![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Dinoguy2, your Aves change points up a problem in taxonomy. What class do non-avian avialae belong to? Reptilia? The current class system is paraphyletic and, thus, pretty artificial. Jbrougham ( talk) 15:12, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Kurochkin (2006) shows the enantiornithines, along with archaeornithines, to be theropods, thereby forming the clade Sauriurae. This means that the clade Enantiornithes is not related to Ornithurae.
Kurochkin, E.N. (2006). Parallel evolution of theropod dinosaurs and birds. Zoologicheskii Zhurnal. 85(3): 283-297.
Does anybody have any evidence-based theory on why the Enantiornithes went extinct at the K-T boundary and the Ornithurae didn't? -- Writtenonsand ( talk) 07:50, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
I have been adding several references to the monographs today trying to build up our many stumps. If anyone else has good research, please help me ! We have tons of unsourced and/or missing articles in this section that just need a ref or two to be credible. Thanks. Jbrougham ( talk) 20:28, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
The article fail to say much concrete about the wings of this group. Some of the illustrations show claws on the manus, did they all have claws? Did they have three free fingers like the older groups, or just two like modern birds? What separate them as a group from the Confuciusornithidae? How do they differ from the more derived Ornithurae? Petter Bøckman ( talk) 21:49, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
So, we have a group that are as primitive as the confuciusornids (or more so in Conficiornis lacking teeth), but set apart by the peculiar shoulder joint? The reason I ask these questions is that I'm editing Archaeornithes these days (I love these quaint groups), and I want to understand why Livezey and Zusi (2007) added confuciusornids, but not enantiornithes to the group (I'm at home can't access the paper).
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Enantiornithes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:09, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
The single article that was cited as reasoning for Enantiornitheans being correct over Enantiornithines doesn’t actually mention the former being the correct terminology. In addition, many of the authors of the article have used the term “Enantiornithine” to mean a member of the Enantiornithes in later published works. Am I missing something? Luxquine ( talk) 22:37, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Basically, "enantiornithine" suggests a group with a subfamily suffix called "Enantiornithinae" and while it is used as a matter of habit by the handful of people who extensively study this group (hence the stats favoring "enantiornithines", though there are workers who are aware of this issue and really do use and prefer "-eans" in practice), it doesn't follow the conventions used to construct other such terms and might lead to confusion for researchers, especially those working on other organisms and unfamiliar with Cretaceous bird jargon."The term “enantiornithean,” rather than “enantiornithine,” is used herein as an informal shorthand for a member of the clade Enantiornithes because the latter implies the existence of, and membership in, a clade “Enantiornithinae” despite the fact that no such clade has ever been recognized. Similarly, “ornithothoracean” is used instead of “ornithothoracine” because there is no clade “Ornithothoracinae,” only Ornithothoraces. The same logic applies to “ornithuran” versus “ornithurine” for Ornithurae, “hesperornithean” vs. “hesperornithine” for Hesperornithes, and “neornithean” versus “neornithine” for Neornithes. This pattern conforms to prevalent usage for other avian and non-avian theropod clade names with similar suffixes (e.g., “avian” rather than “avine” for Aves, “avialan” rather than “avialine” for Avialae, and “tetanuran” rather than “tetanurine” for Tetanurae) and brings paleornithological terminology into congruence with the nomenclature of other organisms (e.g., “gnetalean” for Gnetales, “aranean” for Araneae, “schizacean” for Schizaceae, etc.)."
Thank you everyone for the corrections! I've used Belaena857's suggestion of replacing "Enantiornithine" and "Enantiornithean" with "Enantiornithes" through careful rewording. Hopefully this will keep this sort of misunderstanding from occurring again. Luxquine ( talk) 08:07, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
I think the "enantiornithine" battle might be lost at this point. Since 2022 I can only find the word "enantiornithean" used once in one article [2]. I don't see "enantiornith" used at all. Meanwhile, "enantiornithine" appears ubiquitous across the literature. I agree that "-ine" is a suboptimal ending to turn a bird taxa into an adjective, but it is a common way to create adjectives (for example equine from equus). The "-ine" suffix isn't great, but it appears to have won out in usage, and we should probably accept it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DinoGarret ( talk • contribs) 07:57, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 02:23, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 16:07, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 15:53, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Dinoguy2, your Aves change points up a problem in taxonomy. What class do non-avian avialae belong to? Reptilia? The current class system is paraphyletic and, thus, pretty artificial. Jbrougham ( talk) 15:12, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Kurochkin (2006) shows the enantiornithines, along with archaeornithines, to be theropods, thereby forming the clade Sauriurae. This means that the clade Enantiornithes is not related to Ornithurae.
Kurochkin, E.N. (2006). Parallel evolution of theropod dinosaurs and birds. Zoologicheskii Zhurnal. 85(3): 283-297.
Does anybody have any evidence-based theory on why the Enantiornithes went extinct at the K-T boundary and the Ornithurae didn't? -- Writtenonsand ( talk) 07:50, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
I have been adding several references to the monographs today trying to build up our many stumps. If anyone else has good research, please help me ! We have tons of unsourced and/or missing articles in this section that just need a ref or two to be credible. Thanks. Jbrougham ( talk) 20:28, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
The article fail to say much concrete about the wings of this group. Some of the illustrations show claws on the manus, did they all have claws? Did they have three free fingers like the older groups, or just two like modern birds? What separate them as a group from the Confuciusornithidae? How do they differ from the more derived Ornithurae? Petter Bøckman ( talk) 21:49, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
So, we have a group that are as primitive as the confuciusornids (or more so in Conficiornis lacking teeth), but set apart by the peculiar shoulder joint? The reason I ask these questions is that I'm editing Archaeornithes these days (I love these quaint groups), and I want to understand why Livezey and Zusi (2007) added confuciusornids, but not enantiornithes to the group (I'm at home can't access the paper).
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Enantiornithes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:09, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
The single article that was cited as reasoning for Enantiornitheans being correct over Enantiornithines doesn’t actually mention the former being the correct terminology. In addition, many of the authors of the article have used the term “Enantiornithine” to mean a member of the Enantiornithes in later published works. Am I missing something? Luxquine ( talk) 22:37, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Basically, "enantiornithine" suggests a group with a subfamily suffix called "Enantiornithinae" and while it is used as a matter of habit by the handful of people who extensively study this group (hence the stats favoring "enantiornithines", though there are workers who are aware of this issue and really do use and prefer "-eans" in practice), it doesn't follow the conventions used to construct other such terms and might lead to confusion for researchers, especially those working on other organisms and unfamiliar with Cretaceous bird jargon."The term “enantiornithean,” rather than “enantiornithine,” is used herein as an informal shorthand for a member of the clade Enantiornithes because the latter implies the existence of, and membership in, a clade “Enantiornithinae” despite the fact that no such clade has ever been recognized. Similarly, “ornithothoracean” is used instead of “ornithothoracine” because there is no clade “Ornithothoracinae,” only Ornithothoraces. The same logic applies to “ornithuran” versus “ornithurine” for Ornithurae, “hesperornithean” vs. “hesperornithine” for Hesperornithes, and “neornithean” versus “neornithine” for Neornithes. This pattern conforms to prevalent usage for other avian and non-avian theropod clade names with similar suffixes (e.g., “avian” rather than “avine” for Aves, “avialan” rather than “avialine” for Avialae, and “tetanuran” rather than “tetanurine” for Tetanurae) and brings paleornithological terminology into congruence with the nomenclature of other organisms (e.g., “gnetalean” for Gnetales, “aranean” for Araneae, “schizacean” for Schizaceae, etc.)."
Thank you everyone for the corrections! I've used Belaena857's suggestion of replacing "Enantiornithine" and "Enantiornithean" with "Enantiornithes" through careful rewording. Hopefully this will keep this sort of misunderstanding from occurring again. Luxquine ( talk) 08:07, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
I think the "enantiornithine" battle might be lost at this point. Since 2022 I can only find the word "enantiornithean" used once in one article [2]. I don't see "enantiornith" used at all. Meanwhile, "enantiornithine" appears ubiquitous across the literature. I agree that "-ine" is a suboptimal ending to turn a bird taxa into an adjective, but it is a common way to create adjectives (for example equine from equus). The "-ine" suffix isn't great, but it appears to have won out in usage, and we should probably accept it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DinoGarret ( talk • contribs) 07:57, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 02:23, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 16:07, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 15:53, 9 May 2022 (UTC)