HOME | DD

yoult — Xiaotingia zhengi OLD

Published: 2011-07-29 17:35:17 +0000 UTC; Views: 2007; Favourites: 43; Downloads: 162
Redirect to original
Description Have you heard about him? It's our new paravian-raptor friend from China!
I can't say much about this nice fellow because I don't know much about him at the moment. He seems to be nearly related to Archaeopteryx but more basal. Now it looks like Archaeopteryx was a Deinonychosauria all the time.

As I know the second X. zhengi on dA. Color and pattern are obviously related on the reconstruction of Xing Lida and Liu Yi, who maybe took inspiration on Cyanocitta cristata and Anchiornis huxleyi.
Related content
Comments: 11

triggamafia [2011-07-31 11:16:08 +0000 UTC]

My Xiaotingia was the 1st on Deviant Art, and your's was 2nd... even though mine wasn't finished and yours is much better... BUT... I was still 1st.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

yoult In reply to triggamafia [2011-07-31 12:39:52 +0000 UTC]

I haven't said something different.
I saw yours before submitting mine and I like it, I'm looking forward how it will look when finished.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Lythronax [2011-07-30 15:14:15 +0000 UTC]

This looks really good, exactly like him . I can't believe now China is saying achaeopteryx could just have been more dinosaur than bird. It's kinda shocking. I hope they find out more though

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Eriorguez [2011-07-29 18:29:32 +0000 UTC]

I would say Deinonychosaurs were Archaeopteryforms all this time, due to priority and all that. Not to mention that the critter which has been used as the "first bird" for 150 years shouldn't be taken out of there just because Scansors exist and its group is larger that previously though. After all, the definition of birds as Passer+Archaeopteryx remains there.

All in all, it is just subjective naming. And Xu making a HORRIBLE choice that will hurt how bird evolution is understood by laypeople. Expect creationist bull**** flying around.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

yoult In reply to Eriorguez [2011-07-29 22:45:50 +0000 UTC]

I think there can't be a sharp line between Dinosaurs and Birds, the borders are fluxionary.
If the name is either Archaeopteryformes or Deinonychosauria isn't much of a concern I think because nearly related families have always to wear the name of the other (like Megalosaurus in the Spinosauroidea-group).
I also wasn't surprised that Archaeopteryx is nearly related to the Deinonychosauria, it was obviously all the time.
You're right with the subjective naming.

We should hope that the Xiaotingia won't become to prominent by laypeople and creationists, they simply don't understand the mechanisms od evolution and the grades of relation. The name maybe helps, because Xiaotingia is way stranger for western speakers than Archaeopteryx.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Eriorguez In reply to yoult [2011-07-30 04:32:15 +0000 UTC]

Megalosaurus is a Megalosauroid, Spinosauroidea is a junior synonim of Megalosauroidea.

And the problem with this, is that the paper went on and said that Archeo is not a bird, but a Deinonychosaur. Despite the fact that Deinonychosauria is all animals closer to Deinonychus that to Archaeopteryx or Passer. Cue news sites claiming Archaeopteryx was discovered to not be a bird, but a dinosaur, and flying excrements will happen.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Nesihonsu [2011-07-29 17:38:34 +0000 UTC]

Yes by a chance I have read about it yesterday on my fave Polish paleontology forum proud memeber of which I am nice you have put him in

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

yoult In reply to Nesihonsu [2011-07-29 17:40:59 +0000 UTC]

Thank you, it's a pleasure!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

RememberToLove [2011-07-29 17:37:03 +0000 UTC]

that's so cool

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

yoult In reply to RememberToLove [2011-07-29 17:40:46 +0000 UTC]

Too kind

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

RememberToLove In reply to yoult [2011-07-29 17:49:16 +0000 UTC]

ur welcome

👍: 0 ⏩: 0