tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post6773935171398230064..comments2024-03-17T01:48:59.504-07:00Comments on The Theropod Database Blog: Antarctic Ichthyornis solvedMickey Mortimerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831823442911513851noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-52126690145239116382020-12-09T16:50:22.611-08:002020-12-09T16:50:22.611-08:00IRRC, Atanassov's taxa were called 'Pterom...IRRC, Atanassov's taxa were called 'Pteromimus' and 'Procoelosaurus', both nomina nuda. <br /><br />This undescribed material deserves even more scrutiny in light of today's Nature paper (Ezcurra et al.) on Lagerpetidae being the sister clade of Pterosauria.Timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17837037454015036429noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-26982439295149682452020-12-08T19:03:11.436-08:002020-12-08T19:03:11.436-08:00Mickey Mortimer considers putative sternal arm, an...Mickey Mortimer considers putative sternal arm, and hand elements assigned the Protoavis holotype and paratype (as well as putative lower forelimb remains from the Tecovas Formation referred to Protoavis by Chatterjee 1995) to belong to one of two as-yet-unnamed taxa described in Atanassov (2002) as belonging to close relatives of pterosaurs. Chatterjee's (1991) interpretation of Protoavis as having opisthopuby is tenuous because the ancestral avialan definitely had a propubic pelvis.<br /><br />Chatterjee (1991) based his reconstructions of Protoavis on his interpretation of morphological features of the holotype and paratype. You have to remember that at the time the paper naming Protoavis was being scripted, knowledge about Mesozoic birds from the Berriasian-early Albian interval was virtually minimal with the exception of the Asian bird Gansus from the Barremian and Noguerornis<br />from Spain. We now know, however, from discoveries of avialan fossils from the Middle Jurassic to Middle Cretaceous of East Asia that morphological features that Chatterjee (1991, 1997) interpreted as tying Protoavis to ornithuromorphs don't reflect the ancestral condition of Avialae. Davidowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06099864739987549261noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-47062796968448590812020-12-08T16:38:44.117-08:002020-12-08T16:38:44.117-08:00Witmer (2001) provides a very measured and objecti...Witmer (2001) provides a very measured and objective review of the Protoavis material, and features this cogent understatement: <br />"But, without question, the most vexing problem is that Chatterjee's descriptions tend to be of the reconstructions, not of the actual fossils, in effect denying the reader the opportunity to reach his or her own conclusions."<br />Unless the epoxy/plaster can be distinguished from the authentic fossil material, identifying many Protoavis elements might be a forlorn cause.Timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17837037454015036429noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-56406443271230464482020-12-07T20:31:58.937-08:002020-12-07T20:31:58.937-08:00Sort of, but at least we have Witmer (2001) for Pr...Sort of, but at least we have Witmer (2001) for Protoavis. In any case, my next blog post is going to cover these kinds of cases...Mickey Mortimerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08831823442911513851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-79655139773659927972020-12-07T15:22:32.682-08:002020-12-07T15:22:32.682-08:00"I wonder how many other weird records are ou..."I wonder how many other weird records are out there that are based on initial misidentification but stay in the literature because nobody ever publishes a correction?"<br /><br />You mean like Protoavis? ;-) Any chance Sankar Chatterjee will publish a revised taxonomic description of this one?<br /><br />Timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17837037454015036429noreply@blogger.com