[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Enigmosauria Published (basically)



On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 NJPharris@aol.com wrote:

> > The name Enigmosauria, although not bad etymologically (if I do say so
> >  myself), is actually probably not a good idea, since it would have to be
> >  anchored on _Enigmosaurus_, which is not the best-known therizinosaur.
>
> I don't think that matters too much, since the chance is vanishingly small
> that _Enigmosaurus_ is not closely related to _Segnosaurus_.

True, but why anchor it on a poor taxon when you have a choice?

> >  I
> >  think it would be a better idea to use a name like "Enigmoraptora"
>
> (with apologies to Mike)
>
> NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
>
> Please don't base any more names off "Maniraptora".  It is not a well-formed
> name, and it bugs the heck outta me.

"Enigmoraptores"?

> Aside from which, the members of this clade were not very conventional
> predators.

True, I agree that's a large problem with the name.

> And besides, it's not very original.

And "Enigmosauria" is? :)

> >  Furthermore, it is not based on any genus. (And neither is
> >  Pete Buchholz's suggestion, "Aenigmosauria".)
>
> That'd be all right.

My only problem with it is that it'd be due for many misspellings, and
could get confused with _Enigmosaurus_ or "Enigmosauria".

(How about a compromise: "Aenigmoraptores"? ;)

Maybe a name based on some character of the group (large hands, beaks,
whatever) would be better. Maybe there's a better suffix than "-sauria" or
"-raptora". ("Enigmodracones"?) One thing's becoming more and more clear
-- it should be named something.

> >  A stem-based definition,
> >  say, Clade(_Oviraptor_ <-- _Passer_, _Ornithomimus_, _Troodon_), could
> >  work, or possibly a node-based definition like Clade(_Oviraptor_ +
> >  _Alxasaurus_), with the proviso that _Passer_ is excluded. (The former is
> >  probably more useful, though.)
>
> I don't know.  I like provisos.

I meant that I think a stem-based group (more inclusive) would be more
useful than a node-based group. (I sometimes like provisos, too.)

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