So, I am working on several papers dedicated to taphonomic biases.
It is good to know that the nearly complete, articulated skeleton with
parts of the patagium that I have under the binocular microscope is just
a
taphonomic bias.
The distribution of nearly complete articulated skeletons with parts of
the
patagia in time and space _is_ the result of taphonomic bias and not much
else, and so is even the distribution of pterosaur remains in general, to
the point that it is impossible to read any trends in pterosaur diversity
from the fossil record.
I don't see what your point is.