Re: Sereno's (2005) new definitions

[David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jaime A. Headden" <qilongia@yahoo.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2005 9:34 AM

>  The problem with *Troodon* is the problem of being able to relate it to 
> other
> taxa, and that the diagnostic comparisons to the type species must relate 
> to
> the tooth and the tooth alone.

Yes, and these comparisons are able to tell that it belongs into the same 
clade as the other taxa usually regarded as troodontids. They even tell us 
that it belongs into a certain subclade (but not where within that 
subclade).

Therefore we know enough about its phylogenetic position that we can, IMHO, 
safely use it as an internal specifier for a (not _too_ small) clade.

(Just to repeat my point.)