without defining Maniraptora such that it explicitly *excludes*
Ornithomosauria, we could arrive at a topology in which Maniraptoriformes is a
subset of Maniraptora, depending on whether Ornithomimosauria or _Ornitholestes
ends up as closer to birds. Not good.
To quote the great philosopher Milhouse Van Houten: "I've said 'Jiminy
jillikers' so many times the words have lost all meaning!" Well, I've seen so
many definitions of Maniraptora that the name has lost all meaning! ;-)
Enough grousing... _Haplocheirus_ is a really, really interesting critter. It
would seem that the peculiar functionally monodactyl manus of derived
alvarezsaurs evolved *after* the forelimb had reduced in size. This is
strange, because if the forelimbs were used to rip open insect nests (either
mounds or soft wood), why was the reach of the manus *decreased*? This goes
against the playbook of extant ant-eaters.
Cheers
Tim