Saurischia(/sɔːˈrɪskiə/saw-RIS-kee-ə,meaning "reptile-hipped" from theGreeksauros(σαῦρος) meaning 'lizard' andischion(ἴσχιον) meaning 'hip joint')[3]is one of the two basic divisions ofdinosaurs(the other beingOrnithischia), classified by their hip structure. Saurischia and Ornithischia were originally calledordersbyHarry Seeleyin 1888[4]though today most paleontologists classify Saurischia as an unrankedcladerather than an order.[5]

Saurischians
Temporal range:
Late TriassicPresent,233.23–0Ma[1]PossibleMiddle Triassicrecord[2]
Montage of six different representatives of saurischian dinosaurs.

1st row (early saurischians):
Herrerasaurus ischigualastensis(herrerasaur),
Eodromaeus murphi(basaltheropod);
2nd row (theropods):
Pelecanus occidentalis,
Tyrannosaurus rex;
3rd row (sauropodomorphs):
Apatosaurus louisae,
Plateosaurus trossingensis.

Scientific classificationEdit this classification
Domain: Eukaryota
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Clade: Dinosauria
Clade: Saurischia
Seeley,1888
Subgroups
Saurischians of
uncertain affinity

Description

edit

Allcarnivorousdinosaurs (certain types oftheropods) are traditionally classified as saurischians, as are all of thebirdsand one of the two primary lineages ofherbivorousdinosaurs, thesauropodomorphs.At the end of theCretaceousPeriod,all saurischians exceptbirdsbecameextinctin the course of theCretaceous–Paleogene extinction event.Birds, as a group ofmaniraptorantheropod dinosaurs, are a sub-cladeof saurischian dinosaurs inphylogenetic classification.[6]

Saurischian dinosaurs are traditionally distinguished fromornithischian dinosaursby their three-pronged pelvic structure, with thepubispointed forward. The ornithischians'pelvisis arranged with the pubis rotated backward,parallelwith theischium,often also with a forward-pointing process, giving a four-pronged structure. The saurischian hip structure led Seeley to name them "lizard-hipped "dinosaurs, because they retained the ancestral hipanatomyalso found in modern lizards and other reptiles. He named ornithischians "bird-hipped" dinosaurs because their hip arrangement was superficially similar to that of birds, though he did not propose any specific relationship between ornithischians and birds. However, in the view which has long been held, this "bird-hipped" arrangement evolved several times independently in dinosaurs, first in the ornithischians, then in the lineage of saurischians including birds (Avialae), and lastly in thetherizinosaurians.This would then be an example ofconvergent evolution:avialans, therizinosaurians, and ornithischian dinosaurs all developed a similar hip anatomy independently of each other, possibly as an adaptation to their herbivorous oromnivorousdiets.[7]

Classification

edit

In his paper naming the two groups, Seeley reviewed previous classification schemes put forth by other paleontologists to divide up the traditional order Dinosauria. He preferred one that had been put forward byOthniel Charles Marshin 1878, which divided dinosaurs into four orders:Sauropoda,Theropoda,Ornithopoda,andStegosauria(these names are still used today in much the same way to refer to suborders orcladeswithin Saurischia and Ornithischia).[4]

Seeley, however, wanted to formulate a classification that would take into account a single primary difference between major dinosaurian groups based on a characteristic that also differentiated them from other reptiles. He found this in the configuration of the hip bones, and found that all four of Marsh's orders could be divided neatly into two major groups based on this feature. He placed the Stegosauria and Ornithopoda in the Ornithischia, and the Theropoda and Sauropoda in the Saurischia. Furthermore, Seeley used this major difference in the hip bones, along with many other noted differences between the two groups, to argue that "dinosaurs" were not a natural grouping at all, but rather two distinct orders that had arisen independently from more primitivearchosaurs.[4]This concept that "dinosaur" was an outdated term for two distinct orders lasted many decades in the scientific and popular literature, and it was not until the 1960s that scientists began to again consider the possibility that saurischians and ornithischians were more closely related to each other than they were to other archosaurs.

Although his concept of apolyphyleticDinosauria is no longer accepted by most paleontologists, Seeley's basic division of the two dinosaurian groups has stood the test of time, and has been supported by moderncladisticanalysis of relationships among dinosaurs.[8]A node-base clade,Eusaurischia,was named for the least inclusive group containing sauropodomorphs (represented byCetiosaurus) and theropods (represented byNeornithes). Any saurischian that diverged before the theropod-sauropodomorph split is therefore outside clade Eusaurischia.[9]

One alternative hypothesis challenging Seeley's classification was proposed byRobert T. Bakkerin his 1986 bookThe Dinosaur Heresies.Bakker's classification separated the theropods into their own group and placed the two groups of herbivorous dinosaurs (the sauropodomorphs and ornithischians) together in a separate group he named thePhytodinosauria( "plant dinosaurs" ).[10]The Phytodinosauria hypothesis was based partly on the supposed link between ornithischians andprosauropods,and the idea that the former had evolved directly from the latter, possibly by way of an enigmatic family that seemed to possess characters of both groups, thesegnosaurs.[11]However, it was later found thatsegnosaurswere an unusual type of herbivorous theropod saurischianclosely related to birds,and the Phytodinosauria hypothesis fell out of favor.

A 2017 study by Matthew Grant Baron, David B. Norman and Paul M. Barrett did not find support for a monophyletic Saurischia, according to its traditional definition. Instead, the group was found to beparaphyletic.As a solution, Theropoda was removed from the group and placed as the sister group to the Ornithischia in the newly defined cladeOrnithoscelida.As another result, the authors redefined Saurischia as "the most inclusive clade that containsD[iplodocus] carnegii,but notT[riceratops] horridus",resulting in a clade containing only the Sauropodomorpha andHerrerasauridae.[12][13]Thomas Holtz(2017) recommended using the name Sauropodomorpha to refer to a possible clade that includes traditional sauropodomorphs and herrerasaurids; alternatively, he proposed redefining the long-disused taxonPachypodosauriato include Sauropodomorpha and Herrerasauridae as subclades.[14]Cau (2018) also supported Ornithoscelida but placed herrerasaurids,TawaandDaemonosaurusin a clade (Herrerasauria) outside Dinosauria.[15]Other recent studies support a view closer to the traditional Saurischia hypothesis, with theropods closer to sauropodomorphs than to ornithischians. Novaset al.(2021) support Cau's herrerasaur phylogeny but place this clade in Saurischia.[16]

Phylogenetic position of saurischians in different topologies
Müller & Garcia, 2020[17] Novaset al.,2021[16]
Dinosauria
Ornithoscelidahypothesis. Taxa traditionally classified as saurischians are highlighted ingreen.
Baronet al.,2017[12] Cau, 2018[15]

See also

edit

References

edit
  1. ^Langer, M.C.; Ramezani, J.; Da Rosa, Á.A.S. (2018). "U-Pb age constraints on dinosaur rise from south Brazil".Gondwana Research.X(18): 133–140.Bibcode:2018GondR..57..133L.doi:10.1016/j.gr.2018.01.005.
  2. ^Nesbitt, S. J.; Barrett, P. M.; Werning, S.; Sidor, C. A.; Charig, A. J. (2013)."The oldest dinosaur? A Middle Triassic dinosauriform from Tanzania".Biol. Lett.9(1): 20120949.doi:10.1098/rsbl.2012.0949.PMC3565515.PMID23221875.
  3. ^Oxford English Dictionary
  4. ^abc"I. On the classification of the fossil animals commonly named Dinosauria".Proceedings of the Royal Society of London.43(258–265): 165–171. 31 December 1888.doi:10.1098/rspl.1887.0117.S2CID129792059.
  5. ^Weishampel, D.B., Dodson, P., and Osmólska, H. (eds.). (2004).The Dinosauria. 2nd edition.University of California Press, Berkeley. 833 pp.
  6. ^Padian, K. (2004). "Basal Avialae". InWeishampel, David B.;Dodson, Peter;Osmólska, Halszka (eds.).The Dinosauria(Second ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press. pp. 210–231.ISBN978-0-520-24209-8.
  7. ^Zanno, Lindsay E.; Gillette, David D.; Albright, L. Barry; Titus, Alan L. (7 October 2009)."A new North American therizinosaurid and the role of herbivory in 'predatory' dinosaur evolution".Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.276(1672): 3505–3511.doi:10.1098/rspb.2009.1029.PMC2817200.PMID19605396.
  8. ^Weishampel, David B.; Dodson, Peter; Osmólska, Halszka (eds.) (2004).The Dinosauria,Second Edition. University of California Press., 861 pp.
  9. ^Weishampel, D. B., Dodson, P., & Osmólska, H. (Eds.). (2007).The dinosauria.Univ of California Press.
  10. ^Bakker, R. T. (1986).The Dinosaur Heresies.New York: William Morrow. p. 203.ISBN0-14-010055-5.
  11. ^Paul, G.S. (1988).Predatory Dinosaurs of the World, a Complete Illustrated Guide.New York: Simon & Schuster. 464 p.
  12. ^abBaron, M.G.; Norman, D.B.; Barrett, P.M. (23 March 2017). "A new hypothesis of dinosaur relationships and early dinosaur evolution".Nature.543(7646): 501–506.Bibcode:2017Natur.543..501B.doi:10.1038/nature21700.PMID28332513.S2CID205254710.
  13. ^"New study shakes the roots of the dinosaur family tree".22 March 2017.
  14. ^abHoltz, T.R. (2017)."Share names for dinosaur divisions".Nature.545(30): 30.doi:10.1038/545030d.PMID28470208.S2CID4395996.
  15. ^abCau, A. (2018). "The assembly of the avian body plan: a 160-million-year long process".Bollettino della Società Paleontologica Italiana(1): 1–25.doi:10.4435/BSPI.2018.01(inactive 2024-11-20).S2CID44078918.{{cite journal}}:CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of November 2024 (link)
  16. ^abNovas, F.E.; Agnolin, F.L.; Ezcurra, M.D.; Müller, R.T.; Martinelli, A.; Langer, M. (2021). "Review of the fossil record of early dinosaurs from South America, and its phylogenetic implications".Journal of South American Earth Sciences.10:103341.Bibcode:2021JSAES.11003341N.doi:10.1016/j.jsames.2021.103341.
  17. ^Müller, R.T.; Garcia, M.S. (2020)."A paraphyletic 'Silesauridae' as an alternative hypothesis for the initial radiation of ornithischian dinosaurs".Biology Letters.16(8): 20200417.doi:10.1098/rsbl.2020.0417.PMC7480155.PMID32842895.S2CID221298572.