New Study Proposes Reorganization Of Dinosaur Family Tree; Dinosaur Evolution Isn't What Was Taught In Classrooms?

By Jeff Thompson - 23 Mar '17 18:58PM
  • T rex named Trix at Naturalis Museum of Leiden
  • (Photo : Dean Mouhtaropoulos/Getty) If the new studies are accepted, it will add more classification to Dinosaur Family Tree.

A recent study suggests a total change in the dinosaur family tree from what learned until date. The study took an analysis of thousands of fossils and arrived a conclusion that the 130-year-old dinosaur family tree should be reshaped to reflect the changes. It says many of the classes such as Tyrannosaurus Rex, Saurischia might go for a change in the tree.

The current classification system of Dinosaur Family goes in two distinct categories according to how the pelvic bones are structured. The bird-hipped were called as Ornithischia, and they were considered to be vegetarians. The reptile-hipped are called as Saurischia, and it is further classified as herbivores and carnivores. "We need to reshape the current family tree," said Matthew Baron from the University of Cambridge, who led the study. They study also suggested renaming some classification to meet the latest findings. For instance, the Theropoda branch must be shifted towards Ornithischia as it is more related to the group than Saurischia, it believed. This means that as part of Theropoda, T-Rex also would get classification change.

Saurischia is still part of Sauropoda like Brontosaurus. Interestingly Herrerasauridae - the carnivorous also starts from Saurischia. The recent study also details how the dinosaur evolution happened. It suggests that the primary dinosaurs were omnivores and walked using two legs that were small. The study says that the dinosaurs were spotted 247 million years back - approximately 10 million years prior than what followed by standard theory.

However, the researchers have shown an open mind on the results and asked other researchers to check their results and make a conclusion at the end. "The new conclusions are appreciable, but needs analysis before following," said Stephen Brusatte, a reputed paleontologist at the University of Edinburgh. He said the classification is not based on new fossils but according to the specimens currently available. "It will be great if they are right, but when there is something presented against the existing there should have the burden of proof," He continued.

Fun Stuff

Join the Conversation

The Next Read

Real Time Analytics