Saturday, March 26, 2011

The Sauropodomorph Database is online!

Go check it out, in its bare bones form.  As for me, I'm getting some sleep...

4 comments:

  1. Mickey, I'm no expert on this subject but I read about the evolution of prosauropods and felt so far that the cladogram would be well ...

    The first is your assumption, the second is so humble that he would propose as I know so far ...


    Mickey Mortimer 2011

    --Massopoda
    `--Sauropodiformes
    |--Gryponyx africanus
    |*-"Gyposaurus" sinensis
    |--Massospondylidae
    | |--+--+--Massospondylus carinatus
    | | | `--Massospondylus kaalae
    | | `--+--Adeopapposaurus mognai
    | | `--Seitaad ruessi
    | `?-+--+--Coloradisaurus brevis
    | | `?-+--Mussaurus patagonicus
    | | `--Xixiposaurus suni
    | `--+--Lufengosaurus huenei
    | |?-Lufengosaurus? "changduensis"
    | |?-Lufengosaurus? magnus
    | `--Glacialisaurus hammeri
    `-----+--Chuxiongosaurus lufengensis
    |--Jingshanosaurus xinwaensis
    |--Yunnanosaurus huangi
    |?-Yunnanosaurus? robustus
    `--Anchisauria


    Rexisto 2011

    --Massopoda
    |--Gryponyx africanus
    |*-"Gyposaurus" sinensis
    |--Massospondylidae
    | |--+--+--Massospondylus carinatus
    | | | `--Massospondylus kaalae
    | | `--+--Adeopapposaurus mognai
    | | `--Seitaad ruessi
    | `?-+--+--Coloradisaurus brevis
    | `--+--Lufengosaurus huenei
    | |?-Lufengosaurus? "changduensis"
    | |?-Lufengosaurus? magnus
    | `--Glacialisaurus hammeri
    `--Sauropodiformes
    `?-+--Mussaurus patagonicus
    | `--Xixiposaurus suni
    `-----+--Chuxiongosaurus lufengensis
    |--Jingshanosaurus xinwaensis
    |--Yunnanosaurus huangi
    |?-Yunnanosaurus? robustus
    `--Anchisauria

    ReplyDelete
  2. So basically you moved Mussaurus+Xixiposaurus closer to sauropods than massospondylids. It's possible, that's why their branch is marked "?". Unfortunately, Yates has yet to include either genus in his analyses, and I trust his more than Upchurch's. However, note that Yates et al.'s Aardonyx paper added info to Upchurch's matrix and found a topology more similar to Yates'. In this tree, Mussaurus+Coloradisaurus is placed near Massospondylus and Lufengosaurus (though Massospondylidae is not monophyletic in it) and not up by Yunnanosaurus and Jinshanosaurus. This is why I arranged it that way, but only future analyses will determine if that's right.

    Why Sereno based Sauropodiformes on Mussaurus, a taxon where only juveniles have been described and which has not been included in many analyses, I'll never understand.

    ReplyDelete
  3. David MarjanovićApril 12, 2011 at 3:17 PM

    I trust his more than Upchurch's

    Why?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Because as more data are added, going from Galton and Upchurch (2004), to Upchurch et al. (2007), to Yates et al.'s (2010) addition of codings and Aardonyx to the latter matrix, the trees have changed to resemble Yates' more closely. This suggests to me that Yates' dataset more closely reflects reality in its basic structure.

    ReplyDelete