headers
Mickey Mortimer | 1 Feb 2003 01:27
Picon
Favicon

Re: New Dinosauricon Taxon Pages: _Therizinosauria_

T. Michael Keesey wrote-

> The problem with that system is that we are then stuck with misleading
species
> names: _Ornithomimus minutus_ (an alvarezsaurid), _Ornithodesmus latidens_
(a
> pterosaur), etc. ... and _Homo troglodytes_, if I'm not mistaken!

Technically, as the only reason the (lost) holotype of "Ornithomimus"
minutus was assigned to the Mononykinae is the described
hyperarctometatarsus (Holtz, 1994), it could be an avimimid as well.
Unfortunately, Marsh did not describe the specimen (at least a partial
metatarsus) further, so we have no way of specifying its relationships.
The referred specimen (USNM 2909) is a second metatarsal and two partial
pedal phalanges, which Chiappe and Walker (2002) refer to the
Euenantiornithes.

"Ornithodesmus" latidens has been renamed Istiodactylus (Howse, Milner and
Martill in Martill and Naish, 2001) in Dinosaurs of the Isle of Wight.

Mickey Mortimer
Permalink | Reply | 23 comments |
headers
Nick Gardner | 1 Feb 2003 01:45
Picon
Favicon

Therizinosauria or Segnosauria? (was RE: New Dino...)

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Segnosauria have priority over 
Therizinosauria?

Nick

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
James R. Cunningham | 1 Feb 2003 04:15

Re: Screaming dromaeosaur biplane killers of the air

David Marjanovic wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jaime A. Headden" <qilongia <at> yahoo.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 5:02 AM

> > <Since there is no evidence for the ability to flap the legs the leg
> > feathers were purely for generating lift for pertinent purposes, they did
> > not generate thrust.>

If the leg feathers were held in a semi-horizontal plane in a
flightworthy position, if they were capable of transmitting flight loads
to the hindlimb skeleton, and if they were held stationary behind a
flapping forelimb wing, then they did help generate thrust.

All the best,
Jim
Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
T. Michael Keesey | 1 Feb 2003 02:15
Picon
Favicon

Re: Therizinosauria or Segnosauria? (was RE: New Dino...)

--- Nick Gardner <ratites637 <at> hotmail.com> wrote:
> Forgive me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Segnosauria have priority over 
> Therizinosauria?

Let's not start THIS up again....

See the archives. My stance is outlined here:
http://dino.lm.com/taxa/display.php?name=Segnosauria

=====
=====> T. Michael Keesey <keesey <at> bigfoot.com>
=====> The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
=====> BloodySteak <http://bloodysteak.com>
=====> Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>
=====

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
T. Michael Keesey | 1 Feb 2003 02:21
Picon
Favicon

Re: New Dinosauricon Taxon Pages: _Therizinosauria_

--- Mickey Mortimer <Mickey_Mortimer111 <at> msn.com> wrote:
> T. Michael Keesey wrote-
> 
> Technically, as the only reason the (lost) holotype of "Ornithomimus"
> minutus was assigned to the Mononykinae is the described
> hyperarctometatarsus (Holtz, 1994), it could be an avimimid as well.
> Unfortunately, Marsh did not describe the specimen (at least a partial
> metatarsus) further, so we have no way of specifying its relationships.
> The referred specimen (USNM 2909) is a second metatarsal and two partial
> pedal phalanges, which Chiappe and Walker (2002) refer to the
> Euenantiornithes.

Interesting -- thanks for the correction.

> "Ornithodesmus" latidens has been renamed Istiodactylus (Howse, Milner and
> Martill in Martill and Naish, 2001) in Dinosaurs of the Isle of Wight.

I am aware of that. My point was that if you want species names to be binomina,
you have to either a) make them stick with their original generic name (so it
would remain _Ornithodesmus latidens_), or suffer impermanent species names.
(_Ornithodesmus latidens_ yesterday, _Istiodactylus latidens_ today, who knows,
maybe _Ornithostoma latidens_ tomorrow? Not a serious proposal, mind you, just
an example.)

=====
=====> T. Michael Keesey <keesey <at> bigfoot.com>
=====> The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
=====> BloodySteak <http://bloodysteak.com>
=====> Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>
=====
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 22 comments |
headers
Mickey Mortimer | 1 Feb 2003 02:41
Picon
Favicon

Re: Screaming dromaeosaur biplane killers of the air

David Marjanovic wrote-

> No
> currently unquestioned member of Enantiornithes is known to have
uncinates.
> *Protopteryx* and *Longipteryx* have them, I forgot about *Jibeinia*,
> confuciusornithids have them, *Sapeornis* appears to lack them, and a few
> specimens of oviraptorids and dromaeosaurids have them.

Protopteryx actually lacks ossified uncinates as preserved.
Hou's illustration of Jibeinia's holotype has a few small structures that
might be ossified uncinates.  Then again, they could be sternal ribs or
broken dorsal ribs.  Also, we must take into account that Hou's
illustrations are hardly detailed, and quite possibly not accurate.  In any
case, he doesn't describe such features.
The rib cage of Sapeornis' holotype is far too incomplete to rule out
ossified uncinates.

> Maybe only because no cladistic analysis has yet integrated all those
> "neoflightless characters" into its data matrix. Many of the characters
are
> IMHO worth such a try. Mickey M? :-)

Look forward to an update on my analysis VERY soon. :-)

BTW- David, I can't access my university e-mail account at the moment, so
cannot reply to the thread we had going (Dino-bird theory).  Hopefully, I'll
get it working soon and we can continue.

Mickey Mortimer
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Nick Pharris | 1 Feb 2003 03:04
Picon

Re: New Dinosauricon Taxon Pages: _Therizinosauria_

Quoting "T. Michael Keesey" <mightyodinn <at> yahoo.com>:

> >   I've argued before that the moast pragamtic way
> >   is using a two-word specification consisting of the Clade Name
> >   Formerly Known As Genus followed by the species name, like this:
> >   _Erlikosaurus andrewsi_.  I still think this is by far the most
> >   pragmatic way to go.  (Just because the code saus that genera are
> >   not "significant" does not mean that we can't still use them as
> >   labels.)
> 
> The problem with that system is that we are then stuck with misleading
> species
> names: _Ornithomimus minutus_ (an alvarezsaurid), _Ornithodesmus latidens_
> (a
> pterosaur), etc. ... and _Homo troglodytes_, if I'm not mistaken!

So put the incorrect genus name in quotes.  Also, there's nothing that says 
_Pan_ has to be sunk into _Homo_--neither genus as traditionally conceived is 
paraphyletic relative to the other.

Nick Pharris
Department of Linguistics
University of Michigan
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Nick Gardner | 1 Feb 2003 03:12
Picon
Favicon

Re: Therizinosauria or Segnosauria? (was RE: New Dino...)


TMK Wrote-

>See the archives. My stance is outlined here:
>http://dino.lm.com/taxa/display.php?name=Segnosauria
>

Been in the Archives, okay.  Out of curiousity, if one were to define 
Segnosauria as a the same clade as Therizinosauria, then which name would 
have priority?

Also, I noticed that towards the bottom of the page, one of the names 
appears to be jarbled, presumedly due to the presence of a special 
character?

Nick Gardner

_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Jaime A. Headden | 1 Feb 2003 03:16
Picon
Favicon

Re: Screaming dromaeosaur biplane killers of the air

I wrote (in double corner brackets “<< >>”):

<<[S]imilar to the positive evidence that *Caudipteryx* lacked tertials of
any note as the secondaries reduce distally towards the bone.>>

David Marjanovic (david.marjanovic <at> gmx.at) wrote (in single corner
brackets “< >”):

<Part of this may be an artifact of the slabs splitting between the
gastroliths, leaving the inner wing feathers buried in the upper slab.>

  Indeed, this works both ways. 

<<The characters, as are noted for *Sinornithosaurus* (pg. 239, for
instance), show that it, despite lacking a wing, "despite all of its
well-developed flight features.">>

<What do you mean? "[S]how that it" what?>

  I left out the concluding clause: “…"despite all of its well-developed
flight features," *Sinornithosaurus* could fly. However, it can’t. It
would thus be considerable if the same features occur in other winged
theropods that these features are not in fact indicative of flight.”

<<I do in fact refer to the M. supracoracoideus which, as restored for
*Archaeopteryx* (in PDW) is advanced above that of *Sinornithosaurus* with
a larger, taller acromion, with the incipient triosseal canal. This is
less derived in *Sinornithosaurus* and *Microraptor*.>

<But doesn't mean they were unable to flap. This character may well have
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 16 comments |
headers
Nick Pharris | 1 Feb 2003 03:18
Picon

Re: New Dinosauricon Taxon Pages: _Therizinosauria_

Quoting "T. Michael Keesey" <mightyodinn <at> yahoo.com>:

> > "Ornithodesmus" latidens has been renamed Istiodactylus (Howse, Milner and
> > Martill in Martill and Naish, 2001) in Dinosaurs of the Isle of Wight.
> 
> I am aware of that. My point was that if you want species names to be
> binomina,
> you have to either a) make them stick with their original generic name (so
> it
> would remain _Ornithodesmus latidens_), or suffer impermanent species names.
> (_Ornithodesmus latidens_ yesterday, _Istiodactylus latidens_ today, who
> knows,
> maybe _Ornithostoma latidens_ tomorrow? Not a serious proposal, mind you,
> just
> an example.)

Well, yes, we'll have to set up some ground rules about when you can 
officially change the first name of a species.  As long as each first name is 
shared exclusively by some monophyletic clade, no harm, no foul.  If it ain't 
broke, don't fix it.

Nick Pharris
Department of Linguistics
University of Michigan
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane