David Peters has a new post up on his blog that has been getting some attention including on Facebook. I'll address it shortly but first I'd like to apologize for the long delay in getting the full description of this taxon out in publication, especially since everyone has now seen Jeff Martz's amazing reconstruction. Originally I suggested he submit it for the Lanzandorf prize because I thought the paper would actually be submitted by that point. The main text has been near completion for some time now and very recently revised. The hang-up is in completing the figures and because I keep taking on other tasks and responsibilities keeping me from focusing on the project.
David Peters post with the suggestion that Revueltosaurus may be a paracrocodylomorph is actually fairly insightful given that he has not seen the material first hand and is relying solely on preliminary descriptions and Jeff's reconstruction. Revueltosaurus is an amazing critter because it possesses character states found in a variety of suchian taxa, including paracrocodylomorphs; however, it has many characters only shared with aetosaurs which results in the position found by Nesbitt (2011). Sterling's coding was based on a thorough examination of all presently known material and although I don't agree with 100% of his codings I don't think the phylogenetic position of Revueltosaurus will change with the publication of the full description and revised phylogenetic analysis.
I'd ask everyone to please be a bit more patient and we'll get the paper out. I realize that it is an important taxon and as a result a lot of people want/need to see the material.
6 comments:
Markup Key:
- <b>bold</b> = bold
- <i>italic</i> = italic
- <a href="http://www.fieldofscience.com/">FoS</a> = FoS
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Examining specimens first-hand only blinds you to the truly important phylogenetic characters, sheeple. These can only be found by adjusting the contrast in Photoshop and crossing your eyes until they mystically appear. E-mail me for further details, glorious 4x4 tritosaur cube!
ReplyDeletePhotoshop had nothing to do with this one, only various published reconstructions and a larger taxon set than prior studies. Please duplicate the inclusion set and report results. Glad to make changes when warranted.
ReplyDeleteDave Peters
PS possessive of Peters is Peters' or Peters's
PS With present data, moving Revultosaurus to the aetosaurs adds 19 steps. Looking forward to the Parker paper so I can make corrections as necessary.
ReplyDeleteCompletely resolved tree here: www.reptileevolution.com/reptile-tree.htm
Dave Peters
With your taxon set it is impossible to have absolutely no homoplasy (i.e. a perfectly resolved tree). You must be hung up on an island.
ReplyDeleteA completely resolved tree does not mean no homoplasy! It's perfectly possibly to have a fully resolved tree with reversals and convergences of individual characters. "Resolved" just means "no polytomies".
ReplyDeleteRight, it's technically not "impossible". I probably should have written that the amount of homoplasy in his dataset must be so large, I find it hard to believe this would not cause a lack of resolution.
ReplyDelete