Re: birds and avians again

["T. Mike Keesey" <tmk@dinosauricon.com>]

On Sat, 1 Sep 2001 ELurio@aol.com wrote:

>
> In a message dated 9/1/01 10:42:45 AM, tmk@dinosauricon.com writes:
>
> << ??? I'm very curious to hear your definition of "wing". >>
>
> Well, as the term has several definitions [I don't think that feminine hygine
> products with them can fly], the operative one "forlimbs of flighted for
> secondarily flightless birds.

So bats, pterosaurs, and insects don't have wings?

Furthermore, you can't define "bird" based on presence of wings, then
define "wings" based on whether they're found on a bird!!!

> What would you call the forlimbs of flightless cormorants. for
> example?

Good point -- I don't think it is a binary issue as to whether something
has wings or not. There's a good bit of grey area between "arm" and
"wing".

Let me ask this, then -- suppose a descendant of the kiwi loses its
forelimbs entirely. No remnant bones, no nothing. Does it belong to
Classis Aves?

At any rate, I can't see myself keeping this thread up much longer, since
I don't really care how Classis Aves is defined. (The proper answer, as
with many traditional taxa, "However the taxonomist feels.") I'm far more
concerned with Clade _Aves_.

_____________________________________________________________________________
T. MICHAEL KEESEY
 Home Page               <http://dinosauricon.com/keesey>
  The Dinosauricon        <http://dinosauricon.com>
   personal                <keesey@bigfoot.com> --> <tmk@dinosauricon.com>
    Dinosauricon-related    <dinosaur@dinosauricon.com>
     AOL Instant Messenger   <Ric Blayze>
      ICQ                     <77314901>
       Yahoo! Messenger        <Mighty Odinn>