Re: Rahonavis....Both!

["Larry Febo" <larryf@capital.net>]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. <th81@umail.umd.edu>
>To: larryf@capital.net <larryf@capital.net>
>Cc: dinosaur@usc.edu <dinosaur@usc.edu>
>Date: Wednesday, February 24, 1999 8:58 AM
>Subject: Re: Rahonavis....Both!


>(snip)


>The large sickle claw is certainly dromaeosaurid-like, but as most analyses
>show dromaeosaurids and/or troodontids are bird outgroups, this feature is
>probably basal to the bird-dromaeosaurid (& troodontid) group, and later
>lost in more advanced birds (_Archaeopteryx_ and some other basal birds do
>retain a hyperextensible digit II without keeping the sickle claw).

Well, yeah, but...I`ve been hearing lately (sorry no specific refs) that
Dromaeosaurs seem in many ways MORE advanced that Archeopteryx, and for that
matter,...so is Rahonavis. So, it dosen`t seem to fit in as a decent
intermediate either. More likely further advanced because it actually had
more time to evolve into the Cretaceous, and give rise to Dromaeosaurs.