Re: DEFINE BIRD

["Jonathan R. Wagner" <znc14@ttacs1.ttu.edu>]

John R. Hutchinson wrote:
>About Aves/Neornithes:
>       Read beyond Gauthier.  Cracraft was out there using cladistics (at
>least in its early form) in 1981; see "Toward a phylogenetic classification
>of the Recent birds of the world (Class Aves)," Auk 98: 681-714, in which
>he uses Aves in a phylogenetic sense to include {_Archaeopteryx_ +
>Ornithurae -- node-based);
        D'oh! The really pathetic part about all this is that I have read at
least part of Cracraft's stuff. I was not aware he had defined anything
phylogenetically as early as 1981, however. In this case, Mike, my sincerest
apologies for being WRONG WRONG WRONG.

>and Ornithurae to include {Hesperornithiformes +
>Carinatae}, and Neornithes as the crown group.  He also does this in
>several papers in 1982, then his 1986 paper in Paleobiology 12(4).
        Which is the one I have read, although I am afraid I have been a
little to busy to process all the info. Bad graduate student! Best not to
open mouth unless fully researched (which is why I never talk about
_Angemimus biscutdo_ anymore...).
        Thanks John! :)

>L.D. Martin even uses the traditional forms of Aves and Ornithurae in his
>semi-phylogenetic papers in 1983 (Curr.Ornithol. 1:105-129 and
>_Perspectives in Ornithology_ pp.291-338).
        Does use count as definition for phylogenetic taxonomy?

>I think a strong case can be made for priority of this usage of Aves and
>Ornithurae over Gauthier's later formalization.
        And it is a relief too. Although I like crown clades in theory, the
objections to crown-group Aves were pretty good, IMHO.

        Humbled and adequately chastened,
        Wagner
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Jonathan R. Wagner, Dept. of Geosciences, TTU, Lubbock, TX 79409-1053
        "Chimp here does the killing." - Doug Mackenzie