Re: [dinosaur] Diadectomorphs and seymouriamorphs as amniotes from inner ear morphology

Absent better agreement on lissamphibian origins, would the amniote total
group be a terribly useful thing to have a name for?

I was surprised, BTW, to see "non-crown amniotes" in the abstract - is
there any possible distinction from "stem amniotes" (which they also use)?

On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 8:23 PM David Marjanovic <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Amniota is a crown-group; there's technically no such thing as a
> "stem-amniote", because if it's on the stem, it's not an amniote. The paper
> finds the diadectomorphs as non-synapsid theropsid amniotes, which is nice
> to have confirmed but isn't downright surprising (I found them there in my
> opus magnum, with weak support, and David Berman has been saying this since
> at least the early 1990s), but does not find the seymouriamorphs as
> amniotes, which isn't surprising either (aquatic juveniles, or in some taxa
> possibly neotenes, are preserved with external gills, and that's been known
> since 1945).
>
> There is no good name for the amniote total group. "Amniotomorpha" would
> be obvious, but has never been published. People tend to go with
> Reptiliomorpha, a name published in 1934 explicitly in the context of
> amniote polyphyly...
>


-- 
Andreas Johansson

Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?