Re: My Phylogeny: Now Accelerating Comes Science

["Mickey Mortimer" <Mickey_Mortimer11@msn.com>]

David Marjanovic wrote-

> 1. Pubic apron more than one-third the length of the pubis (0), shorter or
> absent (1)
> 2. Obturator process on ischium present (0), absent (1)
> 3. Ischial symphysis present (0), absent (1)
> 4. Extra exit for V1 nerve absent (0), present (1)
> 5. Arctometatarsus: not (0), sub (1), normal or hyper (2) (ordered)
> 6. Tail : femur ratio over (0), under (1) 3.5
> 7. over 40 (0), 25 -- 39 (1), 24 or less (2) caudal vertebrae
> 8. Pygostyle absent (0), present (1)
> 9. Quadrate single-(0), double-headed (1)
> 10. Antitrochanter absent (0), present (1)
> 11. Trochanteric crest divided (0), undivided (1)
> 12. Ratio of height of neural canal in dorsal vertebrae to height of
cranial
> articular face less (0), more (1) than 0.40
> 13. Leg length : tail length ratio under 0.45 (0), in between (1), above
0.8
> (2) (ordered)
> 14. Tail stiffened distally (0), distally and in the middle, but mobile at
> the base (1), mobile throughout its length (save a pygostyle) (2)
> (unordered -- the transformation from 0 to 2 is one step)
> 15. 5 or less (0), 6 or more (1) sacral vertebrae (polymorphic!)
> 16. Caudal pneumatization absent (0), occurring (1) (polymorphic by
> definition!)
> 17. 2 or no ridges on the nasals and broad snout (0), 1 central ridge and
> narrow snout (1)
> 18. Small pointed interdental plates (0) absent, (1) present (I know
almost
> nothing)
> 19. Furcula almost straight and pointed ventrally (0), round ventrally (1)
> 20. Inflated parasphenoid capsule absent (0), present (1)
> 21. Contact between jugals and postorbitals present (0), absent (1)
> 22. Ascending process of jugal present (0), absent (1) (polymorphic!)

1. Rahonavis has an unreduced pubic apron (Forster et al., 1998).
2. Avimimus has a ventrally and distally broken ischium, making it hard to
say whether the obturator process was reduced or prominently triangular
(Kurzanov, 1987)
3. Where did you learn Nomingia, Avimimus, Bambiraptor and Sinornithosaurus
have ischial symphyses?  I have Archaeopteryx coded as lacking an ischial
symphysis (Forster et al., 1998- though I really have to verify these
postcranial codings, why couldn't you have more cranial characters? :-) )
4. No comment, as my braincase knowledge needs some work.
5. There's always "Ginnareemimus", the Thai ornithomimosaur without an
arctometatarsus. But I would leave ornithomimosaurs "2" until its identity
is ascertained.  Bambiraptor is not "sub-arctometatarsalian", it's similar
to dromaeosaurids (unpublished, online).
Archaeopteryx is not "sub-arctometatarsalian" either, having a proximally
reduced mtIII like Deinonychus (Wellnhofer, 1992).  Alvarezsaurus and
Patagonykus have unreduced third metatarsals (though I think Jaime believes
Patagonykus to be arctometatarsalian, due to a different interpretation), so
would make Alvarezsauridae "0".  Yandangornis and pygostylians actually have
a proximally expanded third metatarsal, more primitive than most
maniraptoriformes.  I'm sure Holtz would agree the derived condition of
mtIII being ventrally placed in these taxa is unrelated to arctometatarsaly,
or at least shouldn't be coded as such a priori.
6. The tail of Bambiraptor is only partially known, and that of
Sinornithosaurus is known from a small fragment, unless you're using cf.
Sinornithosaurus too.  I wouldn't code caenagnathids until we know how much
of the new skeletons are real (same for the next character for all these
taxa).  I would agree alvarezsaurids are probably "0", after the new news of
Shuvuuia and Alvarezsaurus' long tail.
7. Might want different dividing points (like over 50), as Deinonychus has
about 40 and some ornithomimids have 39.  Bagaraatan has over 25.
8. Technically, we don't have a tail tip for troodontids, so don't know if
they had pygostyles. I still say Caudipteryx lacks one, but we've had that
discussion.  Again, Bambiraptor and Sinornithosaurus are unknown, as is
Rahonavis.  It looks like only one vertebra is missing from Yandangornis, so
I'd be confident coding it "0".
9. I have Erlikosaurus as "0".  Caudipteryx is coded "0" by others, I think
Jaime suggested it was "1", but I can't see it.  Where did you get codings
for Bambiraptor and Sinornithosaurus?
10. How did you code Sinornithosaurus?  Its ilia are preserved in ventral
and medial views.
11. Bagaraatan and troodontids have trochanteric crests, though you can see
where the division was in the former.  Again, how did you code
Sinornithosaurus?  Alvarezsaurus and Patagonykus lack trochanteric crests,
so Alvarezsauridae should be coded "0".
12. How did you code compsognathids, Nomingia, Bambiraptor, Sinornithosaurus
and Archaeopteryx?  Avimimus has the derived state.
13. I haven't looked at this character, but it may be a partial repeat of 6.
I haven't checked the accuracy of your codings here.  Bagaraatan has an
uncertain femoral length and unknown tail length.  *copy, paste* I wouldn't
code caenagnathids until we know how much of the new skeletons are real.
Again with the fragmentary Sinornithosaurus tail thing.  I suppose the lack
of Nomingia metatarsi might allow you to assume it has a long leg/tail
ratio, just because of the very short tail.
14. Very odd coding you have here, I'd recommend splitting the character up.
If I had to use your codings, I would do it as seen above.  But I think
length of prezygopophyses is more useful to use than mobility, as the latter
is hard to determine without articulated specimens to examine.  Even
dromaeosaurids could bend their tail distally quite a lot, as shown by
articulated Velociraptor specimens.
15. Troodontids have six sacrals.  You'll have to decide just what you
define as sacral vertebrae in Nomingia- seven vertebrae have attached
centra, six contact the ilia, five have fused neural arches.  Dromaeosaurids
(Velociraptor, Deinonychus) and Bambiraptor have five sacrals.  Avimimus has
seven sacrals.  Confuciusornis has seven sacrals too, to answer your
question.
16. Tyrannosaurids and Caudipteryx lack caudal pleurocoels.  Nomingia has
them.  It's unknown in Bambiraptor and Sinornithosaurus.  Although
Patagonykus has lateral fossae on some caudals, Alvarezsaurus lacks them.  I
would want data from Mesozoic pygostylians before we code them.
17. Why are tyrannosaurids coded as having narrow snouts, but dromaeosaurids
aren't?  Narrow snouts and central nasal ridges should be kept as separate
characters.  The "narrow snout" character needs quantification, while the
"central nasal ridge" character is problematic.  Nearly all
maniraptoriformes seem to lack nasal ridges, central or paired.  Their
nasals are convex and often have large foramina, but not rugosities as far
as I can tell.  Dromaeosaurids have a sharp separation between the lateral
and dorsal surfaces, but this may not have supported keratinous ridges.
Some oviraptorids have a central nasal crest.  I've coded your taxa for the
"central nasal ridge" character.
18. "Small pointed" interdental plates is the plesiomorphic condition of
having them unfused, so you must reverse the polarity.  I've coded for
"interdental plates fused or absent", that being the opposite.
19. No ornithomimid furculae are known.  Beipiaosaurus would seem to have a
rounded furcula, but oviraptorid furculae are pointed (Barsbold, 1981).
Padian et al. (2001) have suggested Caudipteryx's furcula may be broken,
which would make it impossible to code.
20. Correct!
21. Oddly enough, we can't prove this in compsognathids yet.  Again about
using the unpublished caenagnathid remains.
22. Caenagnathids again... :-) Basal pygostylians (confuciusornithids,
Spanish nestling, Yanornis) have dorsal jugal processes.

Compsognathidae   000?0 000?0 0?020 0?0?0 ?0
*Bagaraatan*      1???? ?0??0 1??0? 0?0?? ??
Tyrannosauroidea  00012 01000 00100 01010 00
Ornithomimosauria 00012 01000 0010p 001?1 00
Troodontidae      00012 01?00 10121 001?1 00
Segnosauria       00010 11?00 0022p ?0010 00
Oviraptoridae     00010 11010 00221 1p100 00
Caenagnathidae    00012 ????0 00?21 1?1?0 ??
*Caudipteryx*     000?1 12000 00200 001?0 00
*Nomingia*        00??? 121?0 0?20? 1???? ??
Dromaeosauridae   00000 01000 00110 00100 00
*Bambiraptor*     00??0 ????0 0??10 ??110 ?0
*Sinornithosaurus*00??1 ????? ???10 ??110 ?0
*Archaeopteryx*   00100 02000 0?220 00010 ?0
*Rahonavis*       001?0 0???0 11121 0???? ??
*Avimimus*        1???2 ????1 11??1 ??1?0 11
Alvarezsauridae   111?0 01?11 01221 p01?0 11
Yandangornis      ????0 120?? 1?2?? ??1?? ??
Pygostylia        11110 12111 112?1 ?0110 p0

I wonder how this compares to Jaime's "corrected matrix".  It will be
interesting to see just why matrices can be coded differently by two
educated people.

Mickey Mortimer