Theropoda Marsh, 1881
Definition- (Allosaurus fragilis <- Morosaurus impar) (modified from Kischlat, 2000)
Other definitions- (Passer domesticus <- Saltasaurus loricatus) (Sereno, 2004; modified from Sereno, 1998; modified from Gauthier, 1986)
(Passer domesticus <- Cetiosaurus oxoniensis) (Holtz and Osmolska, 2004; modified from Gauthier, 1986)
(Allosaurus fragilis <- Plateosaurus engelhardti) (modified from Clarke et al., 2004)
= Goniopoda Cope, 1866
= Therophagi Jaekel, 1914
= Carnosauriformes Cooper, 1985
= Theropoda sensu Sereno, 1998
Definition- (Passer domesticus <- Saltasaurus loricatus) (modified)
= Theropoda sensu Clarke, Gauthier, de Queiroz, Joyce, Parham and Rowe, 2004
Definition- (Allosaurus fragilis <- Plateosaurus engelhardti)
= Theropoda sensu Holtz and Osmolska, 2004
Definition- (Passer domesticus <- Cetiosaurus oxoniensis) (modified)
Other diagnoses- Marsh's (1881) original diagnosis consisted largely of plesiomorphies- carnivorous; limb bones hollow; digits with prehensile claws; digitigrade pes. The distal pubes are only fused in adult neotheropods. "Vertebrae more or less cavernous" refers to the extremely constricted dorsal centra of Allosaurus, which aren't present in most theropods. "Post-pubis present" probably refers to Allosaurus' elongate pubic boot, which is only present in some avetheropods.
Marsh (1884) added more plesiomorphies- premaxilla toothed; external nares placed anteriorly; large antorbital fossa; forelimbs short; propubic pelvis.
Comments- Marsh (1881) named Theropoda as a dinosaur suborder containing only the Allosauridae, in which he placed Allosaurus, Creosaurus and Labrosaurus (both of the latter now recognized as synonyms of Allosaurus). By 1884, Marsh had raised Theropoda to an order and expanded it to include all carnivorous dinosaurs, as well as what are today recognized as basal sauropodomorphs (often mixed with cranial elements of canivorous crurotarsans). This was the standard for many decades, as seen in Romer's (1956) classic work, in which theropods consist of coelurosaurs, carnosaurs and prosauropods. The monophyly of theropods was questioned by Huene (1914), who placed most of the larger taxa such as Allosaurus and Megalosaurus in Sauropodomorpha (his Pachypodosauria) while the smaller taxa (which he named Coelurosauria) had branched off earlier. In the 1960's, workers began to recognize the monophyly of coelurosaurs and carnosaurs to the exclusion of basal sauropodomorphs (e.g. Colbert, 1964). Paul (1984) was the first author to use a theropod phylogeny similar to todays, with deinonychosaurs (albeit paraphyletic), tyrannosaurids, allosaurids, Eustreptospondylus, Ceratosaurus and coelophysoids forming successively more distant sister taxa to birds. Gauthier's (1984) thesis also had a modern topology, with deinonychosaurs, ornithomimids, carnosaurs and ceratosaurs (the latter two improbably inclusive, containing tyrannosaurids and coelophysoids respectively) successively further from birds, and is the basis of our current nomenclature for major clades.
Goniopoda, Harpagosauria, Therophagi and Carnosauriformes- Cope (1866) named Goniopoda for Dryptosaurus (his Laelaps) and Streptospondylus (his Megalosaurus) based on his misinterpretation of their astragalus as a fibula, as a fibula which wraps distally around the tibia would be unique. The taxon was almost exclusively used by Cope through the 1880's for carnivorous dinosaurs even after the astragalus was correctly identified. He eventually gave it a scope and diagnosis similar to Marsh's Theropoda (e.g. Cope, 1883). After Cope's death, Theropoda became the term almost exclusively used for carnivorous dinosaurs.
Harpagosauria was seen as a paraphyletic order of dinosaurs by Haeckel (1866), containing Megalosaurus, Plateosaurus and Pelorosaurus (but not Iguanodon). Haeckel refers to these as the carnivorous dinosaurs, which led Cope to synonymize the taxon with his Goniopoda (starting in 1870, and consistantly misspelled Harpagmosauria). However, Haeckel's original usage suggests it is instead the equivalent to Saurischia. Baur (1887) uses Harpagosauria as a dinosaurian group containing only Goniopoda, with Sauropoda separate. Haeckel (1895) later used Harpagosauria as a junior synonym for his new dinosaurian taxon Dysdracones including both Arctopoda (containing basal sauropodomorphs) and Theropoda, with sauropods now placed in his Eudracones that contained all herbivorous dinosaurs. Harpagosauria was said to contain the carnivorous dinosaurs with sharp teeth and claws. It has not been used since.
Therophagi was named by Jaekel (1914) for a saurischian group containing the taxa then usually referred to Theropoda- anchisaurids, zanclodontids (mixing sauropodomorph postcrania with crurotarsan crania), ceratosaurids, megalosaurids and tyrannosaurids. Plateosauridae and Sauropoda were placed in the Allophagi however. The names have not been used since.
Proposed as part of a cladistic reclassification of ornithischians, Carnosauriformes was named by Cooper (1985) as a cohort of dinosaurs "retaining the primitive condition of recurved thecodontian dentition with finely serrated cutting edges." No justification for using this name over Theropoda was given, and it is today rightfully considered a junior synonym.
Theropoda defined- Gauthier (1986) was the first to phylogenetically define Theropoda, as "birds and all saurischians that are closer to birds than they are to sauropodomorphs." Variations on this definition have been most common, with Sereno (1998) using Neornithes and Saltasaurus, specified by Sereno (2004) as Passer domesticus and Saltasaurus loricatus. Holtz and Osmolska (2004) chose Cetiosaurus oxoniensis as the sauropodomorph specifier instead. However, this class of definition violates Phylocode Recommendation 11A- "Definitions of converted clade names should be stated in a way that attempts to capture the spirit of traditional use to the degree that it is consistent with the contemporary concept of monophyly." While birds are currently thought to be theropods, this was not the consensus until over a century after Theropoda was named. Similarly, Clarke et al.'s (2004) definition using Plateosaurus engelhardti as an external specifier is problematic since basal sauropodomorphs were often included in Theropoda until the 1960s. Kischlat (2000) suggested all taxa closer to Allosaurus than to Morosaurus, which is valid in using taxa Marsh (1881) and everyone since have recognized as being theropod and non-theropod. This definition is modified here by including the types species of each genus.
Ex-theropods- Numerous taxa (at least 130) have been incorrectly placed in Theropoda in the past, including ornithosuchids, poposaurids, most basal avemetatarsalians and basal sauropodomorphs, and many Triassic archosauriforms known only from teeth. This site has an entire section devoted to ex-theropods, so they are not discussed further here.
References- Cope, 1866. [On the anomalous relations existing between the tibia and fibula in certain of the Dinosauria]. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. 18, 316-317.
Haeckel, 1866. Generelle Morphologie der Organismen. Allgemeine Grundzuge der organischen Formen Wissenschaft, mechanisch begrundet durch die von Charles Darwin reformiete Deszendenz-Theorie. II. Allgemeine Entwicklungsgeschichte der Organismen. Kritische Grundzuge der mechanischen Wissenschaft von dan entstehenden Formen der Organismen, begrundet durch die Deszendenz-Theorie. Georg Reimer, Berlin. 462 pp.
Cope, 1870. Synopsis of the extinct Batrachia and Reptilia of North America. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. 14, 1-252.
Marsh, 1881. Principal characters of American Jurassic dinosaurs. Part V. American Journal of Science. 21, 417-423.
Cope, 1883. On the characters of the skull in the Hadrosauridae. Proceedings of the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences. 35, 97-107.
Marsh, 1884. Principal characters of American Jurassic dinosaurs. Part VIII. The order Theropoda. American Journal of Science. 27, 329-340.
Baur, 1887. On the phylogenetic arrangement of the Sauropsida. Journal of Morphology. 1, 93-104.
Haeckel, 1895. Systematische Phylogenie: Entwurf eines Natürlichen Systems der Organismen auf Grund ihrer Stammesgeschichte. Dritter Theil: Systematische Phylogenie der Wirbelthiere (Vertebrata). Georg Reimer, Berlin. 660 pp.
Huene, 1914. Das natürliche System der Saurischia [The systematics of the Saurischia]. Centralblatt für Mineralogie, Geologie und Paläontologie. 1914, 154-158.
Jaekel, 1914. Über die Wirbeltierfunde in der oberen Trias von Halberstadt. Palaontologische Zeitschrift. 1(1), 155-215.
Romer, 1956. Osteology of the Reptiles. University of Chicago Press. 772 pp.
Colbert, 1964. Relationships of the saurischian dinosaurs. American Museum Novitates. 2181, 1-24.
Gauthier, 1984. A cladistic analysis of the higher systematic categories of the Diapsida. PhD thesis. University of California, Berkeley. 564 pp.
Paul, 1984. The archosaurs: A phylogenetic study. Third Symposium on Mesozoic Terrestrial Ecosystems, Short Papers. 175-180.
Cooper, 1985. A revision of the ornithischian dinosaur Kangnasaurus coetzeei Haughton, with a classification of the Ornithischia. Annals of the South African Museum. 95(8), 281-317.
Gauthier, 1986. Saurischian monophyly and the origin of birds. Memoirs of the Californian Academy of Sciences. 8, 1-55.
Sereno, 1998. A rationale for phylogenetic definitions, with application to the higher-level taxonomy of Dinosauria. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie Abhandlungen. 210, 41-83.
Kischlat, 2000. Tecodoncios: A aurora dos Arcosaurios no Triassico. in Holz and De Rose (eds.). Paleontologia do Rio Grande do Sul. 273-316.
Clarke, Gauthier, de Queiroz, Joyce, Parham and Rowe, 2004. A phylogenetic nomenclature for the major clades of Amniota Haeckel 1866, with emphasis on Aves Linnaeus 1758. First International Phylogenetic Nomenclature Meeting, Abstracts. 30.
Holtz and Osmólska, 2004. Saurischia. in Weishampel, Dodson and Osmólska (eds.). The Dinosauria. 2nd ed. University of California Press, Berkeley. 21-24.
Sereno, 2004. Phylogenetic nomenclature for stem crocodilians and birds, exclusive of Pterosauria. First International Phylogenetic Nomenclature Meeting, Abstracts. 26.

undescribed theropod (Novas, Haro and Canale, 2003)
Late Carnian-Early Norian, Late Triassic
Cancha de Bochas Member of the Ischigualasto Formation, San Juan, Argentina

Material- basicranium, cervical vertebrae, dorsal vertebrae, sacral vertebrae, caudal vertebrae, fragmentary ilia, fragmentary ischia, fragmentary femur, tibia, fibula, metatarsals
Comments- This taxon is said to have a prominent and pointed mid and posterior cervical epipophyses, no presacral pleurocoels, dorsal hyposphenes-hypantra, wing-like postacetabular process, deep brevis fossa, prominent and conical anterior trochanter, no trochanteric shelf, globose distal femoral articular surface and deep tibiofibularis groove. Novas et al. assigned it to a theropod more derived than herrerasaurids and Eoraptor but outside Avepoda. Though the subsequently described Eodromaeus has this position and is from the same formation, it differs from the new taxon in having cervical pleurocoels and a trochanteric shelf.
Reference- Novas, Haro and Canale, 2003. Un nuevo terópodo basal de la Formación Ischigualasto (Carniano) de la provincia de San Juan, Argentina. Ameghiniana. 40(4), 63R.

unnamed theropod (Stocker, 2013)
Carnian-Early Norian, Late Triassic
Otis Chalk, Dockum Group, Texas, US
Material
- (TMM 31100-523) femur
....(TMM 31100-1324) tibia
Comments- Stocker (2013) described these as a new taxon of Tawa-grade theropod based on the symmetrical fourth trochanter, flat proximal tibial surface, and lack of a ridge on the posterodistal tibia. Nesbitt and Ezcurra (2015) found they are not referrable to Lepidus from the same deposits, and stated "other isolated limb bones" were referred to the taxon by Stocker, but only the femur and tibia are mentioned in that thesis.
References- Stocker, 2013. Contextualizing vertebrate faunal dynamics: New perspectives from the Triassic and Eocene of western North America. PhD thesis, University of Texas at Austin. 297 pp.
Nesbitt and Ezcurra, 2015. The early fossil record of dinosaurs in North America: A new neotheropod from the base of the Upper Triassic Dockum Group of Texas. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica. 60(3), 513-526.

Eodromaeus Martinez, Sereno, Alcober, Columbi, Renne, Montanez and Currie, 2011
E. murphi Martinez, Sereno, Alcober, Columbi, Renne, Montanez and Currie, 2011
Norian, Late Triassic
Valle de la Luna Member of the Ischigualasto Formation, San Juan, Argentina

Holotype- (PVSJ 560) (~1.77 m; adult) partial skull (~120 mm), mandible (~126 mm), proatlantal arches, atlas, axis (19 mm), third cervical vertebra (24 mm), fourth cervical vertebra (26 mm), fifth cervical vertebra (30 mm), sixth cervical vertebra (30 mm), seventh cervical vertebran (30 mm), eighth cervical vertebra (27 mm), ninth cervical vertebra (22 mm), tenth cervical vertebra (~13 mm), several cervical ribs, first dorsal vertebra (~15 mm), second dorsal vertebra (17 mm), third dorsal vertebra (17 mm), fourth dorsal vertebra (17 mm), fifth dorsal vertebra (17 mm), sixth dorsal vertebra (18 mm), seventh dorsal vertebra (21 mm), eighth dorsal vertebra (~21 mm), ninth dorsal vertebra (21 mm), tenth dorsal vertebra (~19 mm), eleventh dorsal vertebra (19 mm), twelfth dorsal vertebra (~19 mm), thirteenth dorsal vertebra, fourteenth dorsal vertebra, dorsal ribs, first sacral vertebra, second sacral vertebra (18 mm), third sacral vertebra (19 mm), first caudal vertebra (21 mm), second caudal vertebra (19 mm), third caudal vertebra (20 mm), fourth caudal vertebra (19 mm), partial fifth caudal vertebra, partial ninth caudal vertebra, tenth caudal vertebra (22 mm), eleventh caudal vertebra (23 mm), twelfth caudal vertebra (25 mm), thirteenth caudal vertebra (~23 mm), fourteenth caudal vertebra (~21 mm), fifteenth caudal vertebra (20 mm), sixteenth caudal vertebra (20 mm), seventeenth caudal vertebra (21 mm), eighteenth caudal vertebra (21 mm), nineteenth caudal vertebra (21 mm), twentieth caudal vertebra (21 mm), twenty-first caudal vertebra (23 mm), twenty-second caudal vertebra (24 mm), twenty-third caudal vertebra (~25 mm), twenty-fourth caudal vertebra (25 mm), twenty-fifth caudal vertebra (25 mm), twenty-sixth caudal vertebra (26 mm), twenty-seventh caudal vertebra (26 mm), twenty-eighth caudal vertebra (26 mm), twenty-ninth caudal vertebra (25 mm), thirtieth caudal vertebra (25 mm), thirty-first caudal vertebra (24 mm), thirty-second caudal vertebra, thirty-third caudal vertebra, thirty-fourth caudal vertebra, thirty-fifth caudal vertebra, thirty-sixth caudal vertebra, thirty-seventh caudal vertebra (19 mm), fortieth caudal vertebra (16 mm), chevrons, proximal humeri, radius, ulna, radiale, centrale, ulnare, distal carpal I, distal carpal II, distal carpal IV, distal carpal V, metacarpal I (12 mm), metacarpal II (19 mm), phalanx II-1 (~11 mm), phalanx II-2 (~14 mm), manual ungual II (11 mm), metacarpal III (21 mm), phalanx III-1 (9 mm), phalanx III-2 (8 mm), phalanx III-3 (10 mm), manual ungual III (~10 mm), metacarpal IV (16 mm), phalanx IV-1 (4 mm), metacarpal V (~7 mm), phalanx V-1 (~5 mm), ilia (60 mm), pubes (~139 mm), ischia (one proximal; ~110 mm), femora (141 mm), tibiae (154 mm), fibulae (132 mm), astragalus, calcaneum, distal tarsals III, distal tarsals IV, metatarsals I (~46 mm), phalanx I-1 (18 mm), metatarsal II, phalanx II-1 (23 mm), incomplete metatarsal III, phalanx III-1 (24 mm), phalanx III-2 (16 mm), metatarsal V
Paratypes- (PVSJ 561) maxilla, nasal, incomplete jugal, femur
(PVSJ 562) (~ 2.00 m; adult) posterior skull, proatlantal arches (13 mm), atlas (4 mm), axis (23 mm), third cervical vertebra (27 mm), fourth cervical vertebra (31 mm), fifth cervical vertebra (34 mm), sixth cervical vertebra (33 mm), seventh cervical vertebra, eighth cervical vertebra (33 mm), cervical ribs, fourth dorsal vertebra (18 mm), sixth dorsal vertebra (24 mm), eleventh dorsal vertebra (24 mm), thirteenth dorsal vertebra (24 mm), fourteenth dorsal vertebra (21 mm), second caudal vertebra (23 mm), third caudal vertebra (24 mm), fourth caudal vertebra (23 mm), fifth caudal vertebra (23 mm), sixth caudal vertebra (22 mm), seventh caudal vertebra (24 mm), eighth caudal vertebra (25 mm), ninth caudal vertebra (25 mm), tenth caudal vertebra (23 mm), eleventh caudal vertebra (26 mm), chevrons (3- 50 mm, 4- 46 mm, 5- 32 mm), scapulae (86 mm), coracoids (21 mm), humerus (85 mm), radius (66 mm), ulna (76 mm), radiale, centrale, ulnare, distal carpal I, distal carpal II, distal carpal IV, distal carpal V, metacarpal I (18 mm), phalanx I-1 (14 mm), metacarpal II (27 mm), phalanx II-1 (15 mm), metacarpal III (28 mm), phalanx III-1 (12 mm), metacarpal IV (21 mm), phalanx IV-1, metacarpal V (10 mm), phalanx V-1 (5 mm), proximal ischia (~116 mm), femur (160 mm), tibiae (one distal; 165 mm), fibulae (one distal), calcaneum, distal tarsal IV, distal metatarsal IV, phalanx IV-1 (13 mm), phalanx IV-2 (11 mm), phalanx IV-3 (9 mm), phalanx IV-4 (8 mm), pedal ungual IV (15 mm)
Late Carnian, Late Triassic
La Pena Member of the Ischigualasto Formation, San Juan, Argentina

Paratype- (PVSJ 534) (~1.95 m) femur (155 mm), proximal tibia, astragalus (~23 mm wide), calcaneum, distal tarsal III, distal tarsal IV, proximal metatarsal I, proximal metatarsal II, proximal metatarsal III, proximal metatarsal IV
Late Carnian-Early Norian, Late Triassic
Cancha de Bochas Member of the Ischigualasto Formation, San Juan, Argentina

Paratype- (PVSJ 877) third cervical centrum
Diagnosis- (after Martinez et al., 2011) less than 12 maxillary teeth (unknown in Tawa); caniniform anterior maxillary teeth more than three times the basal mesiodistal width; fine mesial and distal serrations (~9 per mm) (unknown in Tawa); ventrally convex maxillary alveolar margin (also in Herrerasaurus); very shallow jugal suborbital ramus (also in Eoraptor); centrale in carpus between the radiale and distal carpal 1 (unknown in Tawa); large distal carpal 5 overlapping distal carpal 4 with a posteroventral heel (also in Herrerasaurus; unknown in Tawa); pubic apron with sinuous lateral margin (also in Herrerasaurinae; unknown in Tawa); pubic foot with squared posterior margin (unknown in Tawa).
Comments- PVSJ 534 and 877 were discovered in 1988, while PVSJ 560-562 were discovered in 1998 and first thought to be Eoraptor until 2000. This taxon was originally described in an abstract by Martinez et al. (2008), after being mentioned by Sereno (2007) as a closely related taxon to Eoraptor. PVSJ 563 was listed as a paratype, but this is a typo (Sereno, pers. comm.). Martinez et al. find Eodromaeus to be a theropod more basal than Tawa, though their matrix has a small number of characters and taxa.
References- Sereno, 2007. The phylogenetic relationships of early dinosaurs: A comparative report. Historical Biology. 19(1), 145-155.
Martinez, Sereno and Alcober, 2008. A new basal theropod from the Ischigualasto Formation of San Juan Province, Argentina. in Calvo, Valieri, Porfiri and dos Santos (eds.). Libro de Resumenes, III Congreso Latinoamericano de Paleontologia de Vertebrados. Universidad Nacional del Comahue, Neuquen, Argentina. 153.
Martinez, Sereno, Alcober, Columbi, Renne, Montanez and Currie, 2011. A basal dinosaur from the dawn of the dinosaur era in Southwestern Pangaea. Science. 331, 206-210.

Dracoraptor Martill, Vidovic, Howells and Nudds, 2016
D. hanigani Martill, Vidovic, Howells and Nudds, 2016
Early Hettangian, Early Jurassic
Blue Lias Formation, Wales
Holotype
- (NGM 2015.5G1-11) (~2 m juvenile) partial skull, fragmentary mandibles, six teeth, ?hyoid, two cervical vertebrae, several incomplete cervical ribs, dorsal centrum, two dorsal ribs, gastralia, partial last sacral vertebra, partial first caudal vertebra, incomplete second caudal centrum, partial third caudal vertebra, partial fourth caudal vertebra, proximal caudal neural arch, mid caudal centrum, two proximal chevrons, distal humerus, radius (71 mm), ulna (73 mm), metacarpal II (~34 mm), phalanx II-1, phalanx III-?, manual ungual, phalanx IV-?, incomplete pubes (~212 mm), ischium (~150 mm), incomplete femur, tibial fragment, incomplete fibula, proximal metatarsal II, phalanx II-?, phalanx III-1, proximal metatarsal IV, two pedal unguals, two phalanges
....(NGM 2015.10G.1) two dorsal centra, neural arch fragment, partial astragalus, calcaneum?, distal tarsal III, distal tarsal IV, distal metatarsal I, metatarsal II (102 mm), proximal phalanx II-1, metatarsals III (116 mm), proximal phalanx III-1, metatarsal IV (93 mm), phalanx IV-1, four phalanges (two proximal), pedal ungual, metatarsal V
Diagnosis- (proposed) posteroventral medial premaxillary process (also in coelophysids); narial fossa absent on premaxilla; portion of maxilla anterior to antorbital fenestra longer than portion under fenestra (also in Eodromeus); maxilla articulates in slot on lateral jugal.
Other diagnoses- Martill et al. (2016) listed "large external naris with slender subnarial bar" in their diagnosis, but as the nasal is not definitely identified and has no narial border, the naris is of uncertain size. Furthermore, the slender subnarial process of the premaxilla is found in most basal saurischians (except Herrerasaurus, Daemonosaurus and Chilesaurus). Three premaxillary teeth are unique among the coelophysoids that Martill et al. classified Dracoraptor as, but shared with Daemonosaurus and Chilesaurus. The jugal process is no more slender than coelophysids, and not that different from Daemonosaurus. Almost all basal saurischians have an anteriorly directed pubis (except some herrerasaurids and Chilesaurus), and Dracoraptor's ischium is actually longer compared to its pubis than coelophysids (~71% vs. 61-~67%) and comparable to e.g. Herrerasaurus and Dilophosaurus. Finally, Martill et al. list "large dorsal process on distal tarsal IV" but there is no obvious dorsal process. The tarsal is very close to rhodesiensis in shape except the posterior third is narrower and it has a slightly concave medial edge.
Comments- This specimen was discovered in 2014 and was described in 2016.
Note the maxillae are in medial view, as the figure caption states, but contra the text. Contra the text and reconstruction, only the small anteriormost jugal groove probably articulated with the maxilla. The longer ridge and groove on the main body is common in early dinosaurs (e.g. Herrerasaurus) and non-articulating. The supraoccipital is in anterior (internal) view, not ventral view as stated by the text. Note the large posttemporal fenestrae as in Silesaurus but unlike dinosaurs. The cervical is not opisthocoelous, contra the text, as the anterior central surface is slightly concave. The supposed first caudal is near certainly a ?last sacral based on the broad transverse processes originating on the centrum (compare to e.g. Staurikosaurus). The authors do call it "a partially sacralised element", but any ambiguity seems unnecessary. The next element could easily be a sacral too, though its more fragmented condition makes this more uncertain. I'm doubtful the supposed furcula is correctly identified. One side is much narrower than the other, and each is curved in a different direction (thin side concave toward the outside of the angle). Furcular arms are subequal in width, and those of coelophysoids (e.g. kayentakatae) are basically circular in section, so that twisting in Dracoraptor is not an excuse. It's more probably a posterior dorsal rib, which are also similar in having a ridge along the outside corner. The tuberculum may be covered in matrix. The authors say "A calcaneum is not present. Two distal tarsals (dt III & dt IV) and part of a putative third are present in a row." No archosauriforms actually have three distal tarsals per pes (certainly no theropods do), so that 'putative third' is more likely the supposedly missing calcaneum, especially as it's placed right next to distal tarsal IV (labeled 'Ldtii'). The supposed "?Metaacarpal of digit I" [sic] is a metacarpal II, very similar to rhodesiensis, more elongate than metacarpal I and more robust than metacarpal III. While I haven't identified all of the phalanges in this block, it's clear Martill et al.'s statement "they are assumed to be from the left manus as they are associated with the left radius and ulna" is in error. For instance, the phalanx underlying the proximal radius is too large to belong to any manual digit and is probably pedal phalanx III-1, while supposed manual unguals I and III lack flexor tubercles ("I" shows an obvious depression in that area) and at least "III" is virtually straight. These unguals more nearly match pedal unguals of e.g. Coelophysis and Liliensternus, while supposed ungual II is manual due to its curvature and large flexor tubercle. Among other phalanges, that at the distal end of metacarpal II matches a manual phalanx II-1, that on the proximal end of metacarpal II belongs to manual digit III, that between unguals "I" and "II" looks like its from pedal digit II, and the small one by the anterior end of the dorsal centrum would be manual IV-1. The latter suggests a less reduced digit IV than coelophysids or Herrerasaurus. Thus the manual reconstruction with its short penultimate phalanges and metacarpal ratios should not be trusted.
Martill et al. (2016) recovered Dracoraptor as a basal coelophysoid sister to Coelophysidae using a version of Nesbitt et al.'s basal dinosaur matrix. 15% of their Dracovenator entries are miscoded though, and once corrected and placed in an improved version of that matrix that excludes the highly modified Velociraptor OTU, it emerges as sister to a Daemonosaurus+Chilesaurus clade, which is itself sister to Avepoda.
References- Howells, Nudds, Martill, Vidovic, Hannigan and Hannigan, 2015. A new Early Jurassic theropod from Wales: Geological and discovery context. SVPCA 2015 abstracts, 43.
Martill, Vidovic, Howells and Nudds, 2015. The oldest Jurassic dinosaur: A basal neotheropod from the Hettangian of Great Britain. SVPCA 2015 abstracts, 52.
Martill, Vidovic, Howells and Nudds, 2016. The oldest Jurassic dinosaur: A basal neotheropod from the Hettangian of Great Britain. PLoS ONE. 11(1), e0145713.

Daemonosaurus Sues, Nesbitt, Berman and Henrici, 2011
D. chauliodus
Sues, Nesbitt, Berman and Henrici, 2011
Late Rhaetian-Early Hettangian, Late Triassic-Early Jurassic
Siltstone member of the Chinle Formation, New Mexico, US

Holotype- (CM 76821) skull (~140 mm), mandibles, atlas, axis, third cervical vertebra, partial fourth cervical vertebra, partial fifth cervical vertebra, cervical rib fragments
Diagnosis- (after Sues et al., 2011) skull proportionately deep and narrow, with short antorbital region; long posterior process of premaxilla that almost contacts anterior process of lacrimal; antorbital fenestra nearly the same size as external naris; premaxillary and anterior maxillary teeth much enlarged relative to more posterior maxillary teeth; prefrontal large and occupies about 50 per cent of the dorsal margin of the orbit; ventral process of lacrimal with slender posterior projection extending along anterodorsal margin of jugal; dorsoventrally deep jugal with prominent lateral ridge; postorbital with anterolateral overhang over orbit; first two dentary teeth large and procumbent; alveolar margin of dentary downturned at symphysis; third cervical vertebra with deep, rimmed, ovoid pleurocoel on the anterolateral surfaces of both centrum and neural arch.
Comments- This taxon was announced in an SVP abstract and formally described the following year. Sues et al. to be the sister taxon to Tawa+Avepoda in their phylogenetic analysis.
References- Sues, Nesbitt, Berman, Henrici and Sullivan, 2010. A new basal theropod dinosaur from the Coelophysis quarry (Upper Triassic) of Ghost Ranch, New Mexico. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. Program and Abstracts 2010, 172A.
Sues, Nesbitt, Berman and Henrici, 2011. A late-surviving basal theropod dinosaur from the latest Triassic of North America. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 278(1723), 3459-3464.

Chilesaurus Novas, Salgado, Suarez, Agnolin, Ezcurra, Chimento, Cruz, Isasi, Vargas and Rubilar-Rogers, 2015
C. diegosuarezi Novas, Salgado, Suarez, Agnolin, Ezcurra, Chimento, Cruz, Isasi, Vargas and Rubilar-Rogers, 2015
Tithonian, Late Jurassic
Toqui Formation, Chile
Holotype
- (SNGM-1935) (~1.6 m; juvenile) partial skull, incomplete dentary, few cervical vertebrae including fourth, over eleven incomplete to complete dorsal vertebrae, dorsal rib fragments, over twelve fragmentary to incomplete caudal vertebrae, at least two proximal chevrons, scapulae (116.3 mm), coracoids, humeri (97.8 mm), radii (68.8 mm), ulnae, distal carpal I, metacarpal I, phalanx I-1, metacarpal II, phalanx II-1, phalanx II-2, metacarpal III (26.7 mm), partial ilia (116.9 mm), pubis (95.7 mm), ischium (101.2 mm), femora (142.4 mm), incomplete tibiae (144.4 mm), fibula
Paratypes- (SNGM-1936) (~1.3 m; juvenile) forelimbs, incomplete ilia, pubes (97.7 mm), ischia (101.6 mm), femur (114.6 mm), astragalus, metatarsals
(SNGM-1937) (~1.3 m; juvenile) forelimbs including radius (64 mm), manual ungual I, manual ungual II, metacarpal III (21.7 mm), tibiae (one partial; 114.6 mm), fibulae (one partial), incomplete metatarsal I (31.4 mm), phalanx I-1, pedal ungual I, incomplete metatarsal II (50.9 mm), phalanx II-1, phalanx II-2, pedal ungual II, metatarsal III (71.1 mm), phalanx III-1, phalanx III-2, phalanx III-3, pedal ungual III, metatarsal IV, phalanx IV-1, phalanx IV-2
(SNGM-1938) incomplete dorsal series, dorsal ribs, scapulae, coracoids, humeri, radii, ulnae, both incomplete manus
Referred- (SNGM-307) pelvis (Chimento, 2015)
(SNGM-1887) distal carpal I, metacarpal I (52 mm), proximal phalanx I-1, incomplete metacarpal II (78 mm), phalanx II-2, metacarpal III, phalanx III-2?, phalanx III-3? (Salgado et al., 2008)
(SNGM-1888) distal tibia, distal fibula, astragalus, calcaneum, distal tarsal IV, metatarsal II, phalanx II-1, phalanx II-2, metatarsal III, proximal phalanx III-1, metatarsal IV, proximal phalanx IV-1, incomplete pedal ungual (Salgado et al., 2008)
(SNGM-1889) incomplete ilium (Salgado et al., 2008)
(SNGM-1894) anterior dorsal centrum (Salgado et al., 2008)
(SNGM-1895) proximal tibia (Salgado et al., 2008)
(SNGM-1898) anterior dorsal centrum (Salgado et al., 2008)
(SNGM-1900) posterior dorsal centrum (Salgado et al., 2008)
(SNGM-1901) distal tibia (Salgado et al., 2008)
(SNGM-1903) anterior dorsal centrum (Salgado et al., 2008)
(SNGM-8193) pelvis (Chimento, 2015)
Diagnosis- (after Novas et al., 2015; note only convergences with closely related taxa or alvarezsaurids are mentioned here) dentary deeper anteriorly than posteriorly; teeth basally constricted (also in maniraptoriforms); teeth serrated only apically; tooth crowns with large apical wear facets; posterior cervical pleurocoels (also in basal avepods); cervicals with septate pleurocoels; coracoid with transversely thick margins; manual phalanx II-2 shorter than II-1 (also in coelophysoids and some alvarezsaurids); manual digit III atrophied (also in some alvarezsaurids); supratrochanteric process; ischiadic peduncle of ilium robust (also in some alvarezsaurids); supracetabular crest absent; pubis fully retroverted (also in derived alvarezsaurids); small pubic boot (also in coelophysoids and derived alvarezsaurids); ischia connected through extended medial lamina; femoral greater trochanter anteroposteriorly expanded (also in alvarezsaurids); pedal digit I robust; metatarsal II transversely wider than the other metatarsals (also in Tawa).
Other diagnoses- Contra Novas et al. (2015), the premaxilla is not particularly short or deep. Fine serrations are plesiomorphic for archosaurs. The coracoid is subquadrangular in megalosaurids, Ceratosaurus, coelophysoids and many basal taxa. The pubis is not more rod-like than most avepods, nor is the pubic apron narrower. Metatarsal I is proximally compressed transversely in all theropods.
If I'm correct that Chilesaurus is a non-avepod sister to Daemonosaurus, the following suggested characters by Novas et al. also don't apply- the plate-like subnarial premaxillary process is shared with Daemonosaurus. The absent mediodistal femoral crest is true in non-neotheropods (and most alvarezsaurids). The distally 'triangular' calcaneum is also primitive, being seen in e.g. Eoraptor and Guaibasaurus. The lack of a fibular crest, astragalar ascending process lower than its body, and robust and elongate metatarsal I are also true of most non-avepods.
Comments- Novas et al. (2015) state there are four paratypes, but while the other SNGM-193x series are obvious possibilities, it's unknown if this assumption is correct and if so, what the other paratype is (SNGM-1887 and 1888 are most complete, so most likely). A manual phalanx III-1 is also reported, but which specimen preserves it is unknown. Salgado et al. (2008) report "articulated phalanges ... III-2, and III-3 are preserved" in SNGM-1887, but Novas et al. say metacarpal III's "digit comprises a single minute phalanx." There are several elements illustrated in the skeletal or coded for (e.g. cervical ribs, metatarsal V), whose existence must be confirmed by future publications.
Salgado et al. (2008) first reported Chilesaurus elements as non-tetanurine Theropoda indet. (SNGM-1888, 1889, 1895, 1901) and Tetanurae indet. (SNGM-1887, 1894, 1898, 1900, 1903), due to the plesiomorphic tarsus and metatarsus yet more derived-looking manus and keeled anterior dorsals. Once more complete specimens were found, Novas et al. (2015) described them as a new taxon of non-orionidan tetanurine. This was based on four datasets, but Chilesaurus is mis- or uncoded for 12-14% of characters in at least three of them (Mortimer, online 2015). Once the datasets were corrected and improved, and Chilesaurus was also analyzed in an unpublished coelurosaur matrix and Butler's ornithischian matrix, the genus most parsimoniously groups with maniraptoriforms and more precisely alvarezsaurids. It emerged strongly supported in that position in my unpublished matrix and Nesbitt et al.'s dinosauromorph matrix once only verified codings of Chilesaurus were used, took only 4 steps to move there without any theropod characters in Butler's matrix, and is one of the most parsimonious possibilities in Carrano et al.'s basal tetanurine matrix if only its verifiable codings are used. A basal tetanurine position is strongly rejected if alvarezsaurids are included (13 more steps in my matrix; 10 more in Butler's matrix). Yet both of these placements seem unlikely due to the incongruities caused by inserting Chilesaurus there, so that even though it's not most parsimonious, convergence between Chilesaurus and tetanurines seems more likely than reversals in Chilesaurus. The fact verifiable Chilesaurus emerges outside Avepoda in one of the most parsimonious trees when Velociraptor is excluded from Nesbitt et al.'s matrix and only takes 1 more step to place there in Carrano et al.'s matrix would then make sense. This would allow many characters to be plesiomorphic (e.g. no fibular crest, short astragalar ascending process, large pedal digit I), and also agrees with its placement close to Avepoda in Otero and Pol's sauropodomorph-focused trees. In Nesbitt-based trees, when outside Avepoda, Chilesaurus emerged sister to Daemonosaurus with which it shares- short snout; broad subnarial premaxillary process; three premaxillary teeth (also in Tawa); decurved dentary; procumbant anterior teeth. However, verifiable Chilesaurus falls out in Sauropodomorpha with 2-7 more steps, and in Ornithischia with 4-8 more. So it could belong to those clades instead, but more definite statements will require an osteology of the taxon to clear up the coding incongruities and briefness of its original description.
References- Salgado, Cruz, Suarez, Fernandez, Gasparini, Palma-Heldt and Fanning, 2008. First Late Jurassic dinosaur bones from Chile. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 28(2), 529-534.
Mortimer, online 2015. http://theropoddatabase.blogspot.com/2015/06/chilesaurus-brings-out-bandit-in-me.html
Chimento, 2015. Anatomia pelvica de un nuevo dinosaurio tetanuro (Dinosauria, Theropoda) del Jurasico tardio de Chile. XXIX Jornadas Argentinas de Paleontología de Vertebrados, resumenes. Ameghiniana. 52(4) suplemento, 12.
Novas, Salgado, Suarez, Agnolin, Ezcurra, Chimento, Cruz, Isasi, Vargas and Rubilar-Rogers, 2015. An enigmatic plant-eating theropod from the Late Jurassic period of Chile. Nature. 522, 331-334.
Soto-Acuna, Otero, Rubilar-Rogers and Vargas, 2015. Arcosaurios no avianos de Chile. Publicacion Ocasional del Museo Nacional de Historia Natural, Chile. 63, 209-263.

unnamed clade (Tawa hallae + Allosaurus fragilis)
Diagnosis- (Nesbitt et al., 2009) Premaxilla, height: length ratio below external naris <.5; Premaxilla, anterodorsal process (=nasal process), length greater than the anteroposterior length of the premaxilla; Premaxilla, angle of the anterodorsal process (=nasal process) relative to the alveolar margin less than 70 degrees; Premaxilla, posterodorsal process (=maxillary process, = subnarial process), length less than or about the same as the anteroposterior length of the premaxilla; Jugal, anterior extent of the slot for the quadratojugal at or anterior to the posterior edge of the dorsal process of the jugal; Cervical vertebrae, 3-5 centrum length longer than mid-dorsal (also in Eodromaeus); Cervical vertebrae, deep recesses on the anterior face of the neural arch, lateral to the neural canal (=prechonos of Welles 1984); Anterior to middle cervical vertebrae, diapophysis and parapophysis nearly touching; Anterior cervical vertebrae, neural arch, posterior portion ventral to the postzygapophysis with a deep excavation with a thin bone lamina covering the anterior extent on the posterolateral surface; Cervical vertebrae, pneumatic features (=pleurocoels) in the anterior portion of the centrum present as deep fossae (also in Eodromaeus); Scapula, blade length more than 3 times distal width (also in Eodromaeus); Manual length (measured as the average length of digits I-III) accounts for more than 0.4 of the total length of humerus plus radius (also in Eodromaeus); Ilium, distal extent of the supra-acetabular crest (=supra-acetabular rim) ends well proximal of the facet for the pubis; Pubis, mediolateral width of distal portion significantly narrower than proximal width (also in Eodromaeus); Femur, proximal portion, anteromedial tuber offset medially (or posteriorly) relative to the posteromedial tuber; Femur, proximal surface transverse groove that is curved; Femur, fourth trochanter: symmetrical, with distal and proximal margins forming similar low-angle slopes to the shaft; Femur, bone wall thickness at or near mid-shaft thin thickness/diameter <0.3, > 0.2; Tibia, lateral margin of the lateral condyle of the proximal portion squared-off; Calcaneum, shape transversely compressed, with the reduction of these projections.
Bittencourt Rodrigues (2010) also found Tawa to be the sister group to avepods in his unpublished thesis based on 9 unambiguous characters.
Comments- All three published analyses that have included Tawa have found it to be closer to avepods than Eoraptor, herrerasaurids, Guaibasaurus, Chindesaurus or Eodromaeus, though they did not all include all of these taxa. Some of the characters supporting Tawa+Avepoda in Nesbitt et al.'s analysis were subsequently described in Eodromaeus, as noted above. Others are probably present in Daemonosaurus, but this has yet to be accounted for here.
References- Nesbitt, Smith, Irmis, Turner, Downs and Norell, 2009. A complete skeleton of a Late Triassic saurischian and the early evolution of dinosaurs. Science. 326, 1530-1533.
Bittencourt Rodrigues, 2010. Revisao filogenetica dos dinossauriformes basais: Implicacoes para a origem dod dinossauros. PhD thesis, Universidade de Sao Paulo. 288 pp.
Martinez, Sereno, Alcober, Columbi, Renne, Montanez and Currie, 2011. A basal dinosaur from the dawn of the dinosaur era in Southwestern Pangaea. Science. 331, 206-210.

Tawa Nesbitt, Smith, Irmis, Turner, Downs and Norell, 2009
T. hallae Nesbitt, Smith, Irmis, Turner, Downs and Norell, 2009
Late Norian, Late Triassic
Petrified Forest Member of Chinle Formation, New Mexico, US

Holotype- (GR 241) (~1.8 m; juvenile or subadult) skull (~173 mm), mandible (~161 mm), presacral column, ribs, gastralia, pectoral girdle, forelimb, pelvis including ilium, hindlimbs including femur, tibia, astragalus and metatarsal I
Paratypes- (GR 155) (~1.7-2 m; juvenile or subadult) sacral vertebra, caudal vertebrae (mid caudals ~26, 22, 24 mm), incomplete ilium (~101 mm), incomplete pubes (~103 mm), proximal ischium, femora, tibia
(GR 242) (~1.5-1.7 m; juvenile or subadult) skull, cervical vertebrae, proximal caudal vertebrae, pectoral girdle including scapula (~99 mm), humerus (~95 mm), radius, ulna, carpals, metacarpal I (~23 mm), phalanx I-1 (~18 mm), manual ungual I (~20 mm straight), metacarpal II (~30 mm), phalanx II-1 (~12 mm), phalanx II-2 (~21 mm), manual ungual II (~24 mm straight), metacarpal III (~36 mm), phalanx III-1 (~15 mm), phalanx III-2 (~13 mm), phalanx III-3 (~17 mm), manual ungual III (~27 mm straight), metacarpal IV (~10 mm), phalanx IV-1 (~6 mm), phalanx IV-2 (~1 mm), pelvis, hindlimbs including femur, tibia, fibula, astragalus (~24 mm wide), calcaneum (~6 mm wide), distal tarsal III, distal tarsal IV, metatarsal I (~62 mm), metatarsal II (~72 mm), metatarsal III (~78 mm), metatarsal IV (~68 mm) and metatarsal V (~35 mm)
(GR 243) (~2 m; juvenile or subadult) incomplete skeleton including cervical vertebrae (anterior cervical ~33 mm)
(GR 244) (~1.3 m; juvenile or subadult) femur (~120 mm)
Referred- (GR 240) (adult) incomplete femur (Nesbitt et al., 2009)
(GR coll.) (adult) isolated elements (Nesbitt et al., 2009)
(H3-259-060609) tibia (Whiteside et al., 2015)
(H4-411-110819) partial skeleton (Whiteside et al., 2015)
Diagnosis- (after Nesbitt et al., 2009) prootics meet on ventral midline of endocranial cavity; anterior tympanic recess greatly enlarged on anterior surface of basioccipital and extending onto prootic and parabasisphenoid; deep recess on posterodorsal base of paroccipital process; sharp ridge extending dorsoventrally on middle of posterior face of basal tuber; incomplete ligamental sulcus on the posterior side of femoral head; semicircular muscle scar/excavation on the posterior face of femoral head; small semicircular excavation on posterior margin of medial posterior condyle of proximal tibia; "step" on ventral surface of the astragalus; metatarsal I similar in length to other metatarsals.
Comments- This taxon was discovered in 2004, and announced as "a new basal dinosaur with an ilium similar to Chindesaurus and Caseosaurus" by Irmis et al. (2006). It was then analysed as the "Ghost Ranch saurischian" by Nesbitt (2009) in his thesis, and briefly described by Nesbitt et al. (2009). The length estimates are based on scaling illustrated element lengths to the skeletal reconstruction by Nesbitt et al.. However, the reconstruction is not accurately proportioned, leading to different lengths when different elements are used. This also means that GR 242's status as the largest individual from the main pocket (GR 241, 242-244) is not reflected in the total length listings. Tawa was found to be the sister group of avepods, a conclusion also reached by the analysis of Bittencourt Rodrigues (2010). Martinez et al. (2011) found it to be the basalmost coelophysoid however, and Novas and Ezcurra (in press) will apparently suggest herrerasaurian affinities in an abstract.
References- Irmis, Nesbitt and Downs, 2006. A new Upper Triassic vertebrate quarry from the Chinle Formation of northern New Mexico with a unique and exceptionally diverse tetrapod fauna. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 26(3), 81A.
Nesbitt, 2009. The early evolution of archosaurs: Relationships and the origin of major clades. PhD thesis, Columbia University. 665 pp.
Nesbitt, Smith, Irmis, Turner, Downs and Norell, 2009. A complete skeleton of a Late Triassic saurischian and the early evolution of dinosaurs. Science. 326, 1530-1533.
Bittencourt Rodrigues, 2010. Revisao filogenetica dos dinossauriformes basais: Implicacoes para a origem dod dinossauros. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Universidade de Sao Paulo. 288 pp.
Burch, Smith, Nesbitt, Irmis and Turner, 2010. Forelimb myology of the basal theropod dinosaur Tawa hallae from the Late Triassic Hayden Quarry of New Mexico. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. Program and Abstracts 2010, 67A.
Irmis, Nesbitt, Smith, Turner and Downs, 2010. Anatomy of the basal theropod Tawa hallae and its implications for early dinosaur phylogeny. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. Program and Abstracts 2010, 110A.
Martinez, Sereno, Alcober, Columbi, Renne, Montanez and Currie, 2011. A basal dinosaur from the dawn of the dinosaur era in Southwestern Pangaea. Science. 331, 206-210.
Whiteside, Lindstrom, Irmis, Glasspool, Schaller, Dunlavey, Nesbitt, Smith and Turner, 2015. Extreme ecosystem instability suppressed tropical dinosaur dominance for 30 million years. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 112(26), 7909-7913.
Novas and Ezcurra, in press. Phylogenetic relationships of basal theropods: Testing the evidence for the herrerasaurian affinities of Tawa.

Avepoda Paul, 2002
Definition- (metatarsal I does not contact distal tarsals homologous with Allosaurus fragilis) (modified from Paul, 2002)
= Paleotheropoda Paul, 1988
Comments- This clade was first suggested by Paul (1988) as a more appropriate name for Theropoda (as their feet are birdlike as opposed to beastlike), though he recognized Theropoda could not be renamed. In his later 2002 book, Paul actually proposed Avepoda as a subgroup of Theropoda, for those "that either possessed a foot in which metatarsal I did not contact the distal tarsals, or descended from such theropods, and belonged to a clade which includes Neotheropoda." The definition is here modified by using Allosaurus fragilis as the internal specifier, as that taxon is here used as the internal specifier of Theropoda. Avepoda has almost exclusively been used by Paul, with other authors using Neotheropoda (sensu Sereno) for the group since the two usually have the same known content (though Avepoda is near certainly more inclusive than Neotheropoda sensu Sereno, unless coelophysoids were the first theropods to develop the tridactyl pes). However, Procompsognathus was an avepod possibly outside the Coelophysis+Passer clade in Paul's (1988) phylogeny and Gauthier's (1986) analysis, as was Liliensternus in the latter. More recently, Liliensternus was found to be outside the Coelophysis+Passer clade in Bittencourt Rodrigues' (2010) thesis. A different complication arises in Martinez et al.'s (2011) cladogram, where the tetradactyl Tawa is a basal coelophysoid. In this case, Avepoda contains Tawa and other coelophysoids under ACCTRAN character optimization, but excludes Coelophysoidea under DELTRAN optimization. Avepoda also has an advantage over Neotheropoda in only having one definition, whereas the latter can also apply to the more exclusive Ceratosaurus+Passer clade. Note it is not the same as Avipoda Novas, 1992, which was proposed for a clade similar in extent to Tetanurae.
Paleotheropoda was proposed as a paraphyletic order of theropods by Paul (1988), including all theropods which were not avetheropods. This consisted of what are generally recognized today as coelophysoids, ceratosaurs and megalosauroids, as well as a few other taxa such as Piatnitzkysaurus and sinraptorids. No other reference used the term due to the general dislike of paraphyletic groups, and in 2002 Paul referred to the same grade as baso-avepods. As Paul's (1988) Theropoda was equivalent to Avepoda, Paleotheropoda is catalogued here as a synonym of that group.
References- Gauthier, 1986. Saurischian monophyly and the origin of birds. Memoirs of the Californian Academy of Sciences 8, 1-55.
Paul, 1988. Predatory Dinosaurs of the World. Simon and Schuster, New York. 464 pp
Paul, 2002. Dinosaurs of the Air. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore and London. 460 pp.
Bittencourt Rodrigues, 2010. Revisao filogenetica dos dinossauriformes basais: Implicacoes para a origem dod dinossauros. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Universidade de Sao Paulo. 288 pp.
Martinez, Sereno, Alcober, Columbi, Renne, Montanez and Currie, 2011. A basal dinosaur from the dawn of the dinosaur era in Southwestern Pangaea. Science. 331, 206-210.

Averostra Paul, 2002
Definition- (promaxillary fenestra homologous with Dromaeosaurus albertensis) (modified from Paul, 2002)
Other definitions- (Ceratosaurus nasicornis + Allosaurus fragilis) (Ezcurra and Cuny, 2007)
Comments- Paul (2002) proposed Averostra for a clade of "avepods that either possessed at least one accessory maxillary opening in the lateral wall of the antorbital fossa that led into a bony mediorostral maxillary sinus, or descended from such avepods, and are members of the clade that includes the Dromaeosauridae." This included taxa generally recognized as ceratosaurs and tetanurines, but excluded coelophysoids. The definition is here modified to use Dromaeosaurus albertensis (as the eponymous species for Dromaeosauridae) and to specify the promaxillary fenestra (as it is the first accessory maxillary opening to evolve, and the only one present in taxa Paul considers basal averostrans such as Ceratosaurus). Ezcurra has used Averostra for the ceratosaur+tetanurine clade in several papers, and in 2007 with Cuny gave it a new node-based phylogenetic definition with that extent- "Ceratosaurus nasicornis, Allosaurus fragilis, and all the descendants of their common ancestor." However, Paul's apomorphy-based definition may not be limited to that clade. Promaxillary fenestrae have since been identified in Dilophosaurus, Zupaysaurus, "Syntarsus" kayentakatae, herrerasaurids and Heterodontosaurus. Unfortunately, the phylogenetic position of most of these taxa is controversial, making it difficult to determine which clade an apomorphy-based Averostra designates. In a more traditional topology where coelophysoids are ceratosaurs and/or Dilophosaurus and/or Zupaysaurus are basal coelophysoids, Averostra encompasses at least Neotheropoda sensu Sereno. In alternative phylogenies where Zupaysaurus and/or Dilophosaurus are closer to birds than to Coelophysis, Averostra encompasses at least the former two taxa and perhaps Coelophysoidea (ambiguous since Coelophysis lacks promaxillary fenestrae). As derived ornithischians, sauropodomorphs, Eoraptor and Tawa all lack promaxillary fenestrae, it's not certain whether those of herrerasaurids and/or Heterodontosaurus are homologous to theropods'. In a phylogeny like Sereno's where herrerasaurids are sister to avepods (and presumably Tawa), Averostra may encompass the herrerasaurid+avepod clade. No standard topology (where sauropodomorphs and Eoraptor are closer to avepods than ornithischians are) results in Heterodontosaurus' promaxillary fenestra being homologous to theropods' though. With these caveats in mind, Averostra is here provisionally placed at the level of Avepoda.
References- Paul, 2002. Dinosaurs of the Air. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore and London. 460 pp.
Ezcurra and Cuny, 2007. The coelophysoid Lophostropheus airelensis, gen. nov.: A review of the systematics of "Liliensternus" airelensis from the Triassic-Jurassic outcrops of Normandy (France). Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 27(1), 73-86.

Eutheropoda Novas, Haro and Canale, 2003
= "Eutheropoda" Holtz, 1992
= Ceratosauria sensu Rowe and Gauthier, 1990
Definition- (Liliensternus liliensterni + Coelophysis bauri + "Syntarsus" rhodesiensis + "Syntarsus" kayentakatae + Segisaurus halli + Sarcosaurus woodi + Dilophosaurus wetherilli + Ceratosaurus nasicornis) (Rowe and Gauthier, 1990)
= Neotheropoda sensu Sereno, 1998
Definition- (Coelophysis bauri + Passer domesticus) (modified)
Comments- Holtz (1992) first used this term in his thesis for a clade containing all theropods except Procompsognathus, consisting of Ceratosauria sensu lato and Tetanurae. Listed diagnostic features are cervical pleurocoels and a transversely narrow pubis. Subsequent studies have shown Procompsognathus has cervical pleurocoels and narrow pubis and may be a coelophysoid. Eutheropoda was later published in an abstract for "("Ceratosauria" + Tetanurae)" by Novas et al. (2003), again using a broader version of Ceratosauria which includes coelophysoids.
This clade is commonly called Neotheropoda since 1995, though given recent topologies it is more inclusive than Bakker's original concept of that group (see Neotheropoda comments).
Rowe and Gauthier's (1990) definition for Ceratosauria includes every taxon they recognized as a ceratosaur, which makes it problematic now that the group is often viewed as paraphyletic to varying degrees. As coelophysids are usually seen as outside the Ceratosaurus+Passer clade now, this definition would make all avepods ceratosaurs. If Liliensternus is outside the Coelophysis+Passer clade (as in Bittencourt Rogriguez, 2010), this version of Ceratosauria would be slightly more inclusive than Neotheropoda sensu Sereno.
References- Rowe and Gauthier, 1990. Ceratosauria. In Weishampel, Dodson and Osmolska (eds.). The Dinosauria. University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, Oxford. 151-168.
Holtz, 1992. An unusual structure of the metatarsus of Theropoda (Archosauria: Dinosauria: Saurischia) of the Cretaceous. PhD thesis. Yale University. 347 pp.
Sereno, 1998. A rationale for phylogenetic definitions, with application to the higher-level taxonomy of Dinosauria. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie Abhandlungen. 210, 41-83.
Novas, Haro and Canale, 2003. Un nuevo terópodo basal de la Formación Ischigualasto (Carniano) de la provincia de San Juan, Argentina. Ameghiniana. 40(4), 63R.
Bittencourt Rodrigues, 2010. Revisao filogenetica dos dinossauriformes basais: Implicacoes para a origem dod dinossauros. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Universidade de Sao Paulo. 288 pp.

unnamed theropod (Owen, 1859)
Hettangian-Early Sinemurian, Early Jurassic
Blue Lias Formation, England

Material- (BMNH 39496; holotype of Scelidosaurus harrisonii) distal femur (~640 mm), proximal tibia, proximal fibula (lost)
Diagnosis- (suggested) combination of bulbous fibular crest on tibia and very shallow extensor groove on distal femur.
Comments- Owen received the partial hindlimbs BMNH 39496 and GSM 109560 in 1858 and used them as the basis for his dinosaur genus Scelidosaurus in an encyclopedia entry the following year. While this is often claimed to be an nomen nudum (e.g. Newman, 1968), genus names published before 1931 do not require species names or illustrations to be valid (ICZN Article 12). Owen later (1861) gave his taxon the species name harrisonii and described it in detail, referring the ungual GSM 109561, a partial postcranium in the Lyme Regis Museum, and the skull of BMNH R1111. Lydekker (1888) made BMNH 39496 the type specimen, though the basal thyreophoran BMNH R1111 (whose postcranium was soon found and described in 1862) formed the basis for peoples' ideas of Scelidosaurus. Newman (1968) believed BMNH 39496 and GSM 109560 to be megalosaurids, and possibly GSM 109561 as well. However, they were only compared to Megalosaurus among theropods, making this familial assignment in need of verification. As the name Scelidosaurus had been associated with the thyreophoran, Charig and Newman (1994) petitioned the ICZN to recognize BMNH R1111 as the lectotype, which was accepted in 1994 as Opinion 1788. Welles and Powell studied the theropod material in 1974 for their unpublished European theropod paper, intending to name it Merosaurus newmani. This was first found in publically available print in 1995 when Pickering credited the name to Welles, Powell and Pickering in an unpublished bibliographic manuscript. In that same year, Pickering printed a packet with a full description of the taxon. This is a nomen nudum however, as he didn't follow ICZN Article 8.1.3- it must have been produced in an edition containing simultaneously obtainable copies by a method that assures numerous identical and durable copies. Pickering intends GSM 109560 to be the type, and referred BMNH 39496 and GSM 109561. He considered it a probable ceratosaur sensu lato metataxon. Pickering will describe it in his in progress work Mutanda Dinosaurologica. Carrano and Sampson (2004) stated BMNH 29496 probably belongs to a basal tetanurine without explanation, but viewed it as indeterminate. Naish and Martill (2007) referred all three specimens to Tetanurae without comment. Most recently, Benson (2009, 2010) redescribed BMNH 39496 and GSM 109560. He found BMNH 39496 to be a coelophysoid when entered in his matrix, but noted that non-tetanurines were poorly sampled so this may not mean much. Benson considered it to be Theropoda incertae sedis, and the other two specimens to be indeterminate theropods. Carrano et al. (2012) noted it may be tetanurine, but they were unsure. When added to their matrix, BMNH 39496 emerges in a polytomy with Cryolophosaurus, "Dilophosaurus" sinensis, Ceratosauria and Tetanurae.
BMNH 39496 consists of a distal femur, proximal tibia and a proximal fibula which has been lost subsequent to Newman's description. Both Pickering and Benson proposed the lack of a deep extensor groove as a non-tetanurine character, but this is true in some basal tetanurines (Chuandongocoelurus), megalosauroids (Dubreuillosaurus, Eustreptospondylus, "Brontoraptor") and most coelurosaurs. Contra Pickering, the popliteal notch is concave and the ectocondyle elliptical and posterolaterally directed even in tetanurines like Megalosaurus and Eustreptospondylus. Benson claims the fibular crest which extends to the lateral condyle is a non-tetanurine character, but this is also found in Afrovenator, Megalosaurus and Gasosaurus. One feature of the tibia might suggest this specimen is a tetanurine- the fibular crest is bulbous as in Piatnitzkysaurus, Megalosaurus and Sinraptor. However, including BMNH 39496 in my saurischian supermatrix results in equally parsimonious trees where it is in Coelophysoidea or non-avetheropod Tetanurae. Morphologies in the preserved areas are not consistantly variable between these groups, making further identification difficult. Thus it is here assigned to Avepoda incertae sedis.
References- Owen, 1859. Palaeontology. Encyclopaedia Britannica, Edition 8. 17, 91-176.
Owen, 1861. Monograph of the fossil Reptilia of the Liassic formations. Part I. A monograph of the fossil dinosaur (Scelidosaurus harrisonii Owen) of the Lower Lias. Palaeontolographical Society Monographs. 13, 1-14.
Owen, 1862. Monographs on the British Fossil Reptilia from the Oolitic Formations. Part second, containing Scelidosaurus harrisonii and Pliosaurus grandis. Palaeontolographical Society Monographs. 1-16.
Lydekker, 1888. Catalogue of the Fossil Reptilia and Amphibia in the British Museum (Natural History), Cromwell Road, S.W., Part 1. Containing the Orders Ornithosauria, Crocodilia, Dinosauria, Squamata, Rhynchocephalia, and Proterosauria. British Museum of Natural History, London. 309 pp.
Newman, 1968. The Jurassic dinosaur Scelidosaurus harrisoni Owen. Palaeontology. 11, 40-43.
Charig and Newman, 1992. Scelidosaurus harrisonii Owen, 1861 (Reptilia, Ornithischia): Proposed replacement in inappropriate lectotype. Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. 49, 280-283.
ICZN, 1994. Opinion 1788. Scelidosaurus harrisonii Owen, 1861 (Reptilia, Ornithischia): Lectotype replaced. Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. 51(3), 288.
Pickering, 1995a. Jurassic Park: Unauthorized Jewish Fractals in Philopatry. A Fractal Scaling in Dinosaurology Project, 2nd revised printing. Capitola, California. 478 pp.
Pickering, 1995b. An extract from: Archosauromorpha: Cladistics and osteologies. A Fractal Scaling in Dinosaurology Project. 11 pp.
Olshevsky, DML 1999. http://dml.cmnh.org/1999Dec/msg00193.html
Carrano and Sampson, 2004. A review of coelophysoids (Dinosauria: Theropoda) from the Early Jurassic of Europe, with comments on the late history of the Coelophysoidea. Neues Jahrbuch fur Geologie und Palaontologie Monatshefte. 2004, 537-558.
Naish and Martill, 2007. Dinosaurs of Great Britain and the role of the Geological Society of London in their discovery: Basal Dinosauria and Saurischia. Journal of the Geological Society. 164, 493-510.
Benson, 2009. The taxonomy, systematics and evolution of the British theropod dinosaur Megalosaurus. PhD thesis. University of Cambridge.
Benson, 2010. The osteology of Magnosaurus nethercombensis (Dinosauria, Theropoda) from the Bajocian (Middle Jurassic) of the United Kingdom and a re-examination of the oldest records of tetanurans. Journal of Systematic Palaeontology. 8(1), 131-146.
Carrano, Benson and Sampson, 2012. The phylogeny of Tetanurae (Dinosauria: Theropoda). Journal of Systematic Palaeontology. 10(2), 211-300.
Pickering, in prep. Mutanda Dinosaurologica.

unnamed possible theropod (Huene, 1921)
Middle Norian, Late Triassic
Middle Stubensandstein, Germany

Material- (SMNS 12670 in part) quadrate, pterygoid, cervical vertebra, mid dorsal vertebra, scapula, incomplete ilium, pubis
Comments- Huene (1921) referred these to Aetosaurus, but they were reidentified by Walker (1961) as a 'coelurosaur' similar to Procompsognathus. The quadrate was originally identified as a pubis, the pterygoid as a postorbital+postfrontal, the mid dorsal as a proximal caudal, the scapula as an ischium, and the pubis as a scapula. Knoll (2008) considered most of the material could be aetosaurian or indeterminate, but thought the scapula might be theropodan though not Procompsognathus. Huene also describes the pubis SMNS 12596 as Saltoposuchus, which Walker (1970) referred to a 'coelurosaur' resembling Procompsognathus. This was figured as a crocodylomorph by Knoll (2008).
References- Huene, 1921. Neue Pseudosuchier und Coelurosaurier aus dem württembergischen Keuper. Acta Zoologica. 2, 329-403.
Walker, 1961. Triassic reptiles from the Elgin area: Stagonolepis, Dasygnathus and their allies. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B. 244, 103-204.
Walker, 1970. A revision of the Jurassic reptile Hallopus victor (Marsh), with remarks on the classification of crocodiles. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B. 257, 323-372.
Knoll, 2008. On the Procompsognathus postcranium (Late Triassic, Germany). Geobios. 41(6), 779-786.

unnamed possible theropod (Rioult, 1978)
Early Hettangian, Early Jurassic
Calcaire de Valognes, France

Material- (University of Caen coll.; destroyed) tooth
Comments- This tooth was referred to "M." cloacinus. However, that taxon is currently indeterminate so other specimens cannot be justifiably referred. Based on its age, it may be a theropod.
References- Rioult, 1978. Inventaire des dinosauriens mésozoïques de Normandie. in Écosystèmes continentaux mésozoïques de Normandie. Livret-guide, Caen. 26-29.
Buffetaut, Cuny and Le Loeuff, 1991. French Dinosaurs: The best record in Europe? Modern Geology. 16(1/2), 17-42.

unnamed theropod (Delsate, 2000)
Late Hettangian, Early Jurassic
Luxembourg Sandstone Formation, Luxembourg
Material
- (MHNL BR778) incomplete pedal phalanx III-1
Comments- This was first identified as a manual phalanx III-3 by Delsate (2000) before being redescribed by Delsate and Ezcurra (2014) as a pedal phalanx.
References- Delsate, 2000. Paléontologie des vertébrés au Grand-Duché de Luxembourg: Découvertes récentes et travaux en cours. Archives de l’Institut Grand-Ducal de Luxembourg, Section des Sciences Naturelles, Physiques et Mathématiques, Nouvelle Série. 43, 49-54.
Delsate and Ezcurra, 2014. The first Early Jurassic (Late Hettangian) theropod dinosaur remains from the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. Geologica Belgica. 17(2), 175-181.

unnamed theropod (Parker and Irmis, 2005)
Middle Norian, Late Triassic
Sonsela Member of the Chinle Formation, Arizona, US
Material
- (PEFO 31187) proximal femur
Reference- Parker and Irmis, 2005. Advances in Late Triassic vertebrate paleontology based on new material from Petrified Forest National Park, Arizona. New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin. 29, 45-58.

unnamed Theropoda (Parker and Irmis, 2005)
Late Norian, Late Triassic
Petrified Forest Member of the Chinle Formation, Arizona, US

Material- (PEFO 33984) proximal femur (Parker and Irmis, 2005)
(UCMP 152645) ilial fragment, partial astragali, calcaneum, distal tarsal III, phalanx I-1, partial metatarsal II, four partial pedal phalanges, pedal ungual (Nesbitt and Stocker, 2008)
References- Parker and Irmis, 2005. Advances in Late Triassic vertebrate paleontology based on new material from Petrified Forest National Park, Arizona. New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin. 29, 45-58.
Nesbitt and Stocker, 2008. The vertebrate assemblage of the Late Triassic Canjilon Quarry (northern New Mexico, USA), and the importance of apomorphy-based assemblage comparisons. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 28(4), 1063-1072.

undescribed theropod (Blackbeard and Yates, 2007)
Hettangian-Sinemurian, Early Jurassic
Upper Elliot Formation, South Africa

Material- (BPI/1/coll.) (large) teeth
Reference- Blackbeard and Yates, 2007. The taphonomy of an Early Jurassic dinosaur bonebed in the Northern Free State (South Africa). Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 27(3), 49A.

undescribed theropod (Nesbitt, Irmis and Parker, 2007)
Early Norian, Late Triassic
Mesa Redondo Member of the Chinle Formation, Arizona, US

Material- (UCMP 25820) distal tibia (Nesbitt et al., 2007)
Reference- Nesbitt, Irmis and Parker, 2007. A critical re-evaluation of the Late Triassic dinosaur taxa of North America. Journal of Systematic Palaeontology. 5(2), 209-243.

unnamed theropod (Novas, Chatterjee, Ezcurra and Kutty, 2009; described by Novas, Ezcurra, Chatterjee and Kutty, 2011)
Rhaetian, Late Triassic
Lower Dharmaram Formation, India
Material
- (ISI R283) incomplete femur
Comments- This was initially called a coelophysoid (Novas et al., 2009) before being described as a non-neotheropod avepod ('non-averostran neotheropod' in their taxonomy) by Novas et al. (2011).
References- Novas, Chatterjee, Ezcurra and Kutty, 2009. New dinosaur remains from the Late Triassic of Central India. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 29(3), 156A.
Novas, Ezcurra, Chatterjee and Kutty, 2011. New dinosaur species from the Upper Triassic Upper Maleri and Lower Dharmaram formations of Central India. Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. 101, 333-349.

undescribed theropod (Britt, Chure, Engelemann, Scheetz and Hansen, 2010)
Late Triassic-Early Jurassic
Nugget Sandstone, Utah, US
Material
- teeth (~30 mm)
References- Britt, Chure, Engelemann, Scheetz and Hansen, 2010. Multi-taxic theropod bonebeds in an interdunal setting of the Early Jurassic Eolian Nugget Sandstone, Utah. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. Program and Abstracts 2010, 65A.
Britt, Chambers, Engelmann, Chure and Scheetz, 2011. Taphonomy of coelophysoid bonebeds preserved along the shoreline of an Early Jurassic lake in the Nugget Sandstone of NE Utah. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. Program and Abstracts 2011, 78.

unnamed possible theropod (Delsate and Ezcurra, 2014)
Late Hettangian, Early Jurassic
Luxembourg Sandstone Formation, Luxembourg
Material
- (MHNL BR924) lateral tooth
Reference- Delsate and Ezcurra, 2014. The first Early Jurassic (Late Hettangian) theropod dinosaur remains from the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. Geologica Belgica. 17(2), 175-181.

undescribed theropod (Liston, Naish, Hone, Tianyang and Jian-Rong, 2014)
Hettangian, Early Jurassic
Shawan Member (Dull Purplish Beds) of Lufeng Formation, Yunnan, China

Material- five partial teeth
Comments- Liston et al. (2014) state these are distinct from "Dilophosaurus" sinensis (their Sinosaurus) and "all other theropod taxa currently known from the Lufeng fauna."
Reference- Liston, Naish, Hone, Tianyang and Jian-Rong, 2014. New data on Early Jurassic theropod diversity and feeding behavior in the Lufeng Formation of Yunnan, China. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. Program and Abstracts 2014, 169.

"Megalosaurus" woodwardi Lydekker, 1909
= Megalosaurus lydekkeri Huene, 1926
= Magnosaurus lydekkeri (Huene, 1926) Huene, 1932
Sinemurian, Early Jurassic
Lower Lias, England

Holotype- (BMNH 41352) maxillary or dentary fragment, tooth (25 x 10 x ? mm)
Comments- Note the name Megalosaurus woodwardi has been independently created two other times. Once by Huene (1932) as a (probably accidentally retained) assignment of his new species Magnosaurus woodwardi (itself an objective junior synonym of Sarcosaurus adrewsi), and again by Olshevsky (1991) as an unattributed supposed junior synonym of Walgettosuchus woodwardi. These are all based on different holotypes, though ironically Lydekker (1909) did consider the Sarcosaurus andrewsi material to belong to Megalosaurus woodwardi.
This tooth was first mentioned by Dawkins (in Huxley, 1869) as Megalosaurus. Purchased by the BMNH in 1869, Lydekker (1888) described it as Zanclodon(?) sp. b. as he felt the large degree of labiolingual compression and longitudinal striations were more similar to that genus than to Megalosaurus. Lydekker (1909) reviewed Woodward's (1908) paper describing the tibia that would later be named Sarcosaurus andrewsi, and felt the tibia and tooth belonged to the same species, which he named Megalosaurus woodwardi, designating the tooth as the type. Huene (1926) was apparently unaware of the 1909 paper and named BMNH 41352 Megalosaurus (gen. ?) lydekkeri, stating simple curvature distinguished it from Megalosaurus terquemi. In 1932, Huene reassigned the species to Magnosaurus, again with reservations, though without stating his reason. He believed unspecified remains from the Lower Lias of Watchet referred to Megalosaurus by Phillips might belong to the same species, but as these have never been described this is uncertain. BMNH 41352 has since been called Megalosaurus or Magnosaurus lydekkeri and is usually placed as Theropoda indet., as in the most recent reviews by Benson and Barrett (2009) and Carrano et al. (2012). Carrano et al. considered it likely to be non-tetanurine as it's striated and "the tooth lacks the specialized features of tetanurans in which such striations also occur (e.g. spinosaurids)." But the striations in M. woodwardi are much narrower and less prominent than the fluting in spinosaurids, and there's no reason they couldn't evolve in another tetanurine lineage.
Because Megalosaurus woodwardi has priority over Megalosaurus lydekkeri, but has not been used since it was named, ICZN Article 23.9.1 should be consulted to check if the former is a nomen oblitum. Usage of Megalosaurus lydekkeri must be maintained if (23.9.1.1) M. woodwardi has not been used as a valid name after 1899 (false, as Lydekker used it in 1909) and (23.9.1.2) M. lydekkeri has been used as a valid name "in at least 25 works, published by at least 10 authors in the immediately preceding 50 years and encompassing a span of not less than 10 years" (false as far as I can tell, as an extensive search located only 13-15 works since 1962). Thus Megalosaurus woodwardi is the valid name, unless a worker were to petition the ICZN to suppress it.
References- Huxley, 1869. On the upper jaw of Megalosaurus. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London. 25, 311-314.
Phillips, 1871. Geology of Oxford and the Valley of the Thames: Oxford at the Clarendon Press. 523 pp.
Lydekker, 1888. Catalogue of the Fossil Reptilia and Amphibia in the British Museum (Natural History), Cromwell Road, S.W., Part 1. Containing the Orders Ornithosauria, Crocodilia, Dinosauria, Squamta, Rhynchocephalia, and Proterosauria. British Museum of Natural History, London. 309 pp.
Lydekker, 1909. Vertebrate paleontology in 1908. Science Progress in the Twentieth Century: A Quarterly Journal of Scientific Work & Thought. 3(11), 450-471.
Huene, 1926 The carnivorous Saurischia in the Jura and Cretaceous formations, principally in Europe. Revista Museo de La Plata, 29, 35-167.
Huene, 1932. Die fossile Reptil-Ordnung Saurischia, ihre Entwicklung und Geschichte [The fossil reptile order Saurischia, their development and history]. Monographien zur Geologie und Palaeontologie, serie 1. 4(1-2), 1-361.
Olshevsky, 1991. A revision of the parainfraclass Archosauria Cope, 1869, excluding the advanced Crocodylia. Mesozoic Meanderings. 2, 196 pp.
Benson and Barrett, 2009. Dinosaurs of Dorset: Part I, the carnivorous dinosaurs (Saurischia, Theropoda). Proceedings of the Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society. 130, 133-147.
Carrano, Benson and Sampson, 2012. The phylogeny of Tetanurae (Dinosauria: Theropoda). Journal of Systematic Palaeontology. 10(2), 211-300.

"Newtonsaurus" Welles vide Welles and Pickering, 1999
"N." cambrensis (Newton, 1899) Welles vide Welles and Pickering, 1999
= Zanclodon cambrensis Newton, 1899
= Megalosaurus cambrensis (Newton, 1899) Molnar, Kurzanov and Dong, 1990
= Gresslyosaurus cambrensis (Newton, 1899) Olshevsky, 1991
Rhaetian, Late Triassic
Rhaetic Beds, Wales

Holotype- dentary (275 mm), teeth (to 29 mm)
Comments- Rauhut and Hungerbuhler (2000) note that the three supposed derived characters shared with Megalosaurus are not valid. The angular rostral margin is found in Liliensternus, Syntarsus and Sellosaurus for instance. The separate interdental plates are found in Plateosaurus, Dilophosaurus and several other theropods. The third character, "replacement teeth exposed at base between interdental plates", is correlated with separate interdental plates. The authors find it agrees quite well with Liliensternus and Dilophosaurus, but refer it to Theropoda indet.. Welles (1984) found several differences from Dilophosaurus, so I think we should wait for an in depth analysis to proclaim this specimen indeterminate. If added to the matrix of Carrano et al. (2012), it emerges as a noasaurid, suggesting it may be a basal ceratosaur, though the authors considered it a non-neotheropod.
References- Newton, 1899. On a megalosauroid jaw from Rhaetic Beds near Bridgend (Glamorganshire). Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London. 55, 89-96.
Welles, 1984. Dilophosaurus wetherilli (Dinosauria, Theropoda), osteology and comparisons. Palaeontographica, Abteilung A. 185, 85-180.
Molnar, Kurzanov and Dong, 1990. Carnosauria. In Weishampel, Dodson and Osmolska (eds.). The Dinosauria. Berkeley: University of California Press. 169-209.
Olshevsky, 1991. A revision of the parainfraclass Archosauria Cope, 1869, excluding the advanced Crocodylia. Mesozoic Meanderings. 2, 196 pp.
Welles and Pickering, 1999. An Extract From: Archosauromorpha: Cladistics and Osteologies. 70 pp.
Rauhut and Hungerbuhler, 2000. A review of European Triassic theropods. Gaia. 15, 75-88.
Carrano, Benson and Sampson, 2012. The phylogeny of Tetanurae (Dinosauria: Theropoda). Journal of Systematic Palaeontology. 10(2), 211-300.

Velocipes Huene, 1932
V. guerichi Huene, 1932
Norian, Late Triassic
Lissauer Breccia, Poland

Holotype- (Hamburg State Geological Institute coll.) proximal fibula
Comments- Huene (1932) referred this to Podokesauridae as the "size and structure" fit that family best, while Rauhut and Hungerbuhler (2000) stated it may not even be a fibula and gave it the excessively broad status of Vertebrata indet.. Most recently, Czepinski et al. (2014) reanalyzed the holotype and found Huene was basically right all along, identifying it as the proximal fibula of a non-tetanurine avepod (neotheropod in their usage).
References- Huene, 1932. Die fossile Reptil-Ordnung Saurischia, ihre entwicklung und geschichte. Monographien zur Geologia und Palaeontologie. 1, 1-362.
Rauhut and Hungerbuhler, 2000. A review of European Triassic theropods. Gaia 15, 75-88.
Czepinski, Niedzwiedzki, Talanda, Skawinski, Ziegler and Szermanski, 2014. A re-evaluation of the purported dinosaur finds from the Middle-Late Triassic of Poland. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, Program and Abstracts, 2014. 115.

Tachiraptor Langer, Rincon, Ramezani, Solorzano and Rauhut, 2014
T. admirabilis Langer, Rincon, Ramezani, Solorzano and Rauhut, 2014a
Hettangian, Early Jurassic
La Quinta Formation, Venezuela
Holotype
- (IVIC-P-2867) (~1.5 m) incomplete tibia (~250 mm)
Paratype- ?...(IVIC-P-2868) proximal ischium
Diagnosis- (after Langer et al., 2014a) posterolateral corner of fibular condyle forms sharp angle in proximal view and extends slightly more posteriorly than the medial condyle; (combination of) distal articulation of tibia more than 50% broader transversely than anteroposteriorly; astragalar buttress occupies between one-third and one-quarter of anteroposterior depth of distal surface of bone, extending obliquely across the anterior surface of distal part of the tibia at an angle of approximately 35 degrees to the distal margin, and flexing proximally at the lateral 20% of the transverse width of the distal shaft; line connecting the outer and inner tibial malleoli in anterior view forms angle of ~80 degrees to long axis of bone.
Comments- Langer et al. (2014a,b) added this taxon to Smith et al.'s basal theropod dataset and found it to be sister to Neotheropoda (their Averostra). As the original matrix is heavily un/miscoded, an assignment to basal Ceratosauria or Tetanurae may not be unlikely.
References- Langer, Rincon, Ramezani, Solorzano and Rauhut, 2014a. New dinosaur (Theropoda, stem-Averostra) from the Earliest Jurassic of the La Quinta Formation, Venezuelan Andes. Royal Society Open Science. 1, 140184.
Langer, Rincon, Ramezani, Solorzan and Rauhut, 2014b. New theropod material from the Triassic-Jurassic boundary of the Venezuelan Andes. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. Program and Abstracts 2014, 165.