Archaeopterygid bird from China

[Richard Jensen]

John,

I thought the example in question was referring to a group - the family
Archaeopteryidae.  Given that fossils occur in both Europe and China, and
the Chinese fossils are both older and, quoting Ken, seem  "to be a slightly
more generalized, primitive member of Archaeopterygidae," it seems
reasonable to me to hypothesize (not claim) a Chinese origin.   This could
be challenged by finding even older fossils in Antarctica or Europe, or
anywhere else.  If all reports of even older fossils came from the same
area, I would take that as cumulative evidence (as with hominids) that that
is the likely place of origin.

Cheers,

Dick J.

John Grehan wrote:

> Dick,
>
> It seems non scientific in that the fossils themselves do not lead to
> the hypothesis. The hypothesis comes from somewhere else. For example,
> why would one need to hypothesize that a taxon had its origin at or near
> the location of the oldest fossil? And how can any further fossils
> 'test' that proposition. If one found an older Archaeopterygid bird in
> Antarctica, for example, one would still not be any the wiser about the
> initial hypothesis, or even that a taxon has an origin associated with
> any one particular location.
>
> I see the example with hominid fossils being slightly different in that
> a group may be seen to have evolved over the range where it occurred (as
> opposed to where it does not have any records) although its not
> necessarily any more real as the flores skeleton (with all its early
> hominid features) shows. Searching for the ultimate center of origin
> seems to come from theory rather than the empirical record. At least
> that's my take on it.
>
> John
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Taxacom Discussion List [mailto:TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU] On
> > Behalf Of Richard Jensen
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 12:21 PM
> > To: TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [TAXACOM] Archaeopterygid bird from China
> >
> > I woud submit that the location of the oldest known fossil can be used
> to
> > construct a simple scientific hypothesis  - the taxon had its origin
> at or
> > near that location.  This becomes a hypothesis and can be tested as
> more
> > fossils come to light. The fact that virtually all of the earlist
> known
> > hominid fossils come from east Africa seems pretty good reason to
> > hypothesize that that is where they evolved.   What, exactly, is
> > non-scientific about this?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Dick J.
> >
> > John Grehan wrote:
> >
> > > Interesting to see new material for the origin of birds, but I would
> > > caution that the fossil record has nothing to do with the family
> > > originating in any particular place over any other. That's just a
> > > theoretical postulate going back to Darwin and it has no necessary
> > > relationship with reality. The location of the oldest known fossil
> has
> > > no necessary relationship with the distribution of a group at its
> > > phylogenetic origin. The location of the oldest fossil is just that
> -
> > > the location of the oldest fossil. Everything else (I would submit)
> is
> > > largely, if not wholly, a fanciful conjecture masquerading as
> science
> > > (and successfully doing so judging by the widespread acceptability
> of
> > > this approach in scientific journals).
> > >
> > > John Grehan
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Taxacom Discussion List [mailto:TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU]
> On
> > > > Behalf Of Ken Kinman
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 11:10 AM
> > > > To: TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU
> > > > Subject: [TAXACOM] Archaeopterygid bird from China
> > > >
> > > > Dear All,
> > > >        A close relative of Archaeopteryx has been described from
> > > China.
> > > > Whether it is from the Jurassic or Lower Cretaceous is uncertain,
> so
> > > it
> > > > could be same age as Archaeopteryx or a bit younger.  Whatever its
> > > age, it
> > > > seems to be a slightly more generalized, primitive member of
> > > > Archaeopterygidae.  This indicates to me that this family more
> likely
> > > > arose in Asia (with Archaeopteryx being a specialized offshoot in
> > > Europe).
> > > > Therefore Archaeopteryx is slowly losing its special status, and
> this
> > > will
> > > > continue as even more primitive members of the family are
> discovered
> > > in
> > > > Asia.  The title of the paper is poorly worded, but here's the
> > > citation:
> > > >
> > > > Ji Q., Ji S., Lu J., You H., Chen W., Liu Y., and Liu Y., 2005.
> First
> > > > avialan bird from China (_Jinfengopteryx elegans_ gen. et sp.
> nov.).
> > > > Geological Bulletin of China 24(3): 197-205.
> > > >
> > > >   ----Cheers,
> > > >         Ken Kinman
> >
> > --
> > Richard J. Jensen              | tel: 574-284-4674
> > Department of Biology      | fax: 574-284-4716
> > Saint Mary's College         | e-mail: rjensen at saintmarys.edu
> > Notre Dame, IN 46556    | http://www.saintmarys.edu/~rjensen

--
Richard J. Jensen              | tel: 574-284-4674
Department of Biology      | fax: 574-284-4716
Saint Mary's College         | e-mail: rjensen at saintmarys.edu
Notre Dame, IN 46556    | http://www.saintmarys.edu/~rjensen