# Most recent common ancestor of all living birds **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [July 15, 2014, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234 "2014-07-15T23:10:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/81 "2017-02-09T22:55:20Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > No, I never said that, I said in ancient times the word “animal” did not include “fish”. Please provide a cite. In what language? Whose classification? What organisms did the word “animal” encompass? What organisms did the term “fish” include? Aristotle’s _History of Animals_, written around 350 BC, includes fish along with all the other animals. I have never heard of any such distinction being made. ---
**Author:** ![Weisshund](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ba8739/32.png) [@Weisshund](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weisshund)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/82 "2017-02-09T23:01:13Z")
> [@Ludovic](#): > > Hitler? ? I think you’d have to agree that he breaths like a cadaver, and nothing like a bird ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/83 "2017-02-09T23:34:04Z")
On the contrary, I believe that you’ll find that the vast majority of birds throughout history breathe in exactly the same way as Hitler. ---
**Author:** ![dtilque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dtilque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtilque)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/84 "2017-02-10T00:34:25Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > I don’t think anyone thinks that turtles or alligators are lizards. > > Oddly enough, however, snakes _are_ lizards, taxonomically speaking. There’s a rather large fraction (perhaps even a majority) of the population that thinks that salamanders and newts are lizards. As far as the fish/animal thing, perhaps it’s a reference to the fact that when the Church forbade eating of animal flesh on Fridays and certain other days, they didn’t include fish in this prohibition. ---
**Author:** ![Darwins\_Finch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darwins_finch/32/20304_2.png) [@Darwins\_Finch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darwins_Finch)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/85 "2017-02-10T00:39:52Z")
> [@Weisshund](#): > > Chicken also = Dinosaur remnant (right way to say it?) Dinosaur descendant ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/86 "2017-02-10T00:46:53Z")
I suspect that the majority of the population doesn’t think of salamanders and newts at all. But salamanders obviously aren’t a type of lizard, anyway: They’re a type of elemental. ---
**Author:** ![dtilque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dtilque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtilque)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/87 "2017-02-10T00:53:19Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > But salamanders obviously aren’t a type of lizard, anyway: They’re a type of elemental. That’s only to D&D players. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/88 "2017-02-10T02:03:12Z")
> [@dtilque](#): > > As far as the fish/animal thing, perhaps it’s a reference to the fact that when the Church forbade eating of animal flesh on Fridays and certain other days, they didn’t include fish in this prohibition. The division wasn’t between “animals” and fish, it was between warm-blooded and cold-blooded animals. You couldn’t eat mammals or birds, but you could eat fish, reptiles, and frogs, plus crustaceans, insects, and mollusks. Even then, the boundaries were flexible: at times it was allowed to eat water-dwelling beaver and capybara on Fridays. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/89 "2017-02-10T02:31:27Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > Linneaus of course never defined dinosaurs. And he defined . . . rhinoceroses as rodents, Oh, and they’re not? > **[Horned gopher](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horned_gopher)** > > Epigaulus > Horned gophers are extinct rodents from the genus Ceratogaulus, a member of the extinct fossorial rodent clade Mylagaulidae. Ceratogaulus is the only known rodent genus with horns, and is the smallest known horned mammal. Ceratogaulus lived from the late Miocene to the early Pliocene epochs. > The horned gopher had two horns; these were large (in comparison to body size), paired, and originated from the nasal bones. Horned gophers are the smallest known horned mammals and the only kno... ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 7:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/90 "2017-02-10T07:11:22Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > But salamanders obviously aren’t a type of lizard, anyway: They’re a type of elemental. > [@dtilque](#): > > That’s only to D&D players. …and [St. Augustine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salamanders_in_folklore_and_legend#Classical_lore:_Pliny.2C_the_Talmud.2C_and_Augustine)… ---
**Author:** ![Darren\_Garrison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darren_garrison/32/92_2.png) [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 11:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/91 "2017-02-10T11:20:36Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > I suspect that the majority of the population doesn’t think of salamanders and newts at all. And when they do, it is mostly at night. Mostly. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/92 "2017-02-10T15:26:55Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Why would losing teeth be an advantage? > [@Folacin](#): > > Because the comet killed off all of the dino-dentists? > > Seriously, though, teeth rot and/or fall-out, limiting the ability to eat. A beak seems a simpler solution. Although why more creatures don’t have beaks instead of teeth speaks against that idea. > > **Or for whatever reason, the toothless bird was actually better able to survive the comet strike.** I appear to have found an answer to my question from two years ago, and **Folacin** is vindicated: birds don’t have teeth because the ancestors of birds at the time of the asteroid strike eat seeds and nuts. That meant that they were still able to eat in the immediate aftermath of the asteroid strike, because there were enough seeds and nuts for them to survive. Similar bird-like critters that still had teeth depended on hunting little animals as their food source. The supply of little animals was greatly diminished in the immediate aftermath of the asteroid strike, so bird-like critters with teeth died out, from starvation. [Why birds don’t have teeth: asteroid strike left seed-eating dinosaurs at top of pecking order](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/04/21/why-birds-dont-have-teeth-asteroid-strike-left-seed-eating-dinos/) > [@](#): > > If you have ever wondered why birds do not have teeth, science may finally have provided an answer. > > A new hypothesis suggests that the ancestors of modern birds managed to survive the asteroid impact which finally wiped out the dinosaurs because they had beaks, and so could eat seed. > > While meat-eating flying reptiles, like pterodactyls, struggled to find food following the catastrophic strike at the end of the Cretaceous Period, small bird-like dinosaurs rose to the top of the pecking order with their shell-cracking abilities. > … > Widespread vegetation loss would have robbed many plant-eating animals of their food source, and in turn large predators would have gone hungry. > > But hardy seeds may have sustained the small toothless birds until the world began to recover. > > “There were bird-like dinosaurs with teeth up until the end of the Cretaceous, where they all died off very abruptly,” Mr Larson said. > > “Some groups of beaked birds may have been able to survive the extinction event because they were able to eat seeds.” ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/93 "2017-02-10T15:58:05Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > 1. There is evidence that at least some dinosaurs were [mesotherms](http://science.sciencemag.org/content/344/6189/1268) (partially warm-blooded and [many had feathers as well including the mighty T-Rex to help with their internal thermoregulation](http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/newly-discovered-fossils-hint-all-dinosaurs-had-feathers/)). Soon, soon, I will have proof of my theory that Tyrannosaurus rex was covered in fuzzy yellow down like a baby duck. They laughed at me at the Academy. Fools! I’ll destroy them all. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/94 "2017-02-10T16:11:37Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > I appear to have found an answer to my question from two years ago, and **Folacin** is vindicated: birds don’t have teeth because the ancestors of birds at the time of the asteroid strike eat seeds and nuts. That meant that they were still able to eat in the immediate aftermath of the asteroid strike, because there were enough seeds and nuts for them to survive. > > Similar bird-like critters that still had teeth depended on hunting little animals as their food source. The supply of little animals was greatly diminished in the immediate aftermath of the asteroid strike, so bird-like critters with teeth died out, from starvation. > > [Why birds don’t have teeth: asteroid strike left seed-eating dinosaurs at top of pecking order](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/04/21/why-birds-dont-have-teeth-asteroid-strike-left-seed-eating-dinos/) I can’t access the original article, but it seems to be an extreme stretch to me. Four main lineages of birds seem to have survived the Cretaceous extinction event: the group including tinamous and large flightless birds; ducks/geese; chicken-like birds; and the ancestor of the Neoaves. The survivors in the first three groups could well have included seedeaters, but the surviving lineages in the latter group are believed to be have been shorebird-like and fed on aquatic life. Plenty of insect-eating lineages of small animals survived the extinction event, including some mammals, lizards, and snakes. There’s no reason to believe that the lineages of birds surviving the extinction event had to be exclusively seedeaters. ---
**Author:** ![Darren\_Garrison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darren_garrison/32/92_2.png) [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/95 "2017-02-10T16:12:27Z")
> [@](#): > > I appear to have found an answer to my question from two years ago, and **Folacin** is vindicated: birds don’t have teeth because the ancestors of birds at the time of the asteroid strike eat seeds and nuts. That meant that they were still able to eat in the immediate aftermath of the asteroid strike, because there were enough seeds and nuts for them to survive. > > Similar bird-like critters that still had teeth depended on hunting little animals as their food source. The supply of little animals was greatly diminished in the immediate aftermath of the asteroid strike, so bird-like critters with teeth died out, from starvation. Hm. I’ve been digging through the dope archives a bit recently (which is why DrDeth’s comment on fish was so fresh at hand) and remember [this](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15407140&postcount=55) post about the birds that made it past the katey being shore birds (which didn’t all eat nuts and seeds.) ---
**Author:** ![DesertDog](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/desertdog/32/11503_2.png) [@DesertDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DesertDog)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/96 "2017-02-10T17:57:06Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > [Dinosaur Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dinosaur) > > efinition of dinosaur > 1 > : any of a group (Dinosauria) of extinct often very large chiefly terrestrial carnivorous or herbivorous reptiles of the Mesozoic era > 2 > : any of various large extinct reptiles (as ichthyosaurs ) other than the true dinosaurs > > [DINOSAUR | definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary](http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/dinosaur) > dinosaur > noun [C] US ​ /ˈdɑɪ·nəˌsɔr/ > ​ > a reptile (= cold-blooded animal), some types of which were extremely large, that stopped existing a very long time ago The [Perfect Master](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1155/pterosaurs-arent-considered-true-dinosaurs-why-not) speaks. ---
**Author:** ![Darren\_Garrison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darren_garrison/32/92_2.png) [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/97 "2017-02-10T18:59:21Z")
Looking at the diagram at the top of [the page](https://www.geol.umd.edu/~tholtz/G104/lectures/104eumani.html) linked in the post that I linked in post #95 (going over sentence so far–yep, I _think_ that works) reminds me of the strength and weakness of cladistics. The strength is that it can define (our best guesses about) real evolutionary relationships. The weakness is that it can be very, very complex. For example, start with [the bird article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird) on Wikipedia and start clicking on the upwards clade links in the right hand boxes. Saying that “birds are dinosaurs” is making it very, very simple. What we call “birds” are the clade Neornithes, which is in the clade Ornithurae, which is in the clade Ornithuromorpha, which is in the clade Euornithes, which is in the clade Ornithothoraces, which is in the clade Pygostylia, which is in the clade Avebrevicauda, which is in the clade Euavialae, which is in the clade Avialae, which is in the clade Paraves (which is finally the level that includes what are traditionally called dinosaurs.) You can potentially take any novel trait and define a clade for the originator of that trait and all its descendants. It isn’t simpler if you try to modify the Linnean system to be more precise on evolutionary relationships–then you have to [add new sub- and super- division](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_%28biology%29#An_example_from_zoology)s of taxonomic levels, such as superclass, subclass, infraclass, and parvclass (and similar at other taxonomic levels.) The only choices with cladistics, Lennean taxonomy, or any other naming system is to make it either very complex and fine-detailed or simple and and poorly detailed. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/98 "2017-02-10T19:20:20Z")
> [@Darren\_Garrison](#): > > For example, start with [the bird article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird) on Wikipedia and start clicking on the upwards clade links in the right hand boxes. Saying that “birds are dinosaurs” is making it very, very simple. What we call “birds” are the clade Neornithes, which is in the clade Ornithurae, which is in the clade Ornithuromorpha, which is in the clade Euornithes, which is in the clade Ornithothoraces, which is in the clade Pygostylia, which is in the clade Avebrevicauda, which is in the clade Euavialae, which is in the clade Avialae, which is in the clade Paraves (which is finally the level that includes what are traditionally called dinosaurs.) You can potentially take any novel trait and define a clade for the originator of that trait and all its descendants. This is true, but trivial: Trees are inherently built out of sub-trees, and sub-trees, being trees, are built out of sub-trees, recursively, only bottoming out when you get down to individual leaves, which, in this case, are species, extinct and extant. Naming every tiny little tree the big tree is made out of is up to you; my point is, that’s tedious, not complex. There’s a difference. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/99 "2017-02-10T19:52:14Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > This is true, but trivial: Trees are inherently built out of sub-trees, and sub-trees, being trees, are built out of sub-trees, recursively, only bottoming out when you get down to individual leaves, which, in this case, are species, extinct and extant. Naming every tiny little tree the big tree is made out of is up to you; my point is, that’s tedious, not complex. There’s a difference. No, it’s complex. The tree in this case is not fractal; the branches can be of very different lengths and branching patterns. Of course, giving every single branching point a name would be simple and tedious. But even cladistics doesn’t seek to label every single branching point. Deciding which branches to label, and which to just include in the same named clade, is a complex matter. ---
**Author:** ![Darwins\_Finch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darwins_finch/32/20304_2.png) [@Darwins\_Finch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darwins_Finch)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234/100 "2017-02-11T00:25:43Z")
> [@DesertDog](#): > > The [Perfect Master](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1155/pterosaurs-arent-considered-true-dinosaurs-why-not) speaks. And my personal follow-up: [Why Pterosaurs aren't Dinosaurs - Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports - Straight Dope Message Board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=132981) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-recent-common-ancestor-of-all-living-birds/693234.md?page=6)