Re: Re: CROCODYLOMORPH ENDOTHERMY

[Thomas_R_HOLTZ@umail.umd.edu (th81)]

>On Fri, 26 Jan 1996 Dinogeorge@aol.com wrote:
>
>> >Sorry for the mixup.  I was talking about the clade Ornithosuchia 
>> >(proposed to include Euparkeria, Ornithosuchidae, and Ornithodira).  Is 
>> >this not widely accepted these days?
>> 
>> In my phylogeny (based on Parrish 1993), this clade is congruent to
>> Archosauria sensu stricto: essentially all archosaurs above the
>> proterosuchian-erythrosuchian grade. Parrish sets Ornithosuchidae off the
>> lineage to Ornithodira, which basically becomes the sister-group to
>> Crurotarsi.
>
>I'm still confused.  Are ornithosuchids and _Euparkeria_ still considered 
>the closest relatives of ornithodires or not?? 

No.  Ornithosuchids are closer to crocs than ornithodirans.  Euparkeria is
outside of the croc-bird (crurotarsian-ornithodiran split.

>
>Last I heard, archosaurs above proterosuchians and erythrosuchians were 
>divided into two groups:
>
>Ornithosuchia:  _Euparkeria_, Ornithosuchidae, Ornithodira;
>Crurotarsi:  Rauisuchidae, Parasuchia, Aetosauria, Crocodilia
>
>Other suggestions?

Sereno, Arcucci, Parrish, and others have published archosaur phylogenies
more recent than the Gauthier one above.

Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Vertebrate Paleontologist
Dept. of Geology
University of Maryland
College Park, MD  20742
Email:Thomas_R_HOLTZ@umail.umd.edu (th81)
Fax: 301-314-9661
Phone:301-405-4084