tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post2262994509769435426..comments2024-03-17T01:48:59.504-07:00Comments on The Theropod Database Blog: Please do a better job at alvarezsauroid taxonomyMickey Mortimerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08831823442911513851noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-24996245298803256252012-01-13T17:01:10.932-08:002012-01-13T17:01:10.932-08:00Interesting that your tree doesn't even share ...Interesting that your tree doesn't even share the (Xix(Parv(Shuv,Monony))) backbone that the Longrich/Currie tree and Agnolin et al. tree have in common. Even my suggested definition for Xixianykini above would fail in your tree, since it is always inside Mononykini. All the more reason not to name more alvarezsaurid clades until we get a stable phylogeny.Mickey Mortimerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08831823442911513851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248412803814730250.post-35227815029190188442012-01-13T12:00:36.494-08:002012-01-13T12:00:36.494-08:00I agrre with you in avoid to name node with such a...I agrre with you in avoid to name node with such a poor support. Using my analysis as a reference, I find a large polytomy formed by all alvarezsaur more derived than Kol. Inside that polytomy, the agreement sub tree is (Parvicursor(Linhenykus(Shuvuuia,Xixianykus))). When the positions of the other taxa (the wildcards) are marked, Albertonykus and Albinykus can be placed in all the alternative positions more derived than Parvisursor in the agreement subtree, Ceratonykus results sister taxon of Parvisursor or sister taxon of Xixianykus, and Mononykus results as sister taxon of Shuvuuia or of the (Shuvuuia, Xixianykus) node. The inclusiveness of Mononykini does not change, but it always include Ceratonykini, the latter with an uncertain inclusiveness.Andrea Cauhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10855060597677361866noreply@blogger.com