[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Dino List Questions

In a message dated 95-10-24 06:15:43 EDT, DSmith0531@aol.com writes:

>"Scrotum Brookes, 1763"
>Was this actually proposed as a genus?  If so, wouldn't that mean that all
>_Megalosaurus_ specimens should be referred to the genus _Scrotum_, since it
>has priority (granted, there was not a lot of material for a genotype)?  Or
>is this a case where better judgement prevailed and the name was simply

The only person who half-seriously suggested that _Scrotum_ was a valid
taxonomic name was Beverley Halstead, who unearthed the name during
historical research. The illustrated specimen is clearly the distal end of a
femur of a large theropod, now lost. Maybe it was _Megalosaurus_, maybe not
(I list it as a possible synonym). But in any case _Scrotum_ would have to be
regarded as a _nomen oblitum_ or forgotten name (a term no longer in use by
the ICZN though it was in use when Halstead published on _Scrotum_) and not a
valid genus, since no one else used it as a genus since 1763.