化石講場-Fossils Board - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: 由龍到鳥的次序 [打印本頁]

作者: vkashima 時間: 2008-7-5 06:43 PM 標題: 由龍到鳥的次序

由中國發現的大量有羽毛的恐龍,例如中華龍鳥, 中國龍鳥, 原始祖鳥等。

牠由龍到鳥的次序是怎樣的。哪一類是歸入龍, 哪一類是歸入鳥呢?

作者: hunter-hunted 時間: 2008-7-5 08:34 PM

中華龍鳥, 中國龍鳥,小盜龍等帶毛鳥龍都屬於龍,會飛才稱鳥類

作者: Franco仔 時間: 2008-7-6 07:26 PM

hunter-hunted 說得對....帶毛鳥龍都屬於恐龍,會飛才稱鳥類''''

我十分同意''

作者: vkashima 時間: 2008-7-6 09:53 PM

哪始祖烏是不是烏?

作者: Franco仔 時間: 2008-7-6 11:15 PM

YES''

作者: 路人甲 時間: 2008-7-7 02:19 PM

QUOTE:

原帖由 vkashima 於 2008-7-6 09:53 PM 發表
哪始祖烏是不是烏?

始祖烏始祖烏是最早的鳥

這裡的版主去了那裡

作者: Dinozoo 時間: 2008-7-7 06:10 PM

哈哈最近忙著考試

QUOTE:

原帖由 vkashima 於 2008-7-6 09:53 PM 發表
哪始祖烏是不是烏?

我個人覺得是龍是鳥都不太重要, 分類學可是人們創出來的, 大自然不一定要跟著我們的遊戲規則, 反正萬物都在一直進化, 比對dna誰接近誰沒意義

作者: 達爾文 時間: 2008-7-7 08:15 PM

QUOTE:

原帖由 Dinozoo 於 2008-7-7 06:10 PM 發表
哈哈最近忙著考試

我個人覺得是龍是鳥都不太重要, 分類學可是人們創出來的, 大自然不一定要跟著我們的遊戲規則, 反正萬物都在一直進化, 比堮..

人們創出來的分類學來說始祖烏是鳥
同意,大自然不會要跟著人們創出來的遊戲規則來分

作者: vkashima 時間: 2008-7-8 05:47 PM

Thanks for Share.
無錯，生物的進化是很漫長的過程，可能途中的不是龍也不是鳥了。

哪由猿到人是否也有過渡的生物？正如當初始祖鳥的出現也突兀。

作者: 好黃魚呀 時間: 2008-7-8 05:49 PM

QUOTE:

原帖由 vkashima 於 2008-7-8 05:47 PM 發表
Thanks for Share.
無錯，生物的進化是很漫長的過程，可能途中的不是龍也不是鳥了。

哪由猿到人是否也有過渡的生物？正如當初始祖鳥的出現也突兀 ...

當然有過度那才會有進化
猿人其實已經很接近了

作者: Franco仔 時間: 2008-7-9 02:02 PM

QUOTE:

當然''

作者: rock-tw 時間: 2008-7-12 08:14 AM

看完珍古德版主發出的小盜龍movie，好像說小盜龍是恐龍演化而來的，但可能不是鳥類的前身啊

作者: Dinosaurprince 時間: 2008-7-13 03:08 AM 標題: 回復 #2 hunter-hunted 的帖子

Some scientists are attempting to set up a system that can do this, called PhyloCode. However, this system is based on relationships, so even if it's defined, whether Archaeopteryx is or is not a bird might *still* be unknown.

Under this system, there are basically 2 opinions. One is that "bird" should be defined with Archaeopteryx in mind. If that's done, Archaeopteryx will be a bird no matter what it's most closely related to, and no matter what we find out. It will be a bird because we say so. Like planet comparison, that would be sort of like defining "planet" as anything Pluto-sized and bigger.

Another opinion is to define "bird" to mean only living birds and the extinct birds that are more closely related to them than prehistoric types. Under that definition, Archaopteryx would not be a bird. Neither would Confusiusornis, Hesperornis, Ichthyornis, etc. That would be, in my personal opinion, sort of like defining "planet" to mean anything Neptune-sized and bigger. Meaning Earth and Mars are not planets, let alone Pluto

A very small minority opinion is to define "bird" based on a key feature like feathers. That would make Archaeopteryx a bird, but also things like dromaeosaurs and oviraptors, and possibly even T. rex. That would be kind of like defining "planet" as anything round that orbits a star.

There's also the issue of which group "bird" corresponds to. For ages, "bird" meant the same thing as Class Aves. Most people who like definition #2 want to sort of "re-assign" "bird" to mean something else, and keep Aves for only modern birds.

As i think, we can define the stage of feather or even bone structures. Say :The fusion of modern bird enable them to fly and there is more bones fused together eg most of the bones on modern bird's tail had fused together .... we can measure the degree of fusion and define which is bird and which is not. By the way, no matter how you define the organisms, the classification just allow us to handle the informations more easily.... the god is not nessary to let us to group all the life easily

作者: c7 時間: 2008-7-14 06:48 PM

Dinosaurprince 不懂用中文好參

作者: vkashima 時間: 2008-7-14 06:55 PM

Dinosaurprince你為何不用中文？手寫都得啦

。

在過渡過程中可能已不是龍也不是鳥，無法以現時的分類學分類

。

作者: c7 時間: 2008-7-14 07:02 PM

所以叫鳥龍

作者: Franco仔 時間: 2008-7-14 07:09 PM

YES''

作者: Dinosaurprince 時間: 2008-7-16 02:34 AM 標題: 回復 #15 vkashima 的帖子

Actually I just copy a foreign paleontologist's opinion in the other forum and plus some of my idea =P

歡迎光臨化石講場-Fossils Board (http://www.fossilshk.com/forum/)