Re: I will be ostracized because of this

["T. Mike Keesey" <tkeese1@gl.umbc.edu>]

It's hard to be critical of someone who endorses my site so strongly,
but.... 

On Tue, 24 Feb 1998, Jack wrote:

> Dinosauria
> |--_Eoraptor_
> |--+--Herrerasauridae (or "herrerasaurids")
> |  +--Phytodinosauria
> |     |=="primitive segnosaurs" (?)
> |     |--_Therizinosaurus_
> |     |--Sauropodomorpha
> |     |--Therizinosauridae (_Segnosaurus_, _Nanshiungosaurus_, etc.)
> |     +--Ornithischia
> +--Theropoda

This is a little confusing right off the bat. Why isn't _Therizinosaurus_
in Therizinosauridae, and what do you mean by "primitive segnosaurs"?
 
> It seems possible, then, that advanced herrerasaurids might have
> developed the strap-like scapula independently of theropods. 
This seems like more of an argument for inclusion of herrerasaurids in
Theropoda to me.

>  The therizinosaurid line would represent a state more
> derived than than those "segnosaurs" which gave rise to sauropodomorphs
> and primitive to the "segnosaurs" which were the direct ancestors of
> ornithischians.
"Basal phytodinosaurs" might be a better term than "segnosaurs".

> The basal "segnosaurs" might have been more derived than
> _Eoraptor_, but primitive to _Staurikosaurus_ based on comparisons of the
> pelvis and skull in these two forms as compared with the relatively
> derived _Segnosaurus_ and "prosauropods".  
Now I'm really confused. This doesn't look like your cladogram at all, and
I still don't know what you mean by "segnosaurs".

> ALSO CHECK OUT T. MIKE KEESEY'S WEBSITE FOR THE CURRENTLY ACCEPTED  
> CLADISTIC ANALYSIS OF ALL DINOSAURS:
> <http://www.gl.umbc.edu/~tkeese1/dinosaur>

Thanks! It's accepted by me, anyway... more or less.

--T. Mike Keesey
tkeese1@gl.umbc.edu
http://umbc.edu/~tkeese1 -- Dinosaur Web Pages