Feathers and fangs: What is Hesperornithoides?

Answer:
Hesperornithoides miessleri (Figs. 1, 2; Late Jurassic, Wyoming, USA; Hartman et al. 2019; WYDICE-DML-001 (formerly WDC DML-001)) is the newest fanged anchiornithid theropod dinosaur to be described, compared and nested (Figs. 3, 4).

From the Hartman et al. abstract
“Limb proportions firmly establish Hesperornithoides as occupying a terrestrial, non-volant lifestyle. Our phylogenetic analysis emphasizes extensive taxonomic sampling and robust character construction, recovering the new taxon most parsimoniously as a troodontid close to Daliansaurus, Xixiasaurus, and Sinusonasus.” [see Figure 3, note: Xixiasaurus is not listed in their cladogram].

“All parsimonious results support the hypothesis that each early paravian clade was plesiomorphically flightless, raising the possibility that avian flight originated as late as the Late Jurassic or Early Cretaceous.” [this is an old hypothesis dating back to the discovery of Late Jurassic Archaeopteryx in the 1860s and it remains a well-established paradigm.]

Figure 1. Published reconstruction of Hesperornithes from Hartman et al. 2019, to scale with Caihong, a similar, though smaller, taxon and Sinusonasus, another sister based on very few bones, but look at that canine fang!

Figure 1. Published reconstruction of Hesperornithes from Hartman et al. 2019, to scale with Caihong, a similar, though smaller, taxon preserved with a complete set of bird-like feathers, and Sinusonasus, another sister based on very few bones, but look at that canine fang!

The cladogram by Hartman et al. 2017
(Fig. 3) is similar to one published by Lefevre et al. 2017 in nesting birds (Avialae) as outgroups to the Dromaeosauridae + Troodontidae, the opposite of the large reptile tree (LRT, 1540 taxa, subset Fig. 4).

Today
we’ll compare the Hartman et al. nesting (Fig. 3) to the one recovered by the LRT (Fig. 4).

Figure 2. Tentative restoration of the skull of Hesperornithes alongside to scale skull of Caihong. The maxillae are similar and both have a distinct fang.

Figure 2. Tentative restoration of the skull of Hesperornithes alongside to scale skull of Caihong. The maxillae are similar and both have a distinct fang.

The Hartman et al. cladogram
(Fig. 3) nested Hesperornithoides with Sinusonasus (IVPP V 11527, Xu and Wang 2004; Early Cretacaceous, Fig. 1), as in the LRT (Fig. 4).

The Hartman et al. cladogram included several taxa not previously included in LRT, 1540 taxa, subset Fig. 4), so I added five to the LRT.

  1. Hesperornithoides (Fig. 1) – sister to Sinusonasus in both cladograms
  2. Sinusonasus (Fig. 1) – sister to Hesperornithoides in both cladograms
  3. Daliansaurus (Fig. 5) – nearby outgroup taxon in both cladograms
  4. Alma (Fig. 6) – more distant outgroup taxon in both cladograms
  5. Protarchaeopteryx (Fig. 7) – primitive oviraptorid in both cladograms
Figure 3. Cladogram published by Hartman et al. 2019, colors added to more or less match those in the subset of the LRT (Fig. 4), a distinctly different topology. Here birds and troodontids/anchirornithids are polypheletic.

Figure 3. Cladogram published by Hartman et al. 2019, colors added to more or less match those in the subset of the LRT (Fig. 4), a distinctly different topology. Here birds and troodontids/anchirornithids are polypheletic.

Issues arise in the Hartman et al. cladogram

  1. Birds arise from the proximal outgroup, Oviraptorosauria
  2. Archaeopteryx is not in the lineage of modern and Cretaceous birds
  3. Anchiornithid troodontids are scattered about
  4. Balaur nests with birds
  5. Microraptors and basal tyrannosaurs nest with dromaeosaurids
  6. The outgroup taxon in figure 3 is: Compsognathus; in the SuppData: Dilophosaurus. Neither is a Triassic theropod.
  7. Running the .nex file results in thousands of MPTs (most parsimonious trees), even when pruned down to well-known, largely articulated taxa. Their phylogenetic analysis included 700 characters (and that means hundreds of less-than-complete taxa) tested against 501 taxa. Changing the outgroup taxon to Sinocalliopteryx resulted in far fewer MPTs, but see here for more validated outgroup taxa. Hartman et al. reported, “The analysis resulted in >99999 most parsimonious trees.” Essentially useless… and they knew that attempting to publish their report.
Figure 4. Subset of the LRT focusing on the theropod-bird transition, distinctly different than in Hartman et al. 2019. Here in a fully resolved cladogram, birds and anchiornithids are monophyletic. Taxon inclusion resolves cladistic issues raised by Hartman et al.

Figure 4. Subset of the LRT focusing on the theropod-bird transition, distinctly different than in Hartman et al. 2019. Here in a fully resolved cladogram, birds and anchiornithids are monophyletic. Taxon inclusion resolves cladistic issues raised by Hartman et al.

By contrast,
in the LRT (Fig. 4):

  1. The cladogram is fully resolved (1 MPT).
  2. Birds, including Archaeopteryx and 12 other Solnhofen bird-like taxa arise from anchiornithids, which arise from troodontids (including dromaeosaurids), which arise from Ornitholestes and kin, which arise from the CNJ79 specimen attributed to Compsognathus and kin (including therzinosaurs + oviraptorids), which arises from the holotype Compsognathus and kin (including ornithomimosaurs and tyrannosaurs).
  3. Double killler-clawed Balaur nests with Velociraptor, not with birds.
  4. The outgroup taxa in the LRT include the Triassic dinosaurs, Herrerasaurus, Tawa and a long list going back to Silurian jawless fish.
  5. Hesperornithoides (Fig. 1) and Sinusonasus (Fig. 1) nest with another anchiornithid with fewer teeth and one elongated canine, Caihong (Fig. 1) and a long list of other shared traits. Caihong has a full set of bird-like feathers, so less well-preserved Hesperornithoides likely shared this trait. Caihong nests closer to Archaeopteryx in the Hartman et al. cladogram.
Figure 6. Daliansaurus reconstructed from the original tracing.

Figure 5. Daliansaurus reconstructed from the original tracing. In the Hartman et al. cladogram, this taxon nests close to Hesperornithoides. In the LRT it nests at the base of the Hesperornithes clade.

A few suggestions for Hartman et al. 2019

  1. Build your tree with fewer, but more complete taxa in order to achieve full resolution
  2. Choose a plesiomorphic Triassic theropod or dinosaur outgroup for your outgroup
  3. Practice more precision in your reconstructions. Do not freehand anything. Do not add bones where bones are not known.
  4. Try not to borrow cladograms (like the TWiG dataset) from others, but build your own, especially when the results are so demonstrably poor (>99,999 MPTs)
  5. Include both Compsognathus specimens. They are different from one another and, apparently, key to understanding interrelationships.
  6. Include as many of the 13 Solnhofen birds and pre-birds that you can and show reconstructions so we know you understand the materials. Checking individual scores is like going to Indiana Jones’ government warehouse. Note how the Solnhofen birds split apart and nest at the bases of all the derived bird clades in the LRT (Fig. 4).
FIgure 5. Alma reconstructed and restored (gray).

FIgure 6. Alma reconstructed and restored (gray).

Hartman et al. report, 
“We follow the advice of Jenner (2004) that authors should attempt to include all previously proposed characters and terminal taxa, while explicitly justifying omissions. To this end we have attempted to include every character from all TWiG papers published through 2012, with the goal to continually add characters.”

As their results demonstrate, such efforts are a waste of time.
Pertinent taxa and suitable outgroup taxa were overlooked. The goal is full resolution and understanding. If incomplete taxa and too many characters prevent you from reaching this goal, start pruning, or start digging into the data. There is only one tree topology in Deep Time. Our job is to find it.

Figure 9. Protarchaeopteryx traced in situ, reconstructed a bit and the skull of Incisivosaurus for comparison.

Figure 7. Protarchaeopteryx traced in situ, reconstructed a bit and the skull of Incisivosaurus for comparison. This taxon nests with oviraptorids in both cladograms, basal to Archaeopteryx and birds in Hartman et al. 2019. Not sure if that is all the tail there is, or if more is buried or missing. Probably the latter, according to phylogenetic bracketing.

I sincerely hope this review of Hartman et al. 2019
is helpful. The LRT confirms their nesting of Hesperornithoides with Sinusonasus. Outside of that the two cladograms diverge radically and only one of these two competing cladograms is fully resolved with a gradual accumulation of traits at every node.


References
Hartman S, Mortimer M, Wahl WR, Lomax DR, Lippincott J and Lovelace DM 2019. A new paravian dinosaur from the Late Jurassic of North America supports a late acquisition of avian flight. PeerJ 7:e7247 DOI 10.7717/peerj.7247
Lefèvre U, Cau A, Cincotta A,  Hu D-Y, Chinsamy A,Escuillié F and Godefroit P 2017. A new Jurassic theropod from China documents a transitional step in the macrostructure of feathers. The Science of Nature, 104: 74 (advance online publication). doi:10.1007/s00114-017-1496-y
Xu X and Wang X-l 2004. A New Troodontid (Theropoda: Troodontidae) from the Lower Cretaceous Yixian Formation of Western Liaoning, China”. Acta Geologica Sinica 78(1): 22-26.

wiki/Sinusonasus
wiki/Troodontidae
wiki/Hesperornithoides
wiki/Xixiasaurus
wiki/Anchiornthidae
wiki/Origin_of_birds

Advertisements

Bird neck length correlated to leg length

Böhmer, et al. 2019 report,
“In contrast with mammals, the length of the cervical vertebral column increases as body size increases and, thus, body size does not constrain neck length in birds. Indeed, neck length scales isometrically with total leg length suggesting a correlated evolution between both modules.”

Unfortunately,
Böhmer et al. employed an invalid cladogram (Hackett et al. 2008) based on genes, not traits. So their cladogram wrongly nests flamingoes with grebes, for instance.

Figure 1. The flamingo, Phoenicopterus, compared to the grebe, Rollandia. DNA says these two are more closely related than any other tested taxa. The LRT reports they are not related.

Figure 1. The flamingo, Phoenicopterus, compared to the grebe, Rollandia. DNA says these two are more closely related than any other tested taxa. The LRT reports they are not related.

We learned earlier
that basal birds, no matter their size, had relatively long neck and legs (Fig. 2) in the LRT, a trait-based analysis. Small birds with shorter legs and necks are derived neotonous clades, retaining chick dimensions and proportions into adulthood. That happened over and over and over again in the large reptile tree (LRT, 1470 taxa, subset Fig. 2).

Figure 4. Subset of the LRT focusing on the crown bird clade. Brown taxa are all long-legged. Neotony produces the smaller, shorter-legged, arboreal taxa.

Figure 2. Earlier subset of the LRT focusing on the crown bird clade. Brown taxa are all long-legged. Neotony produces the smaller, shorter-legged, arboreal taxa. This is the cladogram Böhmer et al. should have used. The pattern is more obvious when the family tree is valid.

We looked at
this cladogram of bird leg length (Fig. 2) a year ago here.


References
Böhmer C, Plateau O, Cornette R and Abourachid A 2019. Correlated evolution of neck length and leg length in birds. Royal Society open science 6: 181588. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.181588
Hackett SJ et al. 2008. A phylogenomic study of birds reveals their evolutionary history. Science 320, 1763–1768. (doi:10.1126/science. 1157704)

Ambopteryx enters the LRT…

…between
Yi qi and Scansoriopteryx (Fig. 1) and it is midway in size between the two. There is no controversy with that nesting.

We looked at the controversies
surrounding Ambopteryx earlier here. No one has reported a ‘stylifom’ bone in Scansoriopteryx nor any other scansoriopterygids (other than Yi qi, by mistake).

Figure 1. Ambopteryx nests midway and is phylogenetically midway between the larger Yi and the smaller Scansoriopteryx. None of these taxa have an extra long bone in the arm.

Figure 1. Ambopteryx nests midway and is phylogenetically midway between the larger Yi and the smaller Scansoriopteryx. None of these taxa have an extra long bone in the arm.

Ambopteryx longibrachium (Wang et al. 2019; Late Jurassic; IVPP V24192; 32 cm long) is a scansoriopterygid bird, a descendant of Archaeopteryx #12 (privately owned) . A dense layer of feathers is also preserved, not a bat wing, as originally described.


References
Wang M, O’Connor JK, Xu X and Zhou Z 2019. A new Jurassic scansoriopterygid and the loss of membraneous wings in theropod dinosaurs. Nature 569:256–259.

wiki/Ambopteryx

Like Yi qi, the new Ambopteryx does NOT have bat wings

Wang, O’Connor, Xu and Zhou 2019
report on another scasoriopterygid with a ‘styliform’ bone creating a bat-like wing membrane in their imaginations. They named this specimen, Ambopteryx longibrachium (Fig. 1). This would be the second such instance, in their opinion, of a bat-wing bird. You might remember the flap over the first such instance, Yi qi (Fig. 2), which turned out NOT to have as styliform bone, just a displaced ulna on one side, a displaced radius on the other.

Figure 1. Photos and black tracing from Wang et al. 2019. Colors added here. There is no styliform bone on either wing. That is a displaced ulna... again.

Figure 1. Photos and black tracing from Wang et al. 2019. Colors added here. There is no styliform bone on either wing. That is a displaced ulna… again, as the reconstruction at upper left shows.

Well… tracing the elements in color
|reveals no styliform bone. See for yourself (Fig. 1). Again the authors mistook a perfectly good ulna for the invalid and imagined ‘styliform’ bone on the left wing. Turns out Ambopteryx longibrachium has a perfectly normal radius and ulna, just like all of its sisters in the bird clade. The authors do not illustrate a styliform bone on the better articulated right wing. It should have been there, if it was there in life.

Figure x. Closeup of the Ambopteryx forelimb. Here the purported radius + ulna is only the radius after crushing with two quarters of the exposed radius crushed neatly in half giving the impression of a radius + ulna, exactly the same length and without any interosseum space, which never happens in birds.

Figure x. Closeup of the Ambopteryx forelimb. Here the purported radius + ulna is only the radius after crushing with two quarters of the exposed radius crushed neatly in half giving the impression of a radius + ulna, exactly the same length and without any interosseum space, which never happens in birds.

The authors tried to make the extraordinary and implausible ordinary
by introducing another example of their previously invalidated observations. Today’s exercise demonstrates the importance of color tracing and using those tracings, as is, to build reconstructions. Do not freehand! The present notes also demonstrate, once again, just because some discovery is published in Nature, and heralded by major publications (see below) it still might not be true.

Figure 4. Yi qi tracing of the in situ specimen using DGS method and bones rearranged, also using the DGS method, to form a standing and flying Yi qi specimen. Note the lack of a styliform element, here identified as a displaced radius and ulna.

Figure 2. Yi qi tracing of the in situ specimen using DGS method and bones rearranged, also using the DGS method, to form a standing and flying Yi qi specimen. Note the lack of a styliform element, here identified as a displaced radius and ulna.

The news media is all over this:
with gorgeous paintings and glorified reports of a mythical creature with a bird body and bat wings. Unfortunately, like the editors and referees at Nature, they, too, were bamboozled by bombast.

www.nationalgeographic.com
www.smithsonianmag.com

Lead author Wang dramatically reported,
“I was frozen when I realized that a second membranous winged dinosaur was in front of my eyes,” Wang says. The 163 million-year-old fossil confirms that Yi was not an aberration or a one-off. Together, the two species represent an alternate evolutionary path for airborne dinosaurs.”

Not an aberration or a one-off, Dr. Wang…
two similar errors based on wishful thinking and cognitive bias.


References
Wang M, O’Connor JK.; Xu X and Zhou Z 2019. A new Jurassic scansoriopterygid and the loss of membranous wings in theropod dinosaurs. Nature 569: 256–259. doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1137-z
Xu X, Zheng X-T, Sullivan C, Wang X-L, Xing l, Wang Y, Zhang X-M, O’Connor JK, Zhang F-C and Pan Y-H 2015. A bizarre Jurassic maniraptoran theropod with preserved evidence of membranous wings. Nature (advance online publication)
doi:10.1038/nature14423

reptileevolution.com/scansoriopterygidae2.htm

wiki/Yi_(dinosaur)
wiki/Ambopteryx

New passerine genomic study not confirmed by phenomic study

Oliveros et al. 2019
produced an exhaustive DNA study from 137 passerine families, then calibrated their phylogeny using 13 fossils to examine the effects of different events in Earth history on the timing and rate of passerine diversification.

Unfortunately
the large reptile tree (LRT, 1434 taxa) produced a different tree because it uses phenomic traits, not genes.

The two trees both started with birds of prey, including owls.
Then they diverged. The Oliveros team recovered 137 families of passerines arising from highly derived parrots, arising from highly derived owls.

The LRT recovered highly derived parrots arising from the more primitive hoatzin Opisthocomus, arising from the more primitive sparrow, Passer, arising from the more primitive grouse + chickens + peafowl and kin going back to Early Cretaceous Eogranivora. In the LRT owls give rise to birds of smaller prey: owlets, like Aegotheles, and swifts, like Apus, not herbivorous parrots.

Figure 1. Skeleton of the common house sparrow, Passer domestics.

Figure 1. Skeleton of the common house sparrow, Passer domestics. Note the heavy, seed-crunching beak, a precursor for the heavier see-crunching beak in parrots, not the other way around.

Among the traditional ‘passerines’ tested by the Oliveros team
are the distinctively different crows (genus Corvus) and nuthatches (genus Sitta). These clades nest apart from each other in the LRT and apart from Passer, the sparrow. In the LRT, crows and nuthatches are not Passerines, but parrots and hoatzins are passerines. Sometimes competing cladograms can be topsy-turvy like that, with similar sister taxa flipped with regard to primitive and derived. Earlier I mentioned ‘woodpeckers’, which have never been considered passerines, because woodpeckers and nuthatches are sisters in the LRT.

Robins (genus: Turdus) are considered passerines in the DNA study. They are crow relatives in the LRT. Jays (genus: Cyanocritta) and grackles (genus: Quiscalus) are crow relatives in the LRT. Neither are included in the DNA study that includes crows (genus: Corvus).

Figure 1. Several birds with zygodactyl feet (light red) and one member of the clade Zygodactylidae (red).

Figure 2. Subset of the LRT focusing on birds. This is how they are related to one another based on phenomic traits. Note the presence of Passer nesting between the chicken, Gallus and the parrot, Ara. Other purported passerines, like Turdus, Corvus and Sitta,  nest in other clades here.

So, once again,
when taxonomists use genomic (DNA) tests they run the risk of wasting their time when dealing with deep time taxa. Some paleo and bird workers put their faith in DNA, hoping it will recover relationships because it works well in humans. Unfortunately, too often phenomic tests are at odds with genomic tests to put  faith in genomic tests. Only phenomic (trait) tests recover cladograms that produce a gradual accumulation of traits among sister taxa, echoing deep time events. Only phenomic tests can employ fossils. Let’s not forget our fossils.

A suggestion for Oliveros et al. 2019:
test your results against your own phenomic study. If valid, both of your results will be the same. If not, one of your tests needs to be trashed.


References
Oliveros CH and 31 co-authors 2019. Earth history and the passerine superradiation.

www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1813206116

Avimaia and her enormous egg

Bailleul et al. 2019 reported
on the posterior half of an Early Cretaceous enantiornithine bird from China, Avimaia schweitzerae (IVPP V25371, Figs. 1,2), including an enormous eggshell within her torso. The authors commented on the eggshell, which had not one, but several several layers, an abnormal condition, probably leading to the demise of the mother.

Phylogenetic analysis
The Bailleul et al. 2019 phylogenetic analysis nested Avimaia with eight most closely related taxa, of which only one, Cathayornis (Fig. 1), was also tested in the large reptile tree (LRT, 1425 taxa, subset Fig. 3) and likewise nested with Avimaia. Significantly, Cathayornis also has a very deep ventral pelvis capable of developing and expelling very large eggs.

Figure 1. Avimaia compared to Cathayornis to scale.

Figure 1. Avimaia compared to Cathayornis to scale. Cathayornis is the only other tested enantiornithine bird to have such a deep ventral pelvis.

A long, thin, straight, displaced bone was found
beneath the rib cage and identified as a rib by Bailleul et al. 2019. I wonder if it is instead a radius (Fig. 1) because it is not curved like a rib and it does not have an expanded medial process. The radius is vestigial. Regardless of the identify of this slender bone, Avimaia, appears to be ill-suited for flying based on her robust tibiae, short dorsal ribs  and giant egg. Cathayornis (Fig. 1) appears to be better-suited for flying, based on its chicken-like proportions.

Figure 2. Avimaia in situ. Some bones were originally mislabeled. Here the egg is reconstructed with a more traditional egg shape.

Figure 2. Avimaia in situ. Some bones were originally mislabeled. Here the egg is reconstructed with a more traditional egg shape.

Mislabeled bones
The right ‘pubis’ (Fig. 2) is the right ischium. The reidentified pubis has a pubic boot and the ischium does, not as in sister taxa. The authors failed to identify vestigial pedal digit 5.

The egg was originally reconstructed as a sphere (drawn as a circle) inside the abdomen. Here (Figs. 1, 2) the egg is reconstructed in a more traditional egg shape more likely to pass through the ischia and cloaca.

Figure 2. Subset of the LRT focusing on the clade Enantiornithes and the nesting of Avimaia as a derived taxon within that clade.

Figure 3. Subset of the LRT focusing on the clade Enantiornithes and the nesting of Avimaia as a derived taxon within that clade.

Most birds
lay more than one egg in a clutch. Another exceptional bird that develops a very large egg is the flightless kiwi (Apterypterx, Fig. 4).

Figure 2. Jurapteryx, Pseudocrypturus, Apteryx and Proapteryx to scale.

Figure 2. Jurapteryx, Pseudocrypturus, Apteryx and Proapteryx to scale.


References
Bailleul AM, et al. 2019. An Early Cretaceous enantiornithine (Aves) preserving an unlaid egg and probable medullary bone. Nature Communications. 10 (1275). doi:10.1038/s41467-019-09259-x
Pickrell, J 2019. “Unlaid egg discovered in ancient bird fossil”. Science. doi:10.1126/science.aax3954

wiki/Avimaia

Eofringillirostrum: a tiny Eocene crake, not a finch

Ksepka, Grande and Mayr 2019
describe two Early Eocene congeneric bird species. Eofringillirostrum parvulum (Fig. 1) is from Germany, 47mya. Eofringillirostrum boudreauxi from Wyoming, 52mya.

Figure 1. Eofringillirostrum in situ at full scale at 72 dpi and closeups of the skull in situ with DGS tracing and reconstructed. Note the slender vomer (purple).

Figure 1. Eofringillirostrum in situ at full scale at 72 dpi and closeups of the skull in situ with DGS tracing and reconstructed. Note the slender vomer (purple) and the added detail gleaned with DGS compared to the original tracing in figure 2.

Eofringillirostrum boudreauxi, E. parvulum (Ksepka, Grande and Mayr 2019; IRSNB Av 128a+bFMNH PA 793; early Eocene; < 10cm long with feathers) was originally considered a finch and a relative of Pumiliornis, a wren-sized Middle Eocene spoonbill. Here Eofringillirostrum nests as a phylogenetically miniaturized corn crake (below). The rail, Crex, is ancestral to chickens, sparrows, moas and parrots, so Eofringillirostrum probably had a Cretaceous origin. A distinctly long fourth toe  was considered capable of being reversed, but no sister taxa with a similar long toe ever reverse it for perching until, many nodes later, parrots appear.

Figure 1. Much enlarged Eofringillirostrum with original tracing and DGS colors. The crest of the sternum, originally overlooked, is just barely ossified here.

Figure 1. Much enlarged Eofringillirostrum with original tracing and DGS colors. The crest of the sternum, originally overlooked, is just barely ossified here.

Corn crake are not ‘perching birds’. 
As we learned earlier, taxa formerly considered members of Passeriformes are a much smaller list in the LRT. Birds capable of perching arise in several clades by convergence.

The corn crake is omnivorous but mainly feeds on invertebrates, the occasional small frog or mammal, and plant material including grass seed and cereal grain. It is not a perching bird, but prefers grasslands.

Figure 4. The extant corn crake (Crex) is a living relative of the giant elephant bird.

Figure 4. The extant corn crake (Crex) is a living relative of the tiny Eocene Eofringillirostrum.

According to the LRT,
Eofringillirostrum is not a finch, not a seed eater and not a ‘perching bird’ (in the classic sense, but likely evolved perching by convergence) according to phylogenetic analysis and phylogenetic bracketing.)

Figure 5. Skull of Crex most closely resembles that of the new Crex sister, Eofingillirostrum.

Figure 5. Skull of Crex most closely resembles that of the new Crex sister, Eofingillirostrum.

References
Ksepka DT, Grande L and Mayr G 2019. Oldest Finch-Beaked Birds Reveal Parallel Ecological Radiation in the Earliest Evolution of Passerines. Current Biology 29, 1–7.

sciencedaily.com