Sunday, May 29, 2011

How Long Freeze Ice Cube Tray

Hesperornis a carnivorous marine ostrich difylie birds and the beginnings of the Wars of the runners monophyly (Ratitae, part 2)

In previous work was briefly zrekapitulována Revert history research since 1758, the beginning of modern zoological nomenclature *, Huxley breakthrough in the classification of birds from 1867. Since the theory of evolution was formulated just before the end of this interval was not so much about what to write: what was the point to ask whether any group of "natural" and whether they are runners Glider primarily or secondary, when he was the transformation of organisms at the time generally known fact ?

3.4 Systematics Revert between Huxley and Fürbringerem

Huxley's classification, dividing birds into three "subclasses" ( Carinatae , Ratitae , Saururae) and shlukující tinamy along with other flying Revert birds instead, was only the beginning of the dispute between the runners instead of the other birds. One of the first Huxley successor was Garrod (1874), in which we would classify along with that Huxley found much common ground. Garrod ignored extinct birds, including birds and archeopteryga MOA, then living among the group recognized the dichotomy Homalogonatae and Anomalogonatae. Anomalogonáti included only a singer and woodpeckers (United obojakého absence of M. ambiens muscle, allowing the finger grip after landing on a branch), then the remainder homalogonáti birds, divided into four orders. Garrod saw the runners as monophyletic, in contrast to previous authors, believing the uniqueness of this group, but they did not even own "order". It is summarized with hrabavými (Gallinaceae ") to" order Galliformes. Unexpectedly advanced feature Garrodovy scheme was that it merged with runners tinamami. While this has suggested Parker (1864, see last part of the article), but Garrod was the first to formally recognize the union in the scheme. Moved but still more than Parker: Some runners were in his classification tinamám closer to than others ratitům. Its "cohort Struthiones" Garrod is divided into four "families": one shared with ostrich rhea (Struthionidae), other cassowaries and emus (Casuaridae), third he himself kiwi (Apterygidae) and fourth were tinamy ( Tinamidae ).
Mivart (1877) has contributed to a better understanding of anatomy kiviho (see article by D. Naish the tetrapod Zoology ). Unlike Richard Owen, who is allied with tabonovitými , but it's only reinforced the fact that the kiwi fall between Revert. Mivart coincided with Huxley that the runners are a natural (monophyletic) group, and treated them as a single "family". Speculate about which birds ratitům should be the closest, however, offered the hypothesis that internal family relations. He presented it in the form of a tree diagram - which represents some progress from Huxley and anticipates that Fürbringera and his revolution in bird taxonomy. In the combined dendrogram Mivart ostrich (Struthio ) and rheas (Rhea ) casuar ( Casuarius ) and emu (Dromaius ) and finally kiviho ( Apteryx) and moa ( Dinornis ). The familial bond has defended Mr Owen, but to get Huxley's classification. Mivart (1877) further assumed that the line of kiwi-moa, cassowaries and emus are sister groups. Like Huxley and Mivart (1877) theorized that the runners never not fly and thus were primarily flightless. This view also evidenced in his second work of the same year (Mivart 1877b).
Sclater (1880) introduced a rather conservative classification that ignored the fossil and living birds divided into the usual "sub" Ratitae and Carinatae . Revert Sclater further divided into Struthiones (including ostrich and rhea), Casuarii (composed of cassowaries and emus) and Apteryges (kiwi). Somewhat more interesting was the system Stejnegera (1885), whose fundamental division of birds I write in connection with hesperornity below. Stejneger Huxley "superorder" Dromaeognathae divided into Struthiones (ostriches, rheas, [emu, cassowaries +] MOA) Aepyornithes (elephant birds of Madagascar), Apteryges (kiwi) and surprisingly Crypturi (tinamy). In Stejnegerově then distinguish the basis of what Pycraft 15 years later, naming Palaeognathae and what happens to a solid foundation all future phylogenetic hypotheses. Notice that in Stejnegerově of no group that would include all the runners, while excluding tinamy. Today's terminology, we could probably say that the author regarded as paraphyletic Revert to tinamám. Stejnegerovy exact opposite of anticipation, the system Reichenow (1882), which is not satisfied with the current division of birds into two or three "sub" and instead introduced seven so-called "series" that crowded living birds often bizarre uskupení. Pro běžce, úsporně seskupené do jedné "čeledi" Struthionidae, zavedl Reichenow synonymum Brevipennes.

3.5 Hesperornithes

    Ke konci 70. let 19. století se začínalo zdát, že mezi běžce brzy přibude nový - a extrémně zajímavý - přírůstek. Měl jím být Hesperornis , asi dva metry dlouhý, evidentně dravý pták s ozubenými čelistmi a silnýma nohama ze svrchní křídy dnešního Kansasu, který měl stejně jako běžci reduced wings and breastbone without the keel. (The degree of reduction of the wings could be classified somewhere between kiviho and birds Moa - his skapulakorakoid still meshed with the upper arm, but that it ended.) Hesperornis described by Marsh (1872), who also soon began to wonder where the development tree of birds this particular animal fit. Although often mentioned in literature suggest that Hesperornis and its relatives (example Hesperornithes or Hesperornithiformes) were close relatives of grebes (Podicipedidae), Loon (Gaviiformes), or groups made up of two previous positives (Gauthier & de Queiroz 2001; Hope 2002), somewhat oblivious to the fact that the earliest speculation about their close ratitům. Marsh even went so far as to Hesperornis called "carnivorous, ostrich floating" (Carnivorous, swimming sharp). If I understand the first time Marsh (1878), this term was used in an article for the magazine Popular Science Monthly , but eventually it also included in his detailed monograph Odontornithes (Marsh 1880), dedicated all fossil toothed birds of America .**

reconstructed skeleton of the carnivorous aquatic alleged Marsh ostrich Hesperornis regalis , issued by the Canadian Fossil Discovery Centre. (Source: wikimedia.org)

In it he notes Marsh different "pštrosovitých" characters hesperornisově on earth, and proposes two different explanations of them. The first traits that any indicate a relationship, and the runners hesperorniti is both inherited from a common "reptilian" ancestor - today's terminology, therefore, were pleziomorfie. Marsh describes, in this scenario would hurt hesperornitů ancestors looked like modern loons. During evolution, their wings reduced to the level of penguins, and then it was lost altogether, with the way their role in place of the swimming legs. The second explanation is really close relationship with the ostriches. The author writes:
Another Explanation He Seems The Whole Sea Reasonable, and more in accordance with the known facts. The Struthious characters, seen in Hesperornis , BE should probably regarded as evidence of a real affinity, and in this case Hesperornis Would Be a Carnivorous Essentially, swimming blades.

Marsh 1880:114
hesperornity with Marsh as a runner, but rather hard hit. Already Vetter (1885) supported his less popular alternative, according to which Hesperornis evolved from ancestors karinátních reduction of the wings and pectoral fin. If I know (I draw here ), Vetter speculate on hesperornisových closest relatives of this task, however, took an American ornithologist Stejneger (1885), the classification tends to be somewhat forbidding place a large number of new and completely unnecessary names, also criticized the time (Sharpe 1891). As if not enough already annoying enough "empty ranks (Rheiformes, Rheidae and Rhea have the exact same content), Stejneger even bothered with the fact that they at least have the same etymological basis: for archeopteryga retained both taxa Saururae Haeckel, but created it new, redundant "order" Ornithopappi. Leaving aside, however, these formal deficiencies Stejnegerův system is quite interesting. Birds now divided into four "sub", two of which he borrowed from the Marsh and the third from Haeckel. In his memoir Odontornithes divided Marsh (1880) toothed birds to people whose teeth grow from the groove (Odontolcae) and those with dental separate wells (Odontotormae). Stejnegerův system, this division follows:
  1. "sub" Saururae
    • "order" Ornithopappi ( Archaeopteryx ,? Laopteryx )
  2. "sub" Odontotormae
    • "order" Pteropappi ( Ichthyornis , Apatornis )
  3. "sub" Odontoholcae [sic]
    • "order" Dromaeopappi ( Hesperornis and relatives)
  4. "sub" Eurhipidurae (wild birds)
Stejneger was perhaps not the first author who explicitly excluded hesperornity of logs made up of all living birds. This example is now called the name Neornithes (or Aves , sensu Gauthier & de Queiroz 2001), that it be done to Gadow in 1893 - Stejneger is perhaps the first to be explicitly named .*** This is undoubtedly right, in its time, but acceptance. It is interesting that with something like Stejnegerově system of four "sub" came across the Atlantic Menzbier (1887). He agreed with a special status and plazoocasých "odontotormů, wild birds, but tore into three" sub " - Revert to the historically unique, Karin and penguins (Eupodornithes).
With that in mind Marsh runner Hesperornis jurisdiction is erroneous, and further agreed (Fürbringer 1888; Thompson 1890). Fürbringer its gigantic monograph, of which more will be discussed, introduced to spur American water birds still use the name Hesperornithes (and Enaliornithes while Enaliornis today hesperornitem) and combined them with a purported asset named Colymbo-Podicipites, consisting of loons (Colymbidae today Gaviidae) and grebes (Podicipidae today Podicipedidae), the "suborder" Podicipitiformes. By contrast, Marsh side as one of the few built Newton (1884), who modeled Huxley categorized birds Saurarae taxa, Ratitae and Carinatae . Newton believed that the derivation karináti runners and lost teeth independently, while "plazoocasí (Saururae) they all possess. In accordance with the shared Revert to the carina and gear teeth. Under toothless runners, all the living representatives, birds MOA (Immanes) and elephant birds of Madagascar (Aepyornithes). Presumed toothed runner Newton (1884) divided into those with bikonkávními vertebrae and the vertebrae with saddle (which belonged to Hesperornis ), resulting classifications are as follows:
  1. "sub" Saururae
    • Archaeopteryx
  2. "subclass" Ratitae
    • teeth
      • with bikonkávními vertebrae (no known representatives)
      • the saddle vertebrae ( Hesperornis )
    • without Teeth
      • Aepyornithes (= Aepyornis , elephant birds of Madagascar)
      • Apteryges (= Apterygidae, kiwi)
      • Immanes (Dinornithidae + = 'Palapterygidae ": moa birds, Palapteryx = Dinornis )
      • Megistanes ( = Casuariidae, emu, cassowaries +)
      • Rhea (= Rhea, rhea)
      • Struthiones (Struthio = , ostrich)
  3. "sub" Carinatae
    • teeth
      • with bikonkávními vertebrae ( Ichthyornis )
      • the saddle vertebrae (No known representatives)
    • without teeth (living neognáti + tinamy)
reason for this arrangement, which today - just like any other system, allowing for the taxa hitherto undiscovered pre-defined properties - seems slightly strange words, the mismatch between what the former states of characters ornithologists and what to expect at Hesperornis and ichtyornise occurred in reality. As Newton (1884:36-7) explains, Ichthyornis had biconcave (in modern terminology amficélní) vertebrae and teeth located in the wells (such teeth is called tekodontní), while Hesperornis vertebrae had saddle and teeth set in a continuous groove. The problem is that it features the then regarded as secondary authors (teeth in the saddle-shaped vertebrae, and wells) did not occur together. Newton, although he admitted that the combination of archaic and derived characters is exactly what we expect evolutionary forces, but since both karinátů and Revert scored at least one pleziomorfický status symbol, he had to assume the convergent loss. With Newton's classification totally agree Pavlow (1885), which included Marsh Odontolcae taxa (= Hesperornithes ) between the runner and Odontotormae (= Ichthyornis ) to Carinatae .
Today we seem to Newton's view is flawed in many aspects. Not only that Hesperornis not to ratitům and Ichthyornis to karinátům, but both are outside the crowning example (= group of all living) birds, which Ichthyornis is closer to him (Clarke 2004). We know that all the ancestors of birds until the very distant past had tekodontní teeth (crocodiles and birds in their teeth wells inherited from the same ancestor) and that the present state of Hesperornis is thus derived, not primitive. Likewise amficélní vertebrae that have plagued the Marsh, although Ichthyornis neptačími shared with dinosaurs, but because of hesperornitů, patagopteryga, apsaravise and to some extent known konfuciusornitidů heterocélní vertebra ("saddle"), is more economical not interpret it as a common primitive character (sympleziomorfii), but derived (autapomorfický) reverzál, return to the original state (Clarke 2004). Since
hesperorniti around this time runners emerge from the story and never returned to him, yet leave you strictly followed the time line and jump to the "future" to show how the above-cited conclusions reached. I draw from Houde'a (1987), which views the development of competence hesperornitů briefly revised. Fürbringerova classification was the fate of more systematic hesperornitů considerable influence, but concreted it (as well as other views on avian evolution) and Heilmann (1926), who demonstrated the similarity of the red and hesperornitů rejected linking characters with runners. His position was widely followed (Lambrecht 1933, Brodkorb 1963). Already Storer (1960), but did not agree and Gingerich (1973, 1976) again drew attention to the runners hesperornitů features, namely their paleognátní floor (see previous article ). Unlike Marsh realized that is a primitive and not derived similarities, and argued that paleognátní type of floor is the primitive living birds, which led in his later article (Gingerich 1976) Cracraftovu questioned the hypothesis of monophyly of the runners. † Cracraft (1982) also came up with a bizarre twist, when using the wrong examined with cladistic analysis demonstrated the monophyly "gaviomorfů", consisting of hesperornitů, grebes and loons. Relationships with Grebe But at least in the case conclusively disproved already baptornise Martin & Tate (1976) and later examined with cladistic analysis carried out clearly both vykrývaly Hesperornis and ichtyornise among wild birds (usually in a trichotomy).

3.6 Primary and nelétavost polyfylie birds

Huxley came with two hypotheses, around which, in the years developed considerable discussion: 1) runners are monofyletičtí and 2) runners are a relic of period, the birds still could not fly, and Glider karináti their descendants. Marsh and Newton agreed with both statements, although Newton (1884) have already felt the need to defend him. The text also gives us a nice picture of how, when scientists thought:
It Has Been for Some Time and the Question Whether the ratite is degraded, and descended from the type of Carinae, or Carinae and the superior development of the ratite type. Eminent Several zoologists have Declared themselves in Favour of the Former Probability, and at first sight most people Would Be Inclined to DECIDE Them with [...]. But the easiest answer is not always the true one, and that the writer should present it before Seems That Be Answered this question and the reply given it Should Be Another-was the first Which animal Properly Could anyone call and "Bird," as distinguished from a "reptile," possessed of a keeled sternum or not? Now Would Birds seem to have been Differentiated from Reptiles [...]. There Is No Reason to Think That That period at [...] Any reptile snake and a keeled sternum. Hence it Seems Almost Impossible That The First Bird should have possessed one; That is to say, it must have been practically of the ratite type.

Newton 1884:43
Revert But if separated from the rest of the birds before this group had years, at what stage of evolution it actually was? Vogt (1879, 1880) to archeopteryga basis of his research - which could make for surprisingly little bird characters - suggested that runners have evolved from dinosaurs, while the karináti archeopteryga and one again in a kind of generalized reptile. (As noted Witmer [1991], this generalized reptile later authors in the interpretation of Vogt's hypothesis mistook the scaly, or lepidosaury.) This hypothesis now seems to be absurd - and the independent development of runners' karinátů "lizard like reptile from the required number of absolutely convergence inadequate number of differences that might explain. Polyfylie extreme hypothesis but support other authors, including Mivart (1881), in which the runners were descendants of dinosaurs and pterosaurs karináti again.
opposite view offered by Lindsay (1885), studying bird's breast bone. According to the keel karinátů relatively late phylogenetic structure, evolving along with powerful pectoral muscles serving to fly and since found remains of the keel of the baby rheas, concluded Revert that birds are descendants létavých.
Difyletičtí birds and their evolution under Wiedersheima. (Source: Witmer 1991: Figure 3, the digitized books.google.com)

Contact hypothesis popular in the 70 and 80 the 19th century into a single consistent model attempted wiedersheimi (1882, 1884, 1885, 1886). He said it was necessary to seek a common ancestor with other birds Revert to Early Triassic, or even the late Palaeozoic (!), While the front was also the ancestor of dinosaurs and pterosaurs. Wiedersheimi to be featured again as an indeterminate reptile (which was again later misinterpreted the "lacertiliana, see eg de Beer 1954), which gave rise to one of the scaly animals, which are split with the pterosaurs and the line leading to birds. On it lies Archaeopteryx, from which evolved all later birds including ichtyornise, which in turn is the ancestor of all living karinátů. On the other hand, Wiedersheimova of "deep ancestor" evolved dinosaurs, whose descendants include Hesperornis and Revert. It is not hard to see that this strange hypothesis was based solely on the authority of other scientists, like the Marsh and Vogt.
The loss of popularity suffered a bird difylii hypothesis is most likely responsible Fürbringer. In 1888 he published his monumental work Untersuchungen zur Morphologie und Systematic der Vogel , in two volumes with a total of 1751 Parties presented a phylogeny of birds not only through hierarchical lists (such as those mentioned above), but also the development tree. The scope and quality of this work also suggests that - as recently pointed Mayr (2011) - neither Livezey & Zusi (2007) in his numerical analysis of 2954 morphological characters did not get the cladograms much different from that which Fürbringer presented 120 years ago . Fürbringer also presented compelling evidence to suggest that all birds - including the Revert - Glider and were initially speculated that bird flight originated in trees (arboreal hypotéza).

3.7 Od Fürbringera po Gadowa

    Co se týče systematiky běžců, Fürbringer (1888) pokládal tuto skupinu za parafyletickou - dosud přitom soupeřila Owenova hypotéza o polyfylii s Huxleyho hypotézou o monofylii. Pštrosi ( Struthio ) mají na jeho stromku ke zbylým ptákům nejdál - hned po archeopterygovi, který je nejbazálnějším nehypotetickým ptákem ve Fürbringerově stromku. Následuje taxon "Hippalectryornithes" (autor měl opět onen nepříjemný zvyk používat vícero redundant names for one and the same example), including cassowaries, emus and dromornitidy - large birds of the Australian Oligocene to Pleistocene, which, while reminiscent of the runners, but today are considered vrubozubé. Even today they are closer relatives to birds létavým nanduové ( Rhea). Finally, the kiwi (Apteryx ) is falling along with the MOA (dinornitidy) in the stocks named Apteryges, whose position relative to other birds somewhat obscures the artistically impressive but a bit impractical to implement tree. Fürbringer attempted a synthesis of current hypotheses on the phylogenetic position of Tina and her tree is therefore set in (under the name Crypturi) to polytomie with hrabavými and Apteryges. Gussekloo (2000) states that Fürbringera impressed by the morphological diversity in bony běžčím floor, Huxley by his notion of "dromeognátní type is not fully appreciated.

Development Tree birds according Fürbringera, which is evident in both runners parafylie (different to the rest of the runners have different birds away), both of secondary nelétavost (Glider Archaeopteryx is located below the tree). On the right, then the clearer version of the same tree, reprinted Mayr (2011), applying the current nomenclature and omitting fossil taxa. (Modified from Sharp 1891: Plate IV [digitalized archive.org] and Mayr 2011: Figure 2)

The Fürbringera Gadow continued, addressing it from the 70 of the 19 century form of bird intestinal loops. The only consensus in this character set by Gadow (1889) for Revert discovered the second clockwise loop and left-handed third. These characters, however, also show tinamy, Galliformes, and hoacin crested cuckoo. Apparently the findings thus confirm Fürbringerovy, but as noted by Sibley & Ahlquist (1972), despite the fact that it was by far the biggest promoter of Gadow Fürbringerovy work in the Anglophone world, in many respects, he disagreed with it - Revert and classification was one of them.
Seebohm (1890) has since presented the work kiviho which came back between runners (in his terminology strutioniformy) and rejected their relationship with hrabavými tinamami and, as suggested Fürbringer. Seebohmova work in the coming years, underwent considerable criticism, especially from Newton. As a "reactionary" but rejected it as Gadow (1893), when he published his groundbreaking work systematically. In it applies the principles of a primitive kind of numerical analysis, including the weighting of characters, it explores many different aspects of bird anatomy and bird among other things, puts up the Crown Example name Neornithes. *** Despite his previous findings on the construction of the intestines are monophyletic Gadow recognizes Revert. From Fürbringerova positives ( Tinamidae , Galliformes, Apteryx ) Gadow kiviho broke and sent him back to the runner. These steps should be used for further taxonomy of birds of paramount importance: Gadowova classification will be subject to minor modifications (Beddarda, Wetmore'a and others) used so long as cladistics and molecular phylogenetics not make unnecessary classification.


* I know the date it attaches some importance exaggerated, but personally I do not have much to consider it as the beginning of modern zoology as a whole.

** Just in passing: that deletions of the budget for science and research - especially a science and research that have extensive practical applications (eg, studies of fossil birds) - have a long tradition in history, evidenced by the fact that a deputy the state of Alabama Hilary Herbert in 1892 used a 44-page excerpt from Marsh monographs directly on the soil of the House of Representatives as the ultimate example of throwing taxpayers' money. He even passed around a luxury edition Odontornithes , printed on Marsh's own expense, as evidence of profligacy U.S. Geological Survey.

*** Or not. Search priority designation can be finished suffering, as in the earlier literature is simply not clear what the authors intended the asset's name together. After some time as covering all living birds - and the only wild birds - taxon Ornithurae , Haeckel already erected in 1866. Today everyone will agree that this includes several taxa outside the crown of literature is but a name used for three different strengths: Chiappeho node-based ( Hesperornis + wild birds), Serenův branch-based (all more than sparrows archeopterygovi) and Gauthierův and de Queirozův apomorphy-based (all birds with short tails bearing bone pygostyl, homologous with that of the Condor). Why? Since it is not clear how this name konceptualizoval Haeckel. A similar case Even the name is Neornithes . It is usually accepted that Gadow (1893), it intended to explicitly name the group composed of all living birds, but Gauthier & de Queiroz (2001) argue that it was going to pay for Haeckelovo Ornithurae , and suggest that the extended hesperornity ichtyornise and since there Gadow included (considering that it is a crown I lay members).

† It is fitting to note that Houde (1987), however, disputed that, as described by Gingerich Hesperornis is true paleognátní patro. 

Zdroje: 
Posted by admin at 8:32 AM 0 comments

Thursday, May 26, 2011

How To Stich Anarkali Churidar

Euronet places hundred

money from ATMs wide stream flowing - who today do not use them? Network users Euronet have the occasion to pay their chance to earn money stówki. All the lottery, which will last until June 30.




What do I need to give a chance to happiness? In total, very little


simple rules like the proverbial wire. Unfortunately, this wire can probably some in the throat - refers to the banks, which pay on each transaction commission ...

Posted by admin at 11:33 AM 0 comments

How To Remove Areail On A Volvo S40

CHF / PLN - after the storm the sun shines

currency pair CHF / PLN is probably one of the most popular for all kinds of media. As soon as something interesting begins to happen on it (and the main interest is the weakening of the zloty in particular), the media can hear a big noise . Noise that prophetic a great tragedy for the people who contracted loan rate for CHF, but the noise that normally is associated with a solstice. As a fan of drawing all sorts of bars attached my proposal for this pair for the coming period.




Looking at the diagram pair CHF / PLN in a broader perspective drawing can be seen in its wide wedge zwyżkującego. This process lasts from 1Q2010 year. Some regularity is that after the test the upper limit of the wedge, there was always more or less abrupt correction, which finally came down to support listing as a lower limit. The last two tests of the upper limit (including that of today) are very aggressive, but the technical level that was still undeniably zarespektowany ( 3.26) follows the line that we can pull from the top of February 2009, by the recent summit on March 17 .

By my estimation it's not yet time to rise to the top of the wedge - Greece certainly very frightened , but the panic that has brought out CHF / PLN to new heights a little bit is still missing. This is what I put on, a correction in this pair to the lower limit, or the surrounding area 3.10 .

not play the currency, credit, fortunately, I no longer have. I hope to improve this post a little humor to those who repay the loan, or give a bit to think about those who are staring in the currency.

Posted by admin at 11:05 AM 0 comments

Long Leg Briefs Women

Seneca - Thoughts. Part VI



A happy life
1 • 1


All Gallionie brother, want to live happily, but wander in the darkness when it comes to knowing what is what makes life happy. And to the extent it is difficult to achieve a happy life, that anyone who descends from the right path, the more it moves away from him, the sooner we seek. And since the road leads opposite direction, same speed causes the distance increases more and more.


1 • 3



Nothing entangles us in a greater evil than to succumb to public opinion and the recognition as the best of what was met with great acclaim, than drawing on so many examples and principles of life is not podług reason, but imitation.


1 • 4



We lose the imitation of others: oddzielmy only from the crowd, and we will return to health.

2 • 1


human affairs are not going so well that they liked most of what is better!


2 • 4


The things that attract the eye and which would be congruent to each other with admiration shows these things on the surface shine, and are in the midst of mediocrity.

3 • 3


happy life in harmony with his nature, but can be achieved provided that the mind is, above all, healthy and continues to retain health, then he is brave and strong, continued, extremely durable, adapted to the circumstances, the attentive, without any squeamishness, about your body and all that about him, as well as caring about other things that bring order to the force, though without any admiration for any of them, and finally, that it intends to use gifts of fate, but not be their slave.
3 • 4


When we despise the pleasure and pain, then in place of all things trivial and worthless, and even harmful for their heinous consequences, he enters a great joy, steadfast and constant, then peace, spiritual harmony and size combined with gentleness. All because the cruelty is born of weakness.

4 • 2


highest good is the spirit, contemptuous of random goods, joyfully virtue, or more precisely, unbeaten strength of spirit, experienced in all mild in action, gentle in dealing with others.
4 • 3


... What disturbs us say that a happy life is the soul free, proud, fearless and imperturbable, standing outside of fear and desire, the soul, for which only welfare generosity, the only evil wickedness, and the rest mass of worthless things that come and go, without omitting or adding anything lucky life, without increasing or diminishing the highest good?

4 • 5


... So we have to go free. The only way to get it to her indifference to the fate: if the word is born invaluable good, peace of mind, and loftiness already completely secure, and after the destruction of errors great and lasting joy of knowing the truth and kindness and serenity that comes with it will be a source of pleasure, not because themselves are good, but because they stem from his own good.
5 • 2-3


... No one who remains outside the truth, can not be called happy. And so life is a happy inplanted fairness and certainty of court, and not subject to change.

6 • 2


... happy man is happy with his time, whatever they were, and in favor of his condition. Is Happy, who makes sense to appreciate all the conditions of existence.

7 • 4


right mind never changes and does not feel disgust for himself, nor transformed into anything in his life, which is always the best. Meanwhile bliss ends when you provide the greatest joy. There is a lot of space on it, so I quickly causes satiety, disgust and begins to wake up after the first burst of losing power.
8 • 3


Let a man can not be spoiled by external things and let it be undefeated and podziwiającym only himself, believing in yourself, and the finished good and bad - an artist of life ...!

8 • 6


... reluctance and hesitation to show the inner struggle and the lack of constancy. Therefore, you can confidently say that the greatest good is the harmony of the soul. For where harmony and unity, must be, and virtue: misdemeanors accompanied by discord.
9 • 3


highest good lies in the selection and excellent attitude of mind, and when he finishes his way and shut up within their borders, then the supreme good reaches its fullness and needs nothing more. There is nothing can be outside the whole, just like anything - except the final frontier.
9 • 4


Looking for man's happiness, not happiness abdomen, which is the largest capacity in cattle and wild animals!


10 • 2


Who does not know that the greatest fools enjoy the most of your delight, that the iniquity is full of fun and that spirit alone provides a wide variety of transgressive pleasure? First of all, it is arrogance, excessive self-esteem and inflated above the elevation of others, blind and uncritical attachment to their own thing, dissolute pleasure and elevation of a petty and childish reasons, harshness and arrogance lubująca in insults, idleness and debauchery flowing with a lazy, sluggish mind.

12 • 2


sage pleasures are quiet and modest, almost inert, dull and barely visible, as they come without being summoned, and even come automatically, are neither appreciated nor accepted with joy by those who experience it. They in fact they mix and combine with life, like entertainment and humor combined with serious matters.

13 • 5


Excessive delight is injurious: but when it comes to virtue, do not be afraid of any excess, because it is itself a measure, it is not good what is breaking from his own greatness.

*



.. To make the virtues of this sublime mistress, slave of pleasure, it is appropriate behavior for a man in whose spirit there is no room for anything big!

14 • 2


As with difficulty and danger of being exposed to the hunt on wild animals, and we do not stop after the capture of their fear - often because their masters beats - so it is also the great delights: they become big misfortune and doścignięte race. They are more numerous and bigger, the more enslaved nędzniejszy and is the one who sparkles mob happy.
15 • 7


... We are linked by a solemn oath that we will endure our human fate, without losing the spirit of balance due to what we can not avoid. We were born in the absolute monarchy: true freedom is to be obedient to God.

20 • 2


noble thing to strive for loftiness of purpose, not by measuring their own strength, but the strength of his nature, and undertake more ambitious plans than they could meet even the men of unusual strength spirit.
20 • 6

Really, you who hate the virtues and her followers, is not progressing at all in a strange way. Because diseased eyes and fear the sun, and nocturnal animals abhor the daily brightness, with the first dawn fall into stupor, looking in all their holes and the fear of hiding in the light of any quality cavities. Ostrzcie Syczcie and vilifying their damn language of noble people, szczerzcie teeth kąsajcie: sooner will break their teeth, than will you be able to bite.

21 • 4

Sage is not considered to be unworthy of any accidental gifts: not love of wealth, but will have them, not to the soul receives them, but to the house, not rejects those held, but stopped because he wants his virtue to provide more opportunities.

24 • 1

're wrong, if anyone thinks that giving is an easy thing, it is very difficult, if only separated gifts wisely and not squandered their chance and under the influence of caprice.




24 • 3


Where a man is, there is an opportunity to wyświadczania benefits.


24 • 5



argue that wealth is not good: if it was, would make people good. And since what is at the bad people can not be called good, I think that this name should not be used to wealth. I admit, moreover, that it is worth having, useful, and that provides significant comfort in life.
Posted by admin at 2:50 AM 0 comments

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Danglerly Skin On Throte

Ranking books listed - what should I read?

New people joining the group of investors, most cases at the beginning of his adventure with the exchange, start looking for some items books in which to discover the secrets of the game before them on the stock exchange. Although there are many schools of investing and there is no de facto only fair and proper manner, which will allow you to earn big money in the stock market, you'll have a credit balance it is worth reading a few books, if only to have fundamental knowledge in this area, which enables you to construct its own individual method of investing.




Some time ago I wrote about the action organized by the Association of Individual Investors (SII), which was to create a ranking of books exchange of all time. In the previews, this ranking will be using for both novice and experienced investors who will want to repeat, extended or systematize their knowledge about the stock market and investing.

Today Association of Individual Investors is presented charts said. It looks as follows:






About one should mention that if books that man did not read (and I ate a few items above) and so what makes a master is primarily practice. Nothing better does not create a good investor and does not allow him to gain unique knowledge and skills as experiencing at first hand (and wallet) of the total, complete cycle of a stock exchange. Highly recommended ...

Posted by admin at 7:56 AM 0 comments

Small Plants For Wedding Favors

Place No. 1 after tuning

the chronicler's duty it is worth noting that today Idea Bank has presented us with his recent proposal, which Deposit No. 1 , as the tuning percent.


is a place 3 monthly with daily market capitalization of interest (ie antybelkowa) at a fixed rate of at 5.23% per year, equivalent to 6.5% interest rate per year for regular deposit. For a single deposit, we can manipulate the amount from 1,000 to 14,000 PLN. As befits a product of the stable Czarnecki, establishment and maintenance investment is carried out via the Internet. Persons interested in should however be aware that applications must be submitted two days (money deposit up to 14 days).

Once all the details, I refer to the card product > click \u0026lt;
Posted by admin at 7:54 AM 0 comments

Monday, May 23, 2011

What Does Transfer Roller

help in the repayment of your loan ...

Got credit in a popular currency, or Swiss franc (CHF) ? The government and banks will help you repay this loan. They will do it in a very simple way - by setting the exchange rate is 15% below current market rates. Too beautiful to be true?


Not necessarily, but unfortunately, such miracles are not in Poland, although a total of close to, because in Hungary. Hungarian banks, in consultation with the government in Budapest, Hungary agreed to establish a maximum rate of exchange for repaying mortgage loans in this currency, at CHF / HUF = 180th It is about 15% lower rate than that currently in force in the market. The banks agreed to establish such a rate for borrowers having trouble repaying the loan .


The move is part of the government program aimed at reducing the ever increasing number of mortgage holders currency who have difficulty with their repayments and thus may lose their homes . Credit costs for the Hungarians, who have contracted loans in 2008, rose since then several times, mainly due to constantly drożejącym Frank. Say You can - as usual, the standard risk rate loan, you should be aware of each borrower.

And what is going on in our backyard? Well, the situation is not conducive to the EU. You can see again increased purchases of CHF, which still pushed CHF / PLN to a level of 3.20 - with a potential threat to re-test of 3.30.



Posted by admin at 11:28 AM 0 comments

Need Free Windowblinds

CORMAY - time to change the trend? Investing

Because a large number of queries about the company CORMAY I would like to share with you my technical look at what goes on in this piece of paper. Unfortunately, we have some worrying signals a bit perishable idyllic atmosphere of the shareholders of the company, who not so long ago able to enjoy the beautiful growth trend.



Day was a turning point in the session with the company on May 6, when trading opened on the new maxima: 19.27 PLN , but restatement of imported investors at the end of the level of PLN 17.09 . The next session is a continuation of bad moods, unfortunately, look at the technical lead on Friday to break the uptrend line. Today's session shows quite interesting behavior of the trading terms of support levels that were available. The first support, which maintained the levels of today's declines were historically appointed by the piercing peaks. In the intro talking about trading prices in the area 13 PLN . Closure of the quotations is the second important level of support from the perspective of zniesień fibo - 38.20% abolish wave of growth. Finally we draw the hammer today, at high speed, which in the short-term downward trend is evidenced by a depletion of supply and a possible rebound.




On subsequent sessions, looking down, Investors should consider the level tested today 13 PLN, while at the top of serious resistance to indicate the line breaks off growth trend, which will run tomorrow ~ 15.80 PLN .

Overall, despite rozrysowanej break the trend line, knowing the very definition of the growth trend, which is a sequence of wells and the higher peaks, we should not overemphasize the opportunities the company for further growth, because investors still managed to eventually quit over the last hole, but after the so-called driving. "Gang."

Posted by admin at 9:45 AM 0 comments

(monica Roccaforte 2010

everyone can ...

anyone can invest a little bit better or worse. It is worth a look, how they cope in the field ruled out. Once past a time when the Prime Minister of the Polish government has admitted publicly that the not have a bank account , and keeps your savings account mother, we waited a bit "better" times, where the "elite" is not only bank accounts but also trying (with varying degrees of success) to invest.


in what and to what effect invest the current government ministers and the Prime Minister himself? Small reconnaissance journalists in the subject did TVN CNBC. It turns out that we have a fairly typical Polish picture, ranging from those who do not invest because they have no resources for this, and ending with those who have the means (and it's quite substantial), and invest, but with varying degrees of success. One thing is certain - investment guru "among these people can not be found.


It is worth mentioning that investments investments, but there's nothing like life on the dash - as it turns out among the rulers also popular.

Posted by admin at 5:13 AM 0 comments

Sunday, May 22, 2011

Ghosts Of Md Eastern Shore

Cleave, nelétavost runners and systematics: the discovery of the moa birds, their biogeography and Richard Owen (Ratitae, part 1) May

Článek Revert the (runners, ostriches and relatives) is about more than promised article on this blog. Actually, I promise it so long that I do not remember (and I do not want to look for) when it happened the first time. Now comes the time in any event. The purpose of the article is to address the three fundamental questions: 1) internal příbuzenstvím between the runners and their relationship to all other birds, 2) their nelétavosti and 3) their role in the debate about the origin of birds themselves. In addition, a brief plan to include other issues such as eg biogeography. And because the materials from which to draw, there is a wealth of, probably would be better if instead of a single article will set a new series.

first Nomenclature

It is probably advisable to get rid of this issue at the beginning, when reading further complicate life. Ratitae is a group that traditionally includes a number of flightless birds living in the southern hemisphere continents, usually possessing huge physical dimensions. These include Ostrich, rheas, emus, cassowaries, kiwi and a few extinct taxa (birds moa, "elephant bird" Aepyornis ). Name Ratitae kurzivuji because it bears a phylogenetic definition (Gauthier & de Queiroz 2001), which, however, is a prime example of how to define nothing. In some phylogenetic hypothesis does not contain anything other than the two-ostrich; else again almost all non-passeriformní birds. Because part of this article will be debate among others about whether the ostrich, cassowaries, kiwi, emu and rhea are really natural (monophyletic) group, to which no other living bird is not, is phylogenetically defined name even useless - its definition is simple text monophyly requires change can only content. Here, by contrast, need for fixed content; about whether the group is made up of representatives of traditional and Revert nothing monophyletic, paraphyletic or polyphyletic, remain to be discuss. And as you probably no ornithologist when they hear the name Ratitae equips Gauthier and de Queirozovu definition, allow her to ignore the text.
Czech Revert is the name of "runners". But it is now also used this name for a group Palaeognathae , which in addition to Revert as such includes even tinamy. (A relative of Tina and Revert still be talking about.) You'll concepts of "runners" and " Ratitae / Revert" to use as a free interchangeable synonyms.
in ornithological literature, more than Ratitae Struthioniformes uses an alternative name, perhaps because it is podnější names of the other Birds orders (Galliformes, Passeriformes ,...). Its scope is not clear: sometimes the same range as Ratitae (eg Sibley & Ahlquist 1981), is sometimes limited to the two-ostrich (Struthio camelus ) and the other runners are promoted to their own 'laws'. Rhea (Rhea ) became the sole representative of the "order" Rheiformes, cassowaries and get emuové "order" Casuariformes etc. This approach, however preposterously inflated taxonomy: whether you say 'rhea (Rhea ), "nanduovití ( Rheidae) or "nanduové (Rheiformes), we always mean the same thing: about 8 distinct taxa seskupovaných into" types " Rhea americana (rhea Rhea) and Rhea pennata (Darwin's rhea). The creation of such names without substance apparently stems from a desire to make everything, what was in ornithological taxonomy're sure to fall in the "relationship between the Council" (interordinal Relationships). For these reasons, I use Struthioniformes: Unlike Ratitae book one can not be sure what to expect from him.

Living runners ( Ratitae , Struthioniformes sensu lato). From the position of top left clockwise: brown emu (Dromaius novaehollandiae ), Ostrich ( Struthio camelus), rhea Rhea (Rhea americana ), Southern Cassowary (Casuarius casuarius ), kiwi? South (Apteryx ? australis). (Sources: author's own photographs of Prague zoo [emu, ostrich - Spring 2010, rhea - Winter 2011], cassowaries - modified on jennifermarohasy.com, kiwi - modified from the info-rotorua.com)

second Inspiration

Runners are undoubtedly one of the strangest and most interesting groups of birds. The debate about the origin of birds, which are fully erupted immediately after the publication of Darwin's book The Origin of Species (Darwin 1859), played a prominent role. Flightless birds are plenty, but few of them that has caught the bird's body's modification of the plan so far as they are. This is obviously all very interesting, but what made me write something for runners, was a high school textbook Fundamentals of Biology (Kislinger et al. 1995). These are
many respects, a truly remarkable publications. Although the piece that I got their hands on enough pages had yellowed out to get the look of something that lay buried for fifty years somewhere on the land are Basics far, far younger - without at least one of reflected. When leafing through a man encounters with such pearls, which quickly led me to the shame that I am imperfect phylogeny of publications criticizing type amazing world of dinosaurs . Well, on purpose, knowing you know that "mushrooms" (meant the sea, which is usually called Sponges) evolved from the "element" already 2.5 billion years ago (!) and that "this line was blank at the end, even though its representatives living today? One would then almost did not recognize her from the line, which ends blindly ... You will find everything, including romerogramu where birds, Pterosaur, crocodiles and dinosaurs independently splits off from the "thekodontů (Fig. 32). Dvojdyšní, scaly and hatérie have the unenviable fate of the same romerogramu, designated as an "evolution of vertebrates, is not fit. There are also scripts Brontosaurus (Panebože! really this could mean that anyone?), Tail pulling the country and representing the group "veleještěrů. As far as birds and runners, we read that:
-----> relatives original small dinosaurs are birds (the jury)
  1. [...]

  2. runners are individually spin-off from small dinosaurs. Do not fly!

Kislinger et al. 1995:120
Wow. Let's see. The authors had to be very sure about when it submit to a cramming school students - there is an exclamation point, a. .. and all. No wonder that in such a reference will cause an enormous interest in the history of research of the runners, if you know of a single case where a similar hypothesis was proposed, with the author if any reasonable ornithologist laughed. What you mean, it will be apparent from the subsequent part of the article.

third History

Have Linnaeus (1758) knew the three representatives of the runners when the 10th edition of his Systema Naturae publications founded the modern biological nomenclature. Named after the Struthio camelus, Struthio casuarius and Struthio americanus. This first (the two-ostrich) are known by that name yet. The second taxon was two years later renamed Brisson Casuarius casuarius (casuar) and the third time to become Rhea americana or rhea. Another discovery quickly followed, when Latham in 1790 described a "casuar novoholandského. Around the same time, paradoxically, in New Zealand last remnants of dying birds moa (Dinornithidae), as up to the largest birds, the world has seen since the Upper Cretaceous oviraptorosaurů. Shaw (1813) from New Zealand described kiviho, the smallest and perhaps even nejpodivnějšího Revert, and three years later was "cassowaries novoholandský" renamed to emus (Dromaius taxon ). Then the foundations scheme runners received more or less normal appearance.

3.1 Identifying runners

first person to recognize that the ostrich, emu, rheas, cassowaries are among the birds living together was probably Merrem (1813). The classification of birds divided into two groups: Ratitae include the above-mentioned taxa (kiwi Merremovi not yet known, early on it was, however, included), Carinatae all other birds, characterized by a keel on the sternum for the insertion of swing muscles (which need flightless Revert). Lesson (1831) Merremovy Revert kiviho took over and instituted a new "family" name Nullipennes .* Both groups Ratitae Nullipennes and then summarized the "anormaux oiseaux" ("abnormal birds"). The revolution here - as in many other areas - came with Darwin (1859), which among others has shown that all the previous classification, often unconsciously, trying to approximate a genealogy, a common origin. Already in the first edition The Origin of Species Darwin runners at several points mentioned: kiviho called vestigial wings (Darwin 2007:508) and thus indicated that his ancestors were Glider same way as most other birds. This hypothesis is supported by, paradoxically, one of the largest and most influential opponents of Darwin, the comparative anatomist Richard Owen (who also introduced the name Dinosauria ). Owen, while protesting that the main mechanism of evolution should be a natural choice, with a common origin, but not a problem. It is therefore not surprising that actively involved in discussions about ancestors birds (Owen 1875) and also the debate about the origin and kinship Revert.

3.2 Owen and moa birds

At this point it is worth to note that Owen, in previous years, his research and taxonomy of birds moa. The fact that New Zealand had been inhabited by giant Revert, Owen persuaded a fragment of femur and the author of this finding then published (Owen 1839). Few of us are convinced, however, many scientists believed that the Pacific concentrate was too small to feed the population of flightless birds with similar dimensions. Owen have started to collect more bones and systematically compared with ostriches, emu, rhea and kiwi. He found that, like the kiwi - but unlike all other Revert - no moa at the femoral neck air vent, and that the body was so filled with bone marrow rather than pneumatizované. Kivimu MOA is similar in the fact that tarzometatarzus (feet) was only half as long as tibiotarzus; tibiotarzu contrast ratio of length to the femur (2-1) answered rather different ratitům (Anderson 1989). Four years after it was Owen with moa bird skeletal material for the first time confronted him definitively described under the name "Megalornis" Nova Zealandiae .** Very soon (description was still in print) has proven that prenomen Megalornis already absorbed, and Owen then changed the formal name for the moa Dinornis .
Systematics moa birds, however, quickly began to unravel. From the description D. novaezealandiae passed only a year when the first bird moa followed by a second, D. giganteus (Moa Island in the South, Owen 1844), and a few months (Owen 1844b) later and the third ( D. struthoides ), fourth (D didiformis ), fifth ( D. dromaeoides ) and sixth ( D. otidiformis ). For a complete list of all subtaxa dinornise present Worthy & Holdaway (2002), of the table shows that in the late 50th of the 19 century, the taxonomy dinornitidů confusing mess. Far more interesting, however, was the development of views on MOA relationship to other birds. Anderson (1989) states that the findings of more complete skeletons Owen was increasingly tempted to withdraw their initial conclusions about the nature dinornitidů runners. In particular, a combination of lack of a fourth toe, and beak-shaped pans and "crocodile cranium" led Owen (1848) to speculate about their close relationship with the drop (Otididae), which refused to end just because the shape of the front of the beak. In the same work even Owen (1848) described the taxon Palapteryx (now generally regarded as synonymous dinornise) for Revert (strutionida ") transition between kiwis and emus, while Dinornis have anatomy" so strange that the author does not assign gender to any known natural family of birds. Its location in order Struthionidae suggest anything more than deadlock development of wings and exaggerated foot development, arranged for movement on dry land. " (Owen 1848:8) About the same time conducted a heated debate about how the moa birds appeared. Owen (1844b) pointed out that the combined proportion of short and robust tarzometatarzu cervical vertebrae resembled rather than casuar kiviho or African ostrich, and even casuar chosen as a model, by which time the moa bird reconstructed:

first reconstruction Owen Bird MOA. The assumption that his posture resembled living cassowaries (pictured left), Owen concluded the height about 10 feet (about 3 meters). The illustrations, however, that much of the possession kasuářím body did not know ... (Source: Owen 1844: Plate XXX digitized here )

Worthy & Holdaway (2002) notes, however, that Owen seems to live casuar never seen before - otherwise it would have to know that the body is oriented horizontally much more than it is in its reconstruction. The same authors note that, paradoxically, Owen was right - cassowaries indeed of all living birds, the moa Revert like most, it's just that the normal, relaxed position looks very different than the illustration Owen. The front part synsakra (typically bird bones, resulting from adhesions between the pelvic bones, and sacral vertebrae) is parallel to the surface level, and thoracic vertebrae as well - this is even for all living except Revert kiviho (Worthy & Holdaway 2002:163).
Discussions also led to whether the moa birds have wings at all. It is a well known fact that all living Runners have wings, even compared létavým dwarf birds. With a little effort would go even build a sequence leading from the ostrich, whose wings are still prominent and actively used (for stabilization at or during the course of the run), up to kivimu for which there are almost no visible wings and 13 squadrons are reduced to the extent that - as aptly noted Matt Martyniuk - kompsognátidů resemble feathers. Where in this sequence fits me? Owen had already in 1843 noticed that the whole collection missing front leg bones - but because he knew that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, decided to use "argument by homology. Homology is a concept which is still recovering from biology předevolučních Ever meant something entirely different than today (which is essentially used interchangeably with the term "synapomorfie). Owen assumed that there is a relationship between the degree of pneumatization of the skeleton and the size of the wings. The ostrich and rhea, who are living on the wing developed best runners are pneumatizovány skull bones, spine, ribs, pelvis and sternum, femur, and ravens (Anderson 1989). Emus and cassowaries have smaller wings, air sacs still interfere with the femur. For kiviho air bags do not infringe on the body than the chest. If the relationship waylaid applied, it should have wings MOA between the state transition observed in kiviho and emus: Dinornis showed otvůrky Although the air sacs (pneumatic foramen) on the vertebrae, but not in the femur. The hypothesis seemed confirmed when in 1850, Owen received a fragment of an alleged humerus (arm bone). The ultimate solution to the issue appeared to dinornise wings in 1864. At Mo's was discovered skapulakorakoid (shoulder girdle), which did not carry the slightest sign of the glenoid: hole through which the scapula and humerus joints thus the entire forelimb. Anderson (1989) cites Owen, that in itself would not result complete absence of wings - but it would require a bizarre situation where the wing joined to the rest of the body only ligaments Owen (1866 :170-171) alone and rejected instead, it opined skapulakorakoid that the skeleton remained only as a lever for the respiratory muscles. Although
moa birds should go take a long time (only the beginning of the 20th century, the taxonomic history has grown so much that all details you can actually afford to go just a book) and have them in series will return - as the occasion Cracraftových systematic revisions - the sub-heading I will conclude with the first hypothesis of paleogeography. In the mid 19th century, of course, not known to move continents, and therefore all the more surprising that it was the Revert and among them particularly birds Moa, who already at that time caused some scientists to speculate about such mechanisms. Owen initially speculated about the "mighty wave unstable and constantly shifting the earth's crust, which has entered the remains dinornitidům similar birds throughout the Pacific to North America and the sole remnant should be just New Zealand (Anderson, 1989:41). He later left the speculation, with the ancestors of birds Moa in New Zealand just flew (Owen 1879 - on the same site by the way the author criticizes and rejects the hypothesis of the origin of birds Saurian) before, however, inspired several authors to the hypothesis about the entire southern continent, very similar to what we now call Gondwana. For the first time it probably gave Hooker (1853) and elaborated in detail by Forbes (1893). According to him, was once the southern hemisphere oceans, all ground to a depth of 3.7 km land, which connected Africa, Antarctica and South America into a single supercontinent. Although this view proved to be correct (and the geographical distribution of key runners), in its time course, such support did not record. Forbes also believed that ratites including dinornitidů represent a natural group, in its classification of them, however, has not such an exceptional place as Merry and grouped them together with hrabavými (McDowell 1948).

3.3 Views on the origin and kinship in the years 1859-1868 Revert

It was probably just Owen's research on bird moa, which it in 1866 inspired an unusual hypothesis. In their classification, all the while runners into one group, as was the custom Merremových times, but also by the view according to which the ostrich (Struthio ) more closely related dropovitým (Otididae) than the rest of the group, while the MOA ( Dinornis ) and kiwi (Apteryx ) are closer to tabonovitým (Megapodidae). Thus formulated the hypothesis that a total of bizarre, but otherwise anticipates "Revert to fight", which will continue until 21 century. If are indeed the main characteristic of runners stunted wings and nelétavost, as he wrote Owen (1866b), what prevents these characters gain various groups of birds in a long time span independently of each other?
Huxley, who - unlike Owen - inclined to Darwin's theory of evolution immediately after its publication, had the whole thing exactly the opposite view. Living Revert regarded as a remnant of ancient, once-great groups of birds, who lost years, but never becomes. Until then it occurred Glider, karinátní birds. In January 1868 letter to Huxley in the German evolutionary biologist Ernst Haeckel wrote:
In scientific work the main thing just now about Which I Am Engaged with a revision of the Dinosauria - with an eye to the Descendenz Theorie ! The Road from Reptiles to Birds is the way of Dinosauria to the Ratitae - The Bird 'phylum' WAS Struthious, and Wings Grew out of Fore rudimentary limbs. You See That Among Other Things I have been reading Ernst Haeckel's Morphologie .

TH Huxley, quoted in Switek 2010:255
Huxley therefore considered that the front legs of runners representing the "atrophied" remains of a once functional wings, as proposed by Owen - ostriches and their relatives have in this form to inherit from the dinosaur (or dinosaur like) ancestors. At that time, but Archaeopteryx and anatomical analysis of the various authors show that the whole scenario looked different. Bavarian "prapták" was in many respects more primitive than runners (Teeth in the jaws, a long tail bone), and yet had no wings létavými comparable to modern birds. Huxley - Darwin as well - but he showed a great interest and archeopteryga his hypothesis ratitních ancestors of birds and spoil the future. As shown Switek (2010), in the author's idea of \u200b\u200bthe runners have evolved from small dinosaurs svrchnojurského kompsognáta type (which Huxley later removed from dinosaurs, erected for him taxon "Compsognatha at the same level in both dinosaurs and the summarized group taxon Ornithoscelida) and its extension "Rudimentary forelegs" gave rise to karinátům. Huxley (1868) expressed their distrust archeopteryga the following sentence:
In many RESPECTS, Archaeopteryx is more remote from the boundary-line Between Birds and Reptiles Than Some living Ratitae are.
Huxley 1868:248
Darwin's theory was launched at the same time other research programs, including the creation of new classifications, which reflect as closely as possible genealogical relationships. Parker (1864) as Revert to support monophyly, based on pterylografie (Organization of feathers). In the same work as the first author advocated a close relationship between the runners and South American tinamami. Previously, these birds - who, unlike runners and fly to the keel of the sternum are - associated more with hrabavými (Lesson 1831). Parker deeply ahead of its time: Taxon connecting the runner and is now called tinamy Palaeognathae . Rather
fad phylogenetic hypothesis represented by a short Note outlined Cope (1867). According to the origin of runners (and / or penguins) has nothing to do with wild birds and is instead primarily flightless descendants of dinosaurs.
Typically paleognátní bony palate (palatal-pterygoid complex "sensu Gussekloo) illustrated the interpretive drawing of skull rhea when viewed from below. (A) mouldboard bone, (B) palatine bone, (C) rostrum parasfenoidní / kultriformní the neck (D) bazipterygoidní ness (E) wing bone (F) bone square. (Source: Gussekloo & Bout, 2005: Figure 2)

the same photograph of the skull excised the two-ostrich (Struthio camelus ) . It is a famous female ostrich Veronica, who - after a happy reunion with Mike'm Taylor - featured in a series of posts on SV-POW, whence comes this photo and where you can see and its 3D version. Note the broad bone radličných that prevent reconciliation and pterygoid palatal bone with parasfenoidním rostro. (Source: svpow.wordpress.com)

Parker Revert spent on research (see eg Parker 1866), his conclusions about their kinship tinamám however, overshadowed the first explicit evolutionary classification of birds, stood again for the Huxley (1867). He, like Parker noted the similarities between the bone floor runners and Tina - Anatomical features of the floor was all based his classification of birds, and the type shared between these two groups Huxley called dromeognátní (dromaeognathous palate). As described Gussekloo (2000), the original definition of the character and include) the absence of contact between the rear end of the bone plate and parasfenoidním rostro (= rostroparasfenoidem, kultriformním process - see above illustration), b) the absence of contact between the front end of the wing bone (pterygoid) and parasfenoidním rostro c) strong bazipterygoidní salient. Over time, the definition and modified, and some authors even the very existence of a specific paleognátního or "dromeognátního" floor rejected due to excessive diversity that this element of the runners reported (McDowell 1948 for a discussion about the validity of letters, see also Gussekloo & Zweers 1999). Correspondence between dromeognátním floor runners and Tina stood Huxley, in any event prior to the problem: while this character combining both groups, the keel of the sternum and the ability to fly to the contrary, it included tinamy Merremových karinátů. The author finally decided to respect the traditional division and its classification introduced three "sub": Saururae archeopterygem as the sole representative Ratitae with traditional ingredients and Carinatae covering all remaining birds. There is evident, inter alia, that the Huxley kept the back door of his hypothesis on the origin of birds ratitním Most other authors would probably not hesitate to connect with Karin Revert to one group to another archeopteryga sit, as it did before Huxley Haeckel (1866).
is most appreciated in retrospect Huxley's classification karinátů, consisting in detecting four different types of bony palate, which is reflected in it as "advice" Dromaeognathae, Schizognathae, and Desmognathae Aegithognathae. Tinamy figure at the beginning karinátů as the only representatives of the "Order" and he Dromaeognathae Huxley (1867:426) recognized that "the bridge struthious Carinae of all birds". In the Revert Huxley recognized the five unnamed groups: ostrich, rhea, kiwi and moa and had four of them for themselves (which shows that Huxley's arguments failed to convince Owen of kinship kiviho and dinornitidů). Emus and cassowaries, then shared a fifth group. As the show's future, this volume remains the only lasting security in a changing taxonomy Revert. Huxley's classification of birds in any event, opens a new era: the Sibley & Ahlquist (1972) showed that in the history of avian systematics since it runs clear line drawn across Fürbringera, Gadowa and Wetmore to today's "default" in the various classifications Checklist.


* standardized suffix "-idaea 'for all zoological names" at the family " introduced to the so-called stricklandský code in 1843, for an overview of the historical development level nomenclature see de Queiroz (2005). ** Sample

similar phenomenon - although today it is a fundamental rule of zoological nomenclature, the "generic" name must consist of a single word without hyphens and accents, in the 1 19th century such universal agreement even existed.

Sources:
Posted by admin at 1:30 PM 0 comments
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)