tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2156944512466583246.post3363789899703675407..comments2024-03-18T18:17:34.333+01:00Comments on Theropoda: To be and not to be in SVP Meeting 2014 in Berlin!Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2156944512466583246.post-75631397823711132252014-11-06T16:16:55.323+01:002014-11-06T16:16:55.323+01:00The claim about Juravenator is especially suprisin...The claim about Juravenator is especially suprising due to the fact that every other analysis found Juravenator to be a Coelurosaur.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2156944512466583246.post-2552208968670092302014-11-06T09:16:58.175+01:002014-11-06T09:16:58.175+01:00Well... the old phylogenetic analyses published on...Well... the old phylogenetic analyses published on the blog... <br />Note that the only published paper by myself including Sciurumimus and Juravenator and based on my dataset had a very small sample among non-coelurosaurian tetanurans: as clearly stated in that paper, the limited sample among non-coelurosaurs may biase Sciurumimus and Juravenator among coelurosaurs. <br />I'm not against Andrea Cauhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10855060597677361866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2156944512466583246.post-90595393302480963722014-11-06T04:36:21.872+01:002014-11-06T04:36:21.872+01:00The abstract that interests me the most is the one...The abstract that interests me the most is the one that claims that Sciurumimus and Juravenator (!?) are non-Coelurosaurs. This contradicts your phylogenetic analysis.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com