Another bogus hypothesis on pterosaur origins omits the actual ptero ancestors

Garcia and Müller continue the tradition of omitting taxa and citations
to promote an untenable hypothesis on pterosaur origins from lagerpetids (Figs 1–3).

From the abstract,
“Additionally, we carried out a phylogenetic analysis to investigate the hypothesis that lagerpetids are closely related to pterosaurs, incorporating new data into the most comprehensive dataset of Triassic dinosauromorphs.”

The large reptile tree (LRT, 2337 taxa) does not recover the clade ‘Dinosauromorpha’. Rather the proximal outgroup of Dinosauria, Crocodylomorpha, together constitute the only clades in the Archosauria by definition.

Figure 1. Venetoraptor compared to the protorosaur, Ixalerepton, and two fenestrasaurs, Cosesaurus and Bergamodactylus to scale. ” data-image-caption=”

Figure 1. Venetoraptor compared to the protorosaur, Ixalerepton, and two fenestrasaurs, Cosesaurus and Bergamodactylus to scale.

” data-medium-file=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/venetoraptor_skeleton_hand588.jpg?w=300″ data-large-file=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/venetoraptor_skeleton_hand588.jpg?w=584″ class=”size-full wp-image-81025″ src=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/venetoraptor_skeleton_hand588.jpg” alt=”Figure 1. Venetoraptor compared to the protorosaur, Ixalerepton, and two fenestrasaurs, Cosesaurus and Bergamodactylus to scale.” width=”584″ height=”541″ srcset=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/venetoraptor_skeleton_hand588.jpg?w=584&h=541 584w, https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/venetoraptor_skeleton_hand588.jpg?w=150&h=139 150w, https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/venetoraptor_skeleton_hand588.jpg?w=300&h=278 300w, https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/venetoraptor_skeleton_hand588.jpg 588w” sizes=”(max-width: 584px) 100vw, 584px” />

Figure 1. Venetoraptor compared to the protorosaur, Ixalerepton, and two fenestrasaurs, Cosesaurus and Bergamodactylus to scale. Size is an issue here.

From the abstract,
“This study highlights the importance of detailed anatomical and phylogenetic analyses in resolving the complex origins of pterosaurs and underscores the value of the Triassic fossil record in understanding the early evolution of pterosauromorphs.”

The LRT does not recover the clade ‘Pterosauromorpha’. Rather pterosaurs arise from fenestrasaurs, tanystropheids and lepidosaurs in the lineage of Huehuecuetzpalli, a late survivor of an earlier radiation in that more comprehensive cladogram.

Figure 1. Tropidosuchus and Lagerpeton compared to the new material (MCZ 101542). ” data-image-caption=”

Figure 1. Tropidosuchus and Lagerpeton compared to the new material (MCZ 101542).

” data-medium-file=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/lagerpeton588-1.jpg?w=243″ data-large-file=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/lagerpeton588-1.jpg?w=584″ class=”size-full wp-image-53669″ src=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/lagerpeton588-1.jpg” alt=”Figure 1. Tropidosuchus and Lagerpeton compared to the new material (MCZ 101542).” width=”584″ height=”722″ srcset=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/lagerpeton588-1.jpg?w=584&h=722 584w, https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/lagerpeton588-1.jpg?w=121&h=150 121w, https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/lagerpeton588-1.jpg?w=243&h=300 243w, https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/lagerpeton588-1.jpg 588w” sizes=”(max-width: 584px) 100vw, 584px” />

Figure 2. Tropidosuchus and Lagerpeton compared to the new material (MCZ 101542). The foot of Lagerpeton should have a pedal digit 5, and an otherwise symmetrical arrangement of toes 1–4, like all Triassic pterosaurs have. But it doesn’t.

From the text,
“These preservation issues, combined with a lack of “transitional” fossils, have made the origin of pterosaurs one of the most challenging questions in vertebrate evolution for over two centuries.”

Paleontologists, like these two, by their own words like to puff themselves up by declaring what a ‘challenge’ this project is. Unfortunately, they are late to the party and they are knocking on the wrong door on the wrong street. Pterosaur ancestors were recovered by Peters 2000 from more complete specimens (Fig 5).

Figure 1. Kongonaphon bones. Very few are known. They resemble those of Lagerpeton and Tropidosuchus. ” data-image-caption=”

Figure 1. Kongonaphon bones. Very few are known. They resemble those of Lagerpeton and Tropidosuchus.

” data-medium-file=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/kongonaphon-bones588.jpg?w=101″ data-large-file=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/kongonaphon-bones588.jpg?w=346″ class=”size-full wp-image-46483″ src=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/kongonaphon-bones588.jpg” alt=”Figure 1. Kongonaphon bones. Very few are known. They resemble those of Lagerpeton and Tropidosuchus.” width=”584″ height=”1726″ srcset=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/kongonaphon-bones588.jpg?w=584&h=1726 584w, https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/kongonaphon-bones588.jpg?w=51&h=150 51w, https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/kongonaphon-bones588.jpg?w=101&h=300 101w, https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/kongonaphon-bones588.jpg 588w” sizes=”(max-width: 584px) 100vw, 584px” />

Figure 3. Kongonaphon bones. Very few are known. They resemble those of Lagerpeton and Tropidosuchus. This is the sort of scrappy data the authors are using while ignoring complete and articulated skeletons with soft tissue from Cosesaurus and kin.

The authors cobbled together
the smallest fragments (like a distal femur representing a new genus) plus a few incomplete skeletons (e.g. Fig 3) while ignoring Lagerpeton itself (Fig 2), evidently because its feet would ruin their hypothesis.

This is not good science. Show your data.

Current interpretation of Cosesaurus.

” data-image-caption=”

Figure 2. Current interpretation of Cosesaurus. Note the proportions of the skull, neck and torso are closer to pterosaurs than to either Sharovipteryx or Longisquama.

” data-medium-file=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cosesaurus.jpg?w=300″ data-large-file=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cosesaurus.jpg?w=584″ class=”size-full wp-image-5307″ src=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cosesaurus.jpg” alt=”Current interpretation of Cosesaurus.” width=”584″ height=”332″ srcset=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cosesaurus.jpg?w=584&h=332 584w, https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cosesaurus.jpg?w=150&h=85 150w, https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cosesaurus.jpg?w=300&h=170 300w, https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cosesaurus.jpg 588w” sizes=”(max-width: 584px) 100vw, 584px” />

Figure 4. Current interpretation of Cosesaurus. Note the proportions of the skull, neck and torso are closer to pterosaurs than to either Sharovipteryx or Longisquama. Click to enlarge.Lagerpeton should have
a pedal digit 5, like all Triassic pterosaurs and their ancestors (Fig 4) have. But it doesn’t. In the LRT lagerpetids are bipedal proterochampsids NOT related to dinosaurs.

So the authors made that mistake, too.

When you ignore the actual ancestors of pterosaurs,
like Cosesaurus (Figs 1, 4), and omit citations, like Peters 2000, 2001, and you don’t care if your ptero ancestors lack toe 5, a longer finger four than three, and don’t start small… well you’re not refuting published hypotheses of pterosaur origins. You’re ignoring them. From the abstract: “Despite their prominence, the origins of pterosaurs have remained a complex puzzle in paleontology for over 200 years.”

Cheating by omission is not good science. Refute first. Then present your case. Details on the omitted taxa start here: http://reptileevolution.com/cosesaurus.htm

Figure 1. Cosesaurus insitu. No bones are present. This is a natural mold that includes an amorphous blob, a jellyfish, that trapped one foot of this unique specimen. ” data-image-caption=”

Figure 1. Cosesaurus insitu. No bones are present. This is a natural mold that includes an amorphous blob, a jellyfish, that trapped one foot of this unique specimen.

” data-medium-file=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cosesaurus-insitu.jpg?w=258″ data-large-file=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cosesaurus-insitu.jpg?w=584″ class=”size-full wp-image-5389″ src=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cosesaurus-insitu.jpg” alt=”Figure 1. Cosesaurus insitu. No bones are present. This is a natural mold that includes an amorphous blob, a jellyfish, that trapped one foot of this unique specimen.” width=”584″ height=”678″ srcset=”https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cosesaurus-insitu.jpg?w=584&h=678 584w, https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cosesaurus-insitu.jpg?w=129&h=150 129w, https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cosesaurus-insitu.jpg?w=258&h=300 258w, https://pterosaurheresies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cosesaurus-insitu.jpg 620w” sizes=”(max-width: 584px) 100vw, 584px” />

Figure 5. Cosesaurus insitu. No bones are present. This is a natural mold that includes an amorphous blob, a jellyfish, that trapped one foot of this unique specimen.

The actual ancestors and ancestor relatives of pterosaurs,
Cosesaurus, Sharovipteryx and Longisquama, are represented by complete and articulated skeletons WITH soft tissue (Fig 5).

Why ignore these excellent specimens?

Unfortunately,
this is what you get when you are part of the university system. The authors, the editors and the referees thought it would be okay to omit published competing hypotheses (with analyses). In science, this is not okay.

Stay independent.

The authors concluded,
“The morphological disparity between the volant pterosaurs and other pterosauromorphs has been gradually reduced but is still considerable and only with new finds will this gap be filled.”

Refuting their claim,
Peters 2001 reported, “many aspects of pterosaur non-wing anatomy were present in their non-volant, prolacertiform sister taxa.” In other words, the wings came last, but everything else was present in Cosesaurus, Sharovipteryx and Longisquama.

Refute the literature first. Examine competing specimens. Then make your claims.

References
Garcia MS and Müller RT 2025. Triassic pterosaur precursors of Brazil: catalog, evolutionary context, and a new hypothesis for phylogenetic relationships of Pterosauromorpha. An. Acad. Bras. Ciênc. 97 (suppl 1) https://www.scielo.br/j/aabc/a/NJjRz5dD9PymgdfwfdpSXdJ/?lang=en
Peters D 2000b. A Redescription of Four Prolacertiform Genera and Implications for Pterosaur Phylogenesis. Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia 106 (3): 293–336.
Peters D 2001. A new model for the evolution of the pterosaur wing – with a twist. Historical Biology 15(4):277–301. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08912960127805